this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
102 points (88.6% liked)

Asklemmy

43363 readers
1419 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There are a lot of GOP-controller legislatures in the USA pushing through so-called “child protection” laws, but there’s a toll in the form of impacting people’s rights and data privacy. Most of these bills involve requiring adults to upload a copy of their photo ID.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Arin@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had an interesting experience as a teen looking at porn online and blocking is not the way. Education is the best, basically teaching teens is better than letting them make mistakes when they turn 18 and get their ass fucked

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Boogeyman4325@reddthat.com 5 points 1 year ago

Personally, I don't like the idea. Government policies aren't good substitutes for parenting. even if they implemented these changes, kids and adults alike would likely move to other websites that don't have the government ID scanning feature in, or kids would use things such as a fake ID or their parent's IDs.

If someone wants porn online, they will find it. It's up to the parents to ensure that their children don't become porn addicts in the first place.

[–] Badass_panda@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

These bills are intended to make it harder for anyone to look at porn online. There are plenty of tools parents can employ to make it harder for their own kids to see porn -- that's where the responsibility belongs.

[–] tallwookie@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

it's my belief that if you try to shield your children from the evils of the world, you will invariable fail and they'll be unprepared for the world itself once they leave the nest. not saying that you shouldnt try to enact parental controls on their devices, just that you'll fail.

also, not sure how the government is going to control access to the porn. it's one thing to gate pornhub/xhamster behind a ID required page, it's another thing entirely to ban all porn everywhere. like, good luck mr government but you're going to fail.

[–] PlexSheep@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago

Unbelievably stupid.

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Parents should have the tools to be able to give their children specific information. And part of that toolbox is keeping them off the internet. Or only supervise internet use for an hour or two a day. Giving any child complete and total access to a tool is kind of dangerous. You have to educate them about the dangers of the tool and how to properly respect it. So if your child is 3 years old they may not be ready for the raw internet.

If an organization such as the government wants to spend money to create a child friendly network space, KinterNet, Great more power to them. Then concerned parents could VPN to the Kinternet on devices for their children. It would be opt-in.

De facto if you give your child a device with unfettered internet access, you're saying they're ready and responsible enough to handle the kind of information there. That you've trained them in the proper use of the tools.

Most kids used to be farm kids, they knew about sex, because on the farm sex happens. Happens a lot. They see the entire life cycle of a various animals. But now we have many children who don't have exposure to the whole life cycle, and if you cut the internet off for them then they're going to grow up very stunted as well. Everything's a balance, and that's up to the parents.

But I think all of these words are wasted. The reason surveillance bills are pushed on us "for the children" is because it's a convenient excuse, it sets precedent, it's about control, it's not about the children. It's an excuse only... And if everyone really is trying to protect the children, where does it end? Can't talk about Santa Claus online? We must reaffirm the tooth fairy industrial complex?

You cannot stop kids from looking at porn. Doesn't matter how hard you try, they will find a way around it. This is about collecting a database of porn preferences to probably use as blackmail.

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm against it. Parents should be helping their children go online go submit homework or whatever they need to do. You cannot babyproof the internet the same way you cannot babyproof society. Parents in the 90s understood this well. Parents in the 20s do not understand this.

Build safer websites for kids. Don't degrade adult spaces, because the 4chans and fox newses will always exist, but will take down the good sites as collateral.

The internet will always be an open forum of advertisements, ideas, arguing, and little niches of helpful information and nerds.

[–] mtchristo@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

it should be their parent's paroblem ! give them the tools to do it properly without making other people's lives hell. instead of govs trying to strip encryption and what not

[–] Cralex@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don’t think there’s a good way to accomplish this on a governmental level. But personally, I would’ve liked to not be exposed to it when I was.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›