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

California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 525 posts

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#81

Post by lazyasciiart »

Bender wrote: post #66
lazyasciiart wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, no news sites for kids.

Right, no news sites for kids. Correct. Until parent or guardian puts in password next to the text that says "Approve this site, forever." You gave me an idea. Maybe there could be categories similar in concept to those that exist in corporate firewalls today that say things like: - News Category (Known to be SFW) - News Category (That may be NSFW) - Child friendly sites - Social media sites ... and so on. This could…

This is a terrible idea and your proposed society is terrible. It doesn’t matter if it’s safe for work; you asked to identify sites with content that can change. Either the parent has seen and approved the content or not.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#82

Post by catlikesshrimp »

mikestorrent wrote: post #63
iamalizard wrote: post #55

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…

If your kids are in the smart 1% who can bypass your authority, they will. Be proud. For the rest, we don't need a police atate

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#83

Post by cyberax »

mikestorrent wrote: post #63
iamalizard wrote: post #55

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…

> 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?

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#84

Post by zeroCalories »

keernan wrote: post #65
zeroCalories wrote: post #22

[flagged]

I have 7 grandchildren with the oldest being 10. My daughters are very strict about not providing their kids with devices that have internet access. The only one of the 7 who has a phone has a flip phone with no internet access. There simply is no reason to provide young children with access to the internet.

[flagged]

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#85

Post by yetta »

Bender wrote: post #61
iamalizard wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No such mandates should take place at all.

I agree fundamentally and ideologically but we are past that point. The toothpaste is already out of the tube as they say. There will be restrictions so all I can do is suggest more sensible restrictions that keep the control on the client side and do not share data. Any data shared can and will be abused, leaked , sold, stolen without consequence.

No we aren't. Also you can put toothpaste in tubes or it wouldn't be in there. Hope that helps!

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#87

Post by dylan604 »

grim_io wrote: post #74
mikestorrent wrote: post #63

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…

Well, you can't. Like no past generation could stop their kids.

Just like no past generation had so much information so readily available. One quick quip can always be rebutted by another quick quip, but it doesn't really move the conversation along in any meaningful manner.

Re: California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verification law after backlash

#88

Post by jeffbee »

neilv wrote: post #32

Who is actually writing this very concerning California Internet legislation, which will ultimately affect the entire nation and world? Did someone write California Internet legislation without consulting any California Internet companies? Did some California Internet companies write California Internet legislation? Did some other party write California Internet legislation?

The bill was written by Buffy Wicks, who represents me in the State Assembly, who is very good on housing, transportation, and climate, and who should absolutely stay in her lane and not try to legislate platform APIs.
Post reply on HN