3 ms·
How would that work when the service has mixed content? You'd have to go to kids.facebook.com to get the child-friendly version? With a client-sent signal they
by gzread 8mo ago
How would that work when the service has mixed content? You'd have to go to kids.facebook.com to get the child-friendly version? With a client-sent signal they can just filter it, the same way Accept-Language can automatically translate the UI.
- hellojesus 8mo agoBut why do we need it at the os level? Couldn't a parent just set a header in the browser for their kid and be done with it?
- labcomputer 8mo agoWhat happens when the kid installs a different browser?
- hellojesus 8mo agoAgreed. Which is why I think the OS level is dumb. Kids can just live boot or launch a vm or keylog their parents' account. If it's windows, they can just live boot into the OS and get access to pretty much all the files anyway, if the parent didn't encrypt things. My point is, if the implementation is trivial to bypass, why do we need this legislation? Just let the parents use the existing tools we have and parent.
- gzread 8mo agoUnless the VM app is marked 18+
- hellojesus 8mo agoYou'll just get the proliferation of the scammy "free proxies" that claim to host virtual vms for you that are actual vms that just log all your data.
- AnthonyMouse 8mo agoElements that contain adult content are tagged and then the user agent doesn't display them. This also has the extremely useful benefit of making you aware that something is being censored, because then it has a censorship box in place of the content. Whenever censorship is happening it should be flagrantly conspicuous rather than invisible.