4 ms·
There’s some nuance here. Realizing that much of the internet is totally toxic to children now and should have a means of keeping them out is distinct from agr
by coffeefirst 8mo ago
There’s some nuance here.
Realizing that much of the internet is totally toxic to children now and should have a means of keeping them out is distinct from agreeing to upload ID to everything.
A better implementation would be to have a device/login level parental control setting that passed age restriction signals via browsers and App Stores. This is both a simpler design and privacy friendly.
- mcmcmc 8mo agoI like this take. Ultimately the only people responsible for what kids consume are the parents. It’s on them to control their kids’ internet access, the government has no place in it. If you want to punish someone for a child being exposed to inappropriate content, punish the negligence of the parents.
- fluoridation 8mo agoIt doesn't sound simple. Now there needs to be some kind of pipeline that can route a new kind of information from the OS (perhaps from a physical device) to the process, through the network, to the remote process. Every part of the system needs to be updated in order to support this new functionality.
- csunbird 8mo agoand is it easier to implement id checks for each online account that people have, had, and will ever have in the future? parents need to start parenting by taking responsibility on what their kids are doing, and government should start governing with regulations on ad tech, addictive social media platforms, instead of using easily hackable platforms for de anonymization, which in turn enable mass identity theft.
- fluoridation 8mo ago>and is it easier to implement id checks for each online account that people have, had, and will ever have in the future? No, I think both ideas are bad.
- bigfishrunning 8mo agoIt's not simple, but it's also not new. mTLS has allowed for mutual authentication on the web for years. If a central authority was signing keys for adults, none of the protocol that we currently use would need to change (although servers would need to be configured to check signatures)
- fruitworks 8mo agonow?
- grvdrm 8mo agoI've thought the same. At least here in US: Google/Apple device controls allow app to request whether user meets age requirements. Not the actual age, just that the age is within the acceptable range. If so, let through, if not, can't proceed through door. I know I am oversimplifying. But I like this approach vs. uploading an ID to TikTok. Lesser of many evils?
- subscribed 8mo agoThis also means the only operating systems allowing access to the internet will be these with the immense surveillance and ad-infested.
- coffeefirst 8mo agoNot at all. You require websites to respect the signal of its set just like GPC. If there’s no signal it fails open. And if a kid installs Linux and sets the signal themselves, well, who cares, they can also sneak into R rated movies. It’s enough friction to kill the ubiquity.
- sfdlkj3jk342a 8mo agoThere already is a means to keep children away from toxic content: parents (possibly with the help of locally run content blocking software).