4 ms·
> The solution, then, ought to be to pass a law requiring some sort of standardized parental controls that allow trivial set-and-forget management. Require devi
by Seattle3503 1y ago
> The solution, then, ought to be to pass a law requiring some sort of standardized parental controls that allow trivial set-and-forget management. Require device manufacturers/software distributors to sort out a "child mode" switch you can flip upon device initialization, in-your-face and unmissable, and then have apps/webpages be able to see whether the device reports it's in child mode. Does this not solve the "prevents 95% of kids from accessing pornography" threshold of effectiveness while being infinitely less invasive?
This feels like an idea out of a previous era; where a lone family computer sat in the living room. There are so many devices now, we can't assume we control or know about all devices our children may have access to.
- idle_zealot 1y ago> There are so many devices now, we can't assume we control or know about all devices our children may have access to. This is specifically a solution for a world with many personal devices. The devices a child has access to are their own (in child mode), someone else's being lent to them (the analog loophole, not solved by child mode or proof-of-age), and public devices at schools, libraries and the like, which are typically locked down.
- rpdillon 1y agoNot at all, it's extremely forward-looking, due to its distributed nature, clean separation of responsibilities among sites, manufacturers, and parents, each doing their part to influence the end result to the appropriate extent. Sites should inform clients about the nature of the content, clients should be configurable to accept or reject various kinds of content, and parents should enforce configurations on devices their children use. Parents cannot abdicate responsibility for what their children are exposed to.