511–520 of 799 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The DAAA doesn't criminalize open source. Please stop spreading disinformation.
GDPR doesn't mandate cookie consent, and DMCA allows reverse engineering. Didn't help at all.
Here's my idea how "safe mode" might be implemented without selfie, passport and without every app or website owner having to spend money on compliance. The mobile and desktop OS should have a checkbox "child mode" in the onboarding stage. Switching device to "child mode" allows only installing white-listed apps from the government list and opening white-listed websites from the government list. Parents may edit the…
The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. If there is a problem with children not being sufficiently protected, that is the level at which to solve it. Give families tools and information to do so.
You clearly don't have kids. You drop them at school and for maybe 8 hours a day, as a parent you have 0 control over whats happening. Bullying, peer pressure etc. How is that also parent's responsibility? Parents shouldn't buy smart phone to kids, period. There are 0 reasons kid of say 15 or lower should have one instead of dumb phone (or new commodore one with google maps and whatsapp but no browser or apps), in sa…
At some point your kid is going to move out or you will die and then you will have even less influence. School is a test for that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like this approach but this is a power grab similar to the purchase of Tiktok...
Where is the power grab? Everything is voluntary except for the requirement to support child mode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are being facetious.
I really don't believe that they are. Historically, communities raised children, and leaving everything up to parents is an anomaly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Because this is leaning on blaming to UK for everything the US is doing to itself an awful lot. Hasn't the UK had a culture of surveillance (the famous CCTV cameras) and arresting people over online wrongthink for quite some time though? Who inspired who?
The US has a history of arrests over "wrong think" https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/may/18/facebook-com... https://www.aclu.org/news/free-speech/new-hampshire-police-a... https://www.fire.org/news/lawsuit-ex-cop-sues-after-spending...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Totally disagree. If you want to stop kids from using cell phones and social media, you are not going to achieve that at the family level. It is just not possible because if your peers are on the platforms and are using smart phones, no amount of family level restrictions are going to stop kids from using them. It has to be at the state or higher level so that everyone is prevented from using social media or smart ph…
Pretty much. As soon as kids start going to school, there is a large amount of time where they are out of the supervision of the parents. This is when they end up being dragged to the general flow of society for better and worse.
The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. If there is a problem with children not being sufficiently protected, that is the level at which to solve it. Give families tools and information to do so.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>in addition to police shooting and killing civilians If you look at actual statistics you know why it keeps happening. The chance to be shot if you don't act or live like them is miniscule. >You’re not afraid to walk to your local for a pint and be shot in the head by a cop I suppose, right? No "just" scared to open my mouth or defend myself or family with the little to none legal weaponary left that still exists fr…
> No "just" scared to open my mouth or defend myself or family with the little to none legal weaponary Bitch please. Firstly the _victim_ was foreign not the attacker. second, you are well within your rights to use reasonable force. Sometimes that involves chasing an attacker down the street with a cricket bat and beating the shit out of someone. > foreign attackers imported against our will which are excluded from s…
I could literally be arrested for what I said, can you claim the same in the US?
>chasing an attacker down the street with a cricket bat and beating the shit out of someone.
Someone literally got arrested for buying a baseball bat couple days ago...
>thats not way to talk about the scottish
Somehow they aren't included in the law exclusion or are part of the group doing disproportionate amounts of stabbings (or rape), curious.
The right people to protect children are those responsible for them - their parents and guardians. If there is a problem with children not being sufficiently protected, that is the level at which to solve it. Give families tools and information to do so.
No ID checks at clubs, bars, or other adults-only venues. No school zone speed limits, or protected crossings on streets near schools. No requirements for railings on public balconies, fencing around public pools, protective covers over drains or other holes in the ground. Parents/guardians can just supervise. Sounds great!
No, I don’t want to scan my face or my passport to use the Web. And also no, this glib, thought-terminating, “common sense” quip about “the parents are responsible” is also something to be rejected. We should try to both collectively protect kids and leave adults alone.
Leave it all to the corporations and you would have them prey on your children on every street corner, splash screen, TV menu, and ad board, with no “parental management” option anywhere. “But parents are responsible”, they would say.