Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 525 posts

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#21

Post by skybrian »

Bender wrote: post #3

The only device mandates that should be taking place is for the default installations of web clients should be checking to see if parental controls are enabled. This only impacts the major browsers. An intern at each browser company could add this check in minutes. If they are enabled and the person logged in is on a regular account (not admin or power user of sorts) then the base installation of web clients must che…

I largely agree, but the RTA header doesn't seem to be good enough for most websites to use. When a website wants to block browsers with parental controls on, but it isn't porn and it shouldn't be blocked by SafeSearch, what do they do?

https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/140733/how-to...

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#23

Post by Bender »

pessimizer wrote: post #20
themafia wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An intern at each browser company could add this check in minutes. An intern could also just delete the product which would also "solve" this "issue". The fact that it's easy or cheap is not significant to the problem at hand. > should be doing is setting an RTA header Many sites will just set the header by default. Now you've created a problem. > then progressively fine them into oblivion. This does nothing. See:…

I must be stupid. Reword this so it makes sense to me. I can't even parse it.

- Site adds a header if they may potentially have adult content.

- Browser detects header. Prompts for local password to access site.

- Child does not know password, picks a different site or begs parent for access.

- This is now between small child and parent. No third parties, no tracking, no telling website the users age, no local or remote API's sharing data.

- At some point if all goes well the child will be an adult and will thank their parent for looking out for them when all their friends data was sold and abused.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#24

Post by pessimizer »

jmclnx wrote: post #7

Hopefully the add the BSDs too.

> The proposed amendment specifically states: “Operating system provider” does not mean a person or entity that distributes an operating system or application under license terms that permit a recipient to copy, redistribute, and modify the software.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#25

Post by cortesoft »

alpinisme wrote: post #9
cortesoft wrote: post #8

As a dad of two younger kids (7 and 10), I have been incredibly frustrated with the way age restrictions are handled across various services. Really, my main complaint comes down to: I completely disagree with what these services choose to restrict for kids and what they allow. They block my kids from doing things I have no problem with them doing and they allow things I would never want my kids to do in 1000 years.…

What tools would you want?

Honestly, I don’t have a perfect answer. It really depends on what the service is.

My main thing is I want to be able to opt in or out of various filters. I don’t mind if my kids want to listen to music that has swear words, but I don’t want them watching videos where they give horribly sexist pickup artist advice.

This isn’t just about what I feel is age appropriate, either. It is also about what I know about my kids.

My 10 year old hates scary things, and she gets completely freaked out when they show scary movie previews. I would like to be able to block those for her. On the other hand, my 7 year old is obsessed with scary things and I don’t mind if he plays zombie video games.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#26

Post by Bender »

skybrian wrote: post #21
Bender wrote: post #3

The only device mandates that should be taking place is for the default installations of web clients should be checking to see if parental controls are enabled. This only impacts the major browsers. An intern at each browser company could add this check in minutes. If they are enabled and the person logged in is on a regular account (not admin or power user of sorts) then the base installation of web clients must che…

I largely agree, but the RTA header doesn't seem to be good enough for most websites to use. When a website wants to block browsers with parental controls on, but it isn't porn and it shouldn't be blocked by SafeSearch, what do they do? https://webmasters.stackexchange.com/questions/140733/how-to...

what do they do?

They stop trying to put everything in a different category and treat RTA as the person under the age of consent must get approval from their parent or legal guardian. Keep it simple.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#28

Post by phendrenad2 »

We did it despite the naysayers who faught us saying it "wasn't a big deal" and that this is the "best version of the law we could get". Never listen to the naysayers and compromise your principles to appease them, stay true to what you believe.
Post reply on HN