Live data from Hacker News

Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

reclaimthenet.org

11–20 of 81 posts

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#11
post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it feels like another round of the same old tired "force everyone to use legal names online to save the children" that has been pushed continuously since the Internet driver's license of the 90s. It will not save any children. It will destroy privacy, destroy free speech, and give lots of money to whatever corporation wins the bid for supplying the tech. And of course, when that corporation gets hacked and all t…

It will make children visible targets and be more exploitable.

Blizzard, the video game company, moved their forums from character name to legal name. I think it lasted a week or two before a ton of people got doxxed and they reverted.

Curiously, people doxx themselves. That is like the entire business model of plaintir, collect all the information people volunteer about themselves and others publicly, for free, to anyone that cares to look.

We seem to be at the bit where people liked having their cake and eating it too, until they had to pay for it. This is the part where the bill comes due.

And that is fucking _nothing_ compared to the massive, eye-watering amount of information people fucking pay to give away to an LLM company. sama must laugh himself to sleep every night.

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#12

I find it relatively strange that over the past 30-40 years, we went from a world where most everything was intermediated by parents, and “adult” media was relatively well gatekept to this online Wild West where it seems almost any attempt to gatekeep is seen as a freedom violation. Maybe this is why we need protocols over platforms? But like, kids shouldn’t be able to sign a ToS until they’re 18. I have little sympa…

When I was a kid, most families that had a computer kept it in a common area. Same with the TV, for that matter.

Some families did not. Mine did not! But that was a decision that was up to individual families.

I don’t see why these decisions should be up to anyone but individual families. Period. If your kids are mature enough for unsupervised computer use, or if you don’t see it as a problem, that’s up to you as a parent. Same as if you feel comfortable taking your kids skeet shooting or rock climbing.

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#14
I don't understand what position this article is trying to stake out. How is it Zuckerberg's fault that a California court called him into a courtroom demanding to know why he didn't stop children from using his platform? It seems like the author recognizes that he agrees with Meta on all the substantive questions here, but feels obligated to jump through hoops to avoid taking a pro-corporate position that Meta is right and the plaintiff is wrong.

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#15

Ban cell phones. The internet must again become something you sit down to use. It'd fix the child problem and many problems for adults. It is not something that should be following you around all day.

Just asteroid the planet and hope we get shit right the next time around.

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#16

I find it relatively strange that over the past 30-40 years, we went from a world where most everything was intermediated by parents, and “adult” media was relatively well gatekept to this online Wild West where it seems almost any attempt to gatekeep is seen as a freedom violation. Maybe this is why we need protocols over platforms? But like, kids shouldn’t be able to sign a ToS until they’re 18. I have little sympa…

When I was a kid, most families that had a computer kept it in a common area. Same with the TV, for that matter. Some families did not. Mine did not! But that was a decision that was up to individual families. I don’t see why these decisions should be up to anyone but individual families. Period. If your kids are mature enough for unsupervised computer use, or if you don’t see it as a problem, that’s up to you as a p…

Attempting to manage this as a parent is hellish.

I can't speak for other parents, but some standards for parental controls—the presence of which and adherence to might be enforced by law, if need be, and need probably would be since none of this is stuff vendors couldn't have figured out on their own long ago if they cared to—we could leverage would be goddamn nice and is all I'd really want.

Especially as devices get more locked-down and it becomes hard to control stuff at the network level if you don't have root on the devices themselves, like... man, it's such a time-suck, and I'm 100% sure I'd be having to choose between "I guess we just don't have the Internet in this house" and "fuck it, I give up, go stumble on gore videos I guess" if I weren't a lot better at this stuff than the median parent. I feel for them, this stuff is entirely hopeless for 'em.

Like, my kids have Chromebooks from school. They pretty much have to bring them home. So now I have this extra physical item I can't administrate that I must police at night if I don't want them to stay up all night on trash-tier web games or something. So I'll block the devices at the network level at night, right? Easy fix! Nope, the fucking things rotate MAC addresses as an anti-tracking measure I guess. We have zero need for that feature (the number of times they're gonna use the things outside school and home over their whole school careers is going to be very small) but I'm not admin on those devices, so, stuck with it. So there's an extra hurdle to making that happen.

Repeat some other incredible frustration for every single thing. Oh look, AppleTV has a simple rating interface so I can at least make sure nothing too bad can get through if I mess something up. Great. Oh except almost nothing on the device except Apple's own software respects the setting, at all, just ignores it. You have to go dick around with every single service on there to lock them down, then hope it sticks through updates and other nonsense. Awesome, great feature that's actually totally useless because nobody cares about the users. Sigh.

Your options are go full-luddite, give up and leave them to the Internet gods, or take on this load of work and stress that our parents did not have.

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I was a kid, most families that had a computer kept it in a common area. Same with the TV, for that matter. Some families did not. Mine did not! But that was a decision that was up to individual families. I don’t see why these decisions should be up to anyone but individual families. Period. If your kids are mature enough for unsupervised computer use, or if you don’t see it as a problem, that’s up to you as a p…

Attempting to manage this as a parent is hellish. I can't speak for other parents, but some standards for parental controls—the presence of which and adherence to might be enforced by law, if need be, and need probably would be since none of this is stuff vendors couldn't have figured out on their own long ago if they cared to—we could leverage would be goddamn nice and is all I'd really want. Especially as devices g…

I agree that it should be easier. We’re on a frigging VC website. Shouldn’t there be a huge market opportunity here for parental control systems? Why is this not a problem that anyone is going after?

I’m also surprised that “family monitoring” stalkerware companies like Life360 haven’t expanded into this market.

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#18

I find it relatively strange that over the past 30-40 years, we went from a world where most everything was intermediated by parents, and “adult” media was relatively well gatekept to this online Wild West where it seems almost any attempt to gatekeep is seen as a freedom violation. Maybe this is why we need protocols over platforms? But like, kids shouldn’t be able to sign a ToS until they’re 18. I have little sympa…

When I was a kid, most families that had a computer kept it in a common area. Same with the TV, for that matter. Some families did not. Mine did not! But that was a decision that was up to individual families. I don’t see why these decisions should be up to anyone but individual families. Period. If your kids are mature enough for unsupervised computer use, or if you don’t see it as a problem, that’s up to you as a p…

When I was a kid 5 gigantic companies didn’t basically control the whole internet.

Skeet shooting isn’t in every pocket, school, library, Best Buy kiosk. Etc. Maybe if the phones were open source and I truly had the capability to control access this would make sense but the currently available tools are obviously toothless in a way meant to ensure that your u feel like your in control.

I’m not really scared about what my kids might do or see. If the internet was still countercultural and not everything was fucking force fed to you by gigantic billionaire mega corps it would be fine. But there should be some friction.

Re: Zuckerberg's "fix" for child safety could end anonymous internet access for all

#20

I find it relatively strange that over the past 30-40 years, we went from a world where most everything was intermediated by parents, and “adult” media was relatively well gatekept to this online Wild West where it seems almost any attempt to gatekeep is seen as a freedom violation. Maybe this is why we need protocols over platforms? But like, kids shouldn’t be able to sign a ToS until they’re 18. I have little sympa…

The idea is of general purpose computing. In past, you could restrict access without restricting most freedoms. Today's world, restricting access means restricting access to a ggeneral purpose computer. And thats the biggest deal.
Post reply on HN