4 ms·

there are plenty of alternatives if we're willing to shift these costs and responsibility to ISPs, which could separate the internet into two networks, one for

there are plenty of alternatives if we're willing to shift these costs and responsibility to ISPs, which could separate the internet into two networks, one for children and the other for the rest of us. This is technically just as feasible, and probably cheaper than requiring every website to process (and probably retain) personally identifiable information.. significantly safer too. But that wouldn't come with baked in surveillance, so "what else can you do" sounds a bit unnerving.

ben_w 4mo ago
> if we're willing to shift these costs and responsibility to ISPs, which could separate the internet into two networks, one for children and the other for the rest of us. This is technically just as feasible, and probably cheaper than requiring every website to process It really wouldn't be. Do that at OSI layer 3, every routed packet would have to have an "was this sent by a kid's device" flag. Higher levels aren't the ISP's role. Lower levels, you'd need duplicate hardware specifically for kids, which couldn't connect to the adult's internet. In the real world, we're still arguing about something that was already embarrassingly slow in its roll-out during my degree, and I graduated 20 years ago: IPv6.
- drptech 4mo ago
  [dead]
- trashb 4mo ago
  > Lower levels, you'd need duplicate hardware specifically for kids, which couldn't connect to the adult's internet. This would also breed more interest in hardware modifications and thus leading more kids into the technical field. Sounds like a win win situation.
  - ben_w 4mo ago
    If sparking such interests is your goal, I'd pick hardware that's ancient and chunky, easy to see what bits it has and pull them out, put new ones in. Nothing newer than 1999. Such things can't run modern websites either.
    - infinite_spin 4mo ago
      this can be done purely with software: a browser with a vpn that cannot be changed without parental consent, which only connects to a network designated for children. The vpn provider could then limit access. High school computer labs already do something similar. We don't need to compromise here, this already exists and works pretty well.
      - ben_w 4mo ago
        First, no. A lot of things supposedly kid-safe have turned out not to be. Also, further up chain, I was replying to: > if we're willing to shift these costs and responsibility to ISPs, which could separate the internet into two networks, one for children and the other for the rest of us. This is technically just as feasible, and probably cheaper than requiring every website to process What you suggest is not that. Also also, what you suggest puts the hard problem (configuring software correctly) in the hands of normal people. Software configuration is second nature to us nerds, so it's easy to forget that the average person probably only knows how to install pi-hole and one or two VPNs: https://xkcd.com/2501/ https://xkcd.com/2501/
        infinite_spin 4mo ago
        > First, no. A lot of things supposedly kid-safe have turned out not to be. I'm not making a comment with respect to the actual safety these systems offer, just that alternatives exist, which would not all require modified hardware. > what you suggest puts the hard problem (configuring software correctly) in the hands of normal people. Pre bundled software, specifically browsers, exist. Colleges use them all the time to prevent cheating, e.g. the Lockdown Browser. Those don't require the student to configure anything, they just download the application and login.

ben_w 4mo ago

> if we're willing to shift these costs and responsibility to ISPs, which could separate the internet into two networks, one for children and the other for the rest of us. This is technically just as feasible, and probably cheaper than requiring every website to process It really wouldn't be. Do that at OSI layer 3, every routed packet would have to have an "was this sent by a kid's device" flag. Higher levels aren't the ISP's role. Lower levels, you'd need duplicate hardware specifically for kids, which couldn't connect to the adult's internet. In the real world, we're still arguing about something that was already embarrassingly slow in its roll-out during my degree, and I graduated 20 years ago: IPv6.

drptech 4mo ago
[dead]
trashb 4mo ago
> Lower levels, you'd need duplicate hardware specifically for kids, which couldn't connect to the adult's internet. This would also breed more interest in hardware modifications and thus leading more kids into the technical field. Sounds like a win win situation.
- ben_w 4mo ago
  If sparking such interests is your goal, I'd pick hardware that's ancient and chunky, easy to see what bits it has and pull them out, put new ones in. Nothing newer than 1999. Such things can't run modern websites either.
  - infinite_spin 4mo ago
    this can be done purely with software: a browser with a vpn that cannot be changed without parental consent, which only connects to a network designated for children. The vpn provider could then limit access. High school computer labs already do something similar. We don't need to compromise here, this already exists and works pretty well.
    - ben_w 4mo ago
      First, no. A lot of things supposedly kid-safe have turned out not to be. Also, further up chain, I was replying to: > if we're willing to shift these costs and responsibility to ISPs, which could separate the internet into two networks, one for children and the other for the rest of us. This is technically just as feasible, and probably cheaper than requiring every website to process What you suggest is not that. Also also, what you suggest puts the hard problem (configuring software correctly) in the hands of normal people. Software configuration is second nature to us nerds, so it's easy to forget that the average person probably only knows how to install pi-hole and one or two VPNs: https://xkcd.com/2501/ https://xkcd.com/2501/
      - infinite_spin 4mo ago
        > First, no. A lot of things supposedly kid-safe have turned out not to be. I'm not making a comment with respect to the actual safety these systems offer, just that alternatives exist, which would not all require modified hardware. > what you suggest puts the hard problem (configuring software correctly) in the hands of normal people. Pre bundled software, specifically browsers, exist. Colleges use them all the time to prevent cheating, e.g. the Lockdown Browser. Those don't require the student to configure anything, they just download the application and login.