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

The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 598 posts

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#531

Post by ben_w »

trashb wrote: post #495
ben_w wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> 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.

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.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#532

Post by tosti »

ben_w wrote: post #529
tosti wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the distinction matters that much. Remember ogrish? I was already an adult when that gore came out and I was terrified. I can still picture the throat gasping for air as he was being sliced alive.

> Remember ogrish? No*, however the point is valid: the internet overall is indeed unfiltered far beyond what is allowed in even the highest cinematic ratings. * I avoided such things, however I do know the low end of what they can be, and had in mind 2girls1cup which I understand to be criminal "extreme porn" by UK standards, though have never actually seen it.

Yes, especially back then. But I don't think age-gating is useful for gore. Even if I had dementia I'd be horrified. Just with the benefit of not being able to remember it.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#533

Post by ethbr1 »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #525
ethbr1 wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By 2006, you already had Google, Amazon, and Facebook outpacing their competition. Apple was riding iPod success and just about to launch the iPhone. Imho, that's well into the re-centralization of the internet and tech landscape. Rewind another 10 years, and I'd call 1996 wild. That's before XMLHttpRequest/AJAX and when a cat could create as impressive of a website as any corporation.

I guess it depends on what you mean by wild...

https://web.archive.org/web/20051029045942/http://www.unc.ed...

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#534

Post by kulahan »

saghm wrote: post #403
program_whiz wrote: post #401

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are the negatives for doing so?

Forcing literally everyone else on the internet to give up privacy. No kids ever use my devices (there are no kids in my household), but in order to protect the non-existent children who theoretically would use my devices, I'd be forced to share information I don't want to and blindly trust that the process is done in a way that magically doesn't increase the ability to track me across websites.

That’s an extremely small negative. We’ve had nearly zero privacy for all of human history. A lockable door in your own home was an enormous revolution. There was a brief period where you could do super secretive things in your own home in America because it was the culture to move out the millisecond you can in order to live on your own, and roommates are viewed as an unfortunate obstacle.

Now that the 70-ish year experiment is over, we’re simply reverting to the way we’ve been since time immemorial.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#535

Post by kulahan »

imhoguy wrote: post #377
djaro wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that not all parents are "concerned parents" and children dont deserve to be taken advantage of by trillion dollar corporations for the crime of having bad parents.

These parents will do age check themselves on kids devices. Why? To not be bothered or to elevate the kid in peer group. No system is going to fix "unresponsble" parents until we end up with a state completely replacing parent like in Brave New World.

You should look into Paul Krugman’s research on nudges, and how he won a Nobel prize showing that extremely small changes can have significantly beneficial effects across an entire citizenry.

You’re the person saying that we shouldn’t be default people to contributing to their retirement because people may choose not to. It’s not about perfectly capturing every possible person - you’re running a country, not a concentration camp.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#536

Post by kulahan »

bArray wrote: post #414
kulahan wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of studies came out kinda at the same time showing how harmful it is and people aren’t coming up with alternatives. What else can you do?

Our environment contains harms. Vehicles are several tonnes traveling 60+ mph, they make guns look safe. The calculation is a risk-reward one. The question we have to ask ourselves is whether these "protect the children" laws are worth the internet freedoms they are about to erode. I would argue not. 1. It is not the state's responsibility to raise your children. They should ensure that safety is available, they shou…

I’m glad you think parents need to step up. They aren’t. Stop pretending that the solution is “people should just stop doing this thing I dislike” because it will literally never work in any situation where you’ve got even an ounce of compassion.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#537

Post by kulahan »

ACV001 wrote: post #462
kerridge0 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had an idea the other day that children could have some kind of jewellery that they can't remove like a curfew device. Probably impractical but at least it matches - children=limited rights and need protection. Once of age, no need, come of age, can remove.

stupid idea

Stupid comment

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#538

Post by kulahan »

saghm wrote: post #412
kulahan wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of studies came out kinda at the same time showing how harmful it is and people aren’t coming up with alternatives. What else can you do?

Oh good, there have never been studies coordinated to come out to influence public opinion based on shoddy science before; just ask the tobacco industry

You realize in this scenario you’re actually defending the tobacco companies, right?

Tobacco companies: “CIGARETTES ARE FINE!”

Society: “we should regulate that.”

Social media companies: “SOCIAL MEDIA IS FINE!”

Society: “we should regulate that”

You, apparently: “if the tobacco industry lied, it proves… social media… is being honest???? Or something???”

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#539

Post by kulahan »

arkh wrote: post #469
kulahan wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of studies came out kinda at the same time showing how harmful it is and people aren’t coming up with alternatives. What else can you do?

> What else can you do? Educate the parents maybe?

Sure. A national training program sounds dope. Let’s get on it.

Re: The KIDS Act would require age checks to get online

#540

Post by infinite_spin »

ben_w wrote: post #531
trashb wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

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.

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.

Post reply on HN