121–130 of 525 posts
A cynical person might suspect that the reason they are doing this is so that Linux developers don't have standing to challenge the law on 1st amendment grounds...
LEarn to take a win as a win. People who are unable to look at anything without seeing themselves being scammed are clinically paranoid.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you, as a longtime free speech believe. but... I would also like to keep my kids from seeing the very worst of the internet before they're ready to handle it. I tried using a PiHole but Firefox DNS-over-HTTPS nullifies that now. It's not realistic for me to be watching over their shoulders 24/7; what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something li…
> what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something like this? Nothing. VPNs exist (including free ones), some of classmates will have unlocked devices, etc. Next question?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No such mandates should take place at all.
I agree with you, as a longtime free speech believe. but... I would also like to keep my kids from seeing the very worst of the internet before they're ready to handle it. I tried using a PiHole but Firefox DNS-over-HTTPS nullifies that now. It's not realistic for me to be watching over their shoulders 24/7; what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something li…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with you, as a longtime free speech believe. but... I would also like to keep my kids from seeing the very worst of the internet before they're ready to handle it. I tried using a PiHole but Firefox DNS-over-HTTPS nullifies that now. It's not realistic for me to be watching over their shoulders 24/7; what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something li…
> what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something like this? Nothing. VPNs exist (including free ones), some of classmates will have unlocked devices, etc. Next question?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No such mandates should take place at all.
A lot of us who grew up pre-social-media agree in principle. What it fails to account for is that today's internet is qualitatively different from the pre-social-media, pre-smartphone internet. The vast majority of the internet audience , too, is qualitatively different. Incentives are misaligned for an average parent who might want to keep a tight leash on smartphone internet access for their kids, when attempting t…
Maybe we should teach parents how to be parents instead of imposing draconian age checks (read: mass surveillance).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A) Aren't you targeting a completely different problem than this law? It's my understanding that this law targets the collection of the age from the user. What the user agent does with that signal is a different problem, and seems to already be solved, except for the definition of "actual knowledge" which they are trying to establish here. B) How would your RTA header intersect with content rating in different jurisd…
For topic (A) I am suggesting to negate this behavior all together. No more sharing personal data. That evil-pattern must be stopped. For topic (B) companies can set or not set the header based on GeoIP. Not perfect but GeoIP is already used in load balancers, web servers and applications.
For (B), your proposal requires the website have a database over current rules in every country they would be accessible from. Would a website then, in your opinion, be responsible for the accuracy of this database? We have to presuppose an official GeoIP source that would then be legally binding and under democratic control, but given such a database, would a website serving a wrong header to an IP associated with a specific country then be committing a crime in that country? What would the punishment be?
A cynical person might suspect that the reason they are doing this is so that Linux developers don't have standing to challenge the law on 1st amendment grounds...
LEarn to take a win as a win. People who are unable to look at anything without seeing themselves being scammed are clinically paranoid.
If OSes that don't verify the age of their users are a genuinely unsafe for children, why should they be allowed just because they are open source? That doesn't seem to mitigate dangers associated with age in any away I can identify.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
99% of people have no idea what this means, but they do understand voting.
Yup I was just replying to the .001% that was discussing it. Please do reach out to your congress people.
I personally think this current version of the legislation is a good compromise. Tech workarounds are fine for the few of us that understand the relevant technology (though I have never bothered to compile DNS in my life and have no plans to do so in the future), but they are simply not practical for most people. Every time I hear someone suggesting this sort of thing I find myself tempted to say 'why worry about legislation? If you don't like what it mandates you can just write your own operating system.'
Of course this would not be helpful because writing your own OS is extremely hard beyond classroom/toy examples. And likewise, tech workarounds and even parental controls are hard for most consumers - partly by design. I have an xbox console and have been trying to figure out why it keeps freezing on certain apps for months now. I suspect a telemetry problem but it's just a guess, there isn't really any way to look at logs so it's a trial and error process because most consumer hardware/application vendors want their products to be black boxes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Google and others can adapt. RTA header? Added to potential adult or user-contributed category.
I imagine Google wants to distinguish between websites that want to be blocked by SafeSearch, versus websites that want to be blocked when parental controls are on? There's no reason to leave that ambiguous. Plenty of adults have SafeSearch on. Defining a new header isn't hard; the hard part is getting consensus and adoption.
Are today's videos beheading's without blood, with blood, with or without anguish, with nudity, without nudity, etc... After a while it gets out of hand.
It turned out the internet was too dynamic so the RTA header was created to just say "adult".