3 ms·
I think you need to explain the solution you're thinking of in detail. "an RFC that gives parents the ability to communicate their underage child is using the
by 1dom 23d ago
I think you need to explain the solution you're thinking of in detail.
"an RFC that gives parents the ability to communicate their underage child is using the device without revealing or verifying any further information." is no different to "turn on age lock?" that you see on website now. It requires the parent to be present, engaged and 1 step ahead of their kids, and if we could depend on that, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
- asadotzler 23d agoHe was saying, vendors put that flag in the OS and parents set that flag in the OS and internet services respect that flag from the OS. No website anything, all in the OS. No staying ahead of anything, one and done. This, as noted above, requires that services respect the flag, which they do not universally do today. That requires legislation, something that will be a part of any workable solution.
- 1dom 23d agoSorry, I think you're being short sighted here. When I was a kid, I spent a lot of time rebuilding custom kernels and installing Puppy, DSL and other niche small operating systems on whatever random bits of hardware I could come across. I assume a lot of other HN users did the same. My parents would have had no opportunity to set the flag, meaning everywhere would have to assume default locked/blocked. > This, as noted above, requires that services respect the flag, which they do not universally do today. That requires legislation, something that will be a part of any workable solution. This is advocating for a variety of closed internet that is legally locked by default and would require a level of legal and international cooperation that would never happen. I'd argue that the resulting network isn't the Web any more.