4 ms·
LOL - I remember saying this would not be something that could be policed, and a bunch of my fellow countrymen tut-tutting at me saying things like “it’s the th
by chris_wot 1mo ago
LOL - I remember saying this would not be something that could be policed, and a bunch of my fellow countrymen tut-tutting at me saying things like “it’s the thought that counts”, etc.
Now it’s gone underground and it’s worse than ever. Meantime, there are kids in high schools across the nation who can’t watch World War II documentaries on Youtube because that’s considered “restricted content”.
You can’t make this shit up.
- grebc 1mo agoBest ban them at the DNS level if you want to get into it. And not by age. Edit: any rule/law has ways around it. It’s the intent of the law that matters, and I do not think the sentiment in the community that made it possible is worried about your LOL.
- bko 1mo agoThe law basically said these companies have to have reasonable measures. They could make a dent if they actually required age verification. But people think it's some civil rights violation like you have some fundamental right to use social media. Also it's not underground. Kids aren't allowed to create accounts and just lie about their age. Below 13yo did that before as that's the min she already.
- chris_wot 1mo agoSo basically, you say it's all ineffective and can't be policed.
- alt227 1mo agoIt isnt worse than ever. Read the article, usage is down overall since the ban.