41–50 of 371 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, you just answered brilliantly to your own question. You nailed it.
Leaving room for someone to give me convincing evidence to the contrary. I didn't expect any, though. It also lets someone who knows more than I to elaborate with more depth.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am a Russian proxy site, I make requests for you without the header. I serve you the content because I don't care about following American laws. Alternatively, just use an older browser that doesn't serve the header. If anything, you'd want the reverse. A header that serves as a disclaimer saying "I'm an adult, you can serve me anything" and then the host would only serve if the browser sends that header. And you'd…
> I am a Russian proxy site, I make requests for you without the header. I serve you the content because I don't care about following American laws. That's no different to a law mandating identification-based age verification though. A site in a different jurisdiction can ignore that just the same.
Either we create the fix, or the feds take it over. we need to sever the idea of a global internet. per-country and allied nations only. anonymous cert-chain verified ID stored on device. problem fixed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that if you're in country B, which has a law that says "you may not make information available to children that discloses that Santa Claus is made up," and the age of becoming an adult in your country is 18 -- knowing that a person accessing your site from country A is an adult in country A (which means, say, ≥ 16) is not sufficient to comply with the law.
I’m not sure why the age of majority in the region of the server would be relevant. The user is not traveling to that region, the laws protecting them should be the laws in their own region.
> should
I don't know if "should" is intended as a moral statement or a regulatory statement, but it's not at all unusual for server operators to need to comply with laws in the country in which they are operating…
I wonder what the psychological effect of having little or no privacy would do to people. Are we all going to be paranoid schizophrenics? How would a world of paranoid schizophrenics work? How insane are world events going to be from that point on?
i am a child header = i am verifying myself as valid target header
has anyone realized that whatever at all the "good" guys do, the "bad" guys will abuse it.
we need canaries [bots with child header], to get a metric on any increase of attempted crimes vs a child.
I'd be OK with an "I am a child" header mandated by law to be respected by service providers (eg. "adult sites" must not permit a client setting the header to proceed). On the client side, mandate that consumer devices that might reasonably be expected to be used by children (every smartphone, tablet, smart TV, etc) have parental controls that set the header. Leave it to parents to set the controls. Perhaps even hold…
If we must do something like this, I think a good solution would be an optional server header that describes the types of objectionable content that may be present (including “none”). Browsers on child devices from mainstream vendors would refuse to display any “unrated” resources without the header, and would block any resources that parents deem age-inappropriate, with strict but fair default settings that can be o…
It was derided as a "system for mass censorship", and got shot down. In hindsight a mistake, and it should have been implemented - it was completely voluntary by the user.
Equally, I think insisting that there must be no controls to internet access whatsoever is not right either. There is now plenty of evidence that eg. social media are very harmful to teenagers - and frankly, before I noticed, going on FB got me depressed each time I did it at one point. And as a parent, you realise how little control you have over your children's tech access. Case in point - my kids seem to have access to very poorly locked down iPads at school. I complained, but they frankly don't understand.
We all accept kids can't buy alcohol and cigarettes, even if that encroaches on their freedom. But or course flashing an ID when you're over 18 is not very privacy-invading.
Likewise, I think it is much better to discuss better means of effecting these access controls. As some comments here mention, there are e.g. zero knowledge proofs.
I'm sure I'll be told it's all a sham to collect data and it's not about kids. And maybe. But I care about kids not having access to TikTok and Pornhub. So I'd rather make the laws better than moan about how terrible it is to limit access to porn and dopamine shots.