4 ms·

But it seems that many parents do not bother to do anything to raise their children properly, including setting up parental controls.

echelon 4mo ago
Let me be very explicit so we're not dancing around the topic: The potentially all-powerful government shouldn't know: - what vices a person has - what religion a person has or doesn't have - what porn you watch - what alcohol and drugs you buy PERIOD. All of these things can be exploited. To control jobs, to control finances, to extort influence, to shape ideology, etc. The government shouldn't be able to catalog those things in a database for later misuse. The government shouldn't be able to install friction or barriers that make it easy to cordon off and kill these things at a later time. The "think of the kids" argument can go to straight to hell. Nobody's having children anyway. This is a very real (not logically fallacious) slippery slope right into the pages of 1984. It's not about kids. It's about control over society as a whole. They're going to force you to use your ID to access the internet, force you to use an approved device, and the minute you step outside of allowed behavior, you'll be punished. Shackles and telescreens are coming, and they're using this argument to build it.
- stouset 4mo ago
  Nobody here disagrees. What should be the case is that sites are broadly required to flag what kind of content they serve so parents can choose to exercise their own level of desired control.
  - dpkirchner 4mo ago
    Surely parents can look at the sites and decide for themselves whether or not they are suitable.
    - stouset 4mo ago
      I am certain that with even two minutes of thought you can understand why this makes zero sense.
      - dpkirchner 4mo ago
        I thought for more than two minutes before replying, so I guess not. What makes it difficult for someone who cares about what their child looks at online to determine for themselves what sites are suitable?
- xorcist 4mo ago
  What constitutes an all-powerful government? It seems rife for a no-true-scotsman argument. Would it be acceptable for a private company to own this information? Perhaps sell it to others?
  - girvo 4mo ago
    To me an all powerful government is one that has all the information the user just listed, because governments are by definition the most powerful force in our countries. Private companies should also be regulated with regards to data sales of private information, yes.
- CJefferson 4mo ago
  Should a government control the porn a child can walk into a shop and buy? The alcohol and drugs they can work into a shop and buy? Are you suggesting we remove current laws making it illegal for children to purchase these things?
  - saghm 4mo ago
    If I recall correctly, in Pennsylvania the government does own the shops that sell liquor, and most states run lotteries, so there's certainly precedent for governments being the ones in the vice business. That's besides the point though because this legislation doesn't check people's IDs when they're trying to purchase porn or alcohol, but as soon as they walk out the door, and if they refuse to show it, they have someone following then around even if they just go to the ATM and to the doctor.
  - echelon 4mo ago
    A store doesn't photocopy your ID. Some states even allow retailers to skip the ID check if the patron looks old enough. With online services, there's no way to ensure your information isn't permanently stored and associated with the transaction for later misuse.
saghm 4mo ago
Okay, but no kids live in my house, so why should there be a law requiring my ID to be checked even without knowing what I'm going to on my device? I don't get carded at the grocery store when I walk in because there's a chance I might buy alcohol.

echelon 4mo ago

Let me be very explicit so we're not dancing around the topic: The potentially all-powerful government shouldn't know: - what vices a person has - what religion a person has or doesn't have - what porn you watch - what alcohol and drugs you buy PERIOD. All of these things can be exploited. To control jobs, to control finances, to extort influence, to shape ideology, etc. The government shouldn't be able to catalog those things in a database for later misuse. The government shouldn't be able to install friction or barriers that make it easy to cordon off and kill these things at a later time. The "think of the kids" argument can go to straight to hell. Nobody's having children anyway. This is a very real (not logically fallacious) slippery slope right into the pages of 1984. It's not about kids. It's about control over society as a whole. They're going to force you to use your ID to access the internet, force you to use an approved device, and the minute you step outside of allowed behavior, you'll be punished. Shackles and telescreens are coming, and they're using this argument to build it.

stouset 4mo ago
Nobody here disagrees. What should be the case is that sites are broadly required to flag what kind of content they serve so parents can choose to exercise their own level of desired control.
- dpkirchner 4mo ago
  Surely parents can look at the sites and decide for themselves whether or not they are suitable.
  - stouset 4mo ago
    I am certain that with even two minutes of thought you can understand why this makes zero sense.
    - dpkirchner 4mo ago
      I thought for more than two minutes before replying, so I guess not. What makes it difficult for someone who cares about what their child looks at online to determine for themselves what sites are suitable?
xorcist 4mo ago
What constitutes an all-powerful government? It seems rife for a no-true-scotsman argument. Would it be acceptable for a private company to own this information? Perhaps sell it to others?
- girvo 4mo ago
  To me an all powerful government is one that has all the information the user just listed, because governments are by definition the most powerful force in our countries. Private companies should also be regulated with regards to data sales of private information, yes.
CJefferson 4mo ago
Should a government control the porn a child can walk into a shop and buy? The alcohol and drugs they can work into a shop and buy? Are you suggesting we remove current laws making it illegal for children to purchase these things?
- saghm 4mo ago
  If I recall correctly, in Pennsylvania the government does own the shops that sell liquor, and most states run lotteries, so there's certainly precedent for governments being the ones in the vice business. That's besides the point though because this legislation doesn't check people's IDs when they're trying to purchase porn or alcohol, but as soon as they walk out the door, and if they refuse to show it, they have someone following then around even if they just go to the ATM and to the doctor.
- echelon 4mo ago
  A store doesn't photocopy your ID. Some states even allow retailers to skip the ID check if the patron looks old enough. With online services, there's no way to ensure your information isn't permanently stored and associated with the transaction for later misuse.

saghm 4mo ago

Okay, but no kids live in my house, so why should there be a law requiring my ID to be checked even without knowing what I'm going to on my device? I don't get carded at the grocery store when I walk in because there's a chance I might buy alcohol.