• Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    165
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    I legitimately dont understand who supports this. Who are these parents that can’t parent their kids properly? It’s so incredibly easy these days.

    So instead of handling shitty parenting we restrict adults and with surveillance. Make it make sense.

    • Sunsofold@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      One of the biggest problems with human societies is that parents, by necessity, have their brains broken and, due to modern values/life, are under constant strain. Being a parent means (generally) the kid is priority 1, then there’s everything else. This is a necessary irrationality, but if this means you have to do the occasional genocide or violate someone else’s civil rights to ‘keep our kids safe’ then, by god, those people are just going to have to suck it up and die. Sometimes, if you have the time, you can talk some people around and remind them, one day their kids are going to have to live in society as one of those 'someone else’s and won’t always be their precious little baby, but almost no one has the time and energy for a more nuanced thought than ‘save the babies!’ much less if they also have to work 48 hours, commute 10 hours, and parent their kid(s) for 167 hours each week.

    • rozodru@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      23 hours ago

      a lot of people. The other day I saw a post on mastodon by some politician or someone in the UK stating that if people find any site that is geoblocking the UK because of the age verification to report it to some link he provided. it was boosted A LOT with a lot of replies in support.

      bootlickers.

    • subignition@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      There are SO MANY parents that are not willing to teach and monitor their kids online safety. I would even say most parents don’t take that responsibility themselves.

      • fucktrump@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 day ago

        Totally in agreement. I think a bigger part of the issue is most people are completely tech illiterate. People can’t tell a computer from a monitor anymore and then we expect them to outsmart a kid with nothing better to do than stare at a screen for hours on end who will no doubt figure out ways around things. There has to be some feeling on the parents part of defeat. If only the politicians knew what the fuck they were doing we might get actual regulations for engineers to implement proper controls. The percentage of parents attempting to monitor their children appropriately while also having enough tech knowledge has to be low.

        • Auli@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          20 hours ago

          With you till the kids. Kids seem less tech literate than before. They can us tech but have no idea how anything works.

          • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            22 hours ago

            Is it going to get to a point we are better off self hosting and having offline copies that we share instead?

    • ArmchairAce1944@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      24 hours ago

      Parental controls for internet use have been around since the 90s. There are even some vintage porn sites that have been running since then that have ads for them. I know this. I saw them back in 1999 and 2000… when I was an underage guy looking at porn online.

    • BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      103
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Who supports it? Fascists. It’s about controlling access to information and robbing the populace of privacy at the same time. An oppressive, authoritarian police state needs tools to maintain control. These are the tools.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s not “support”, it’s already been done in practice.

        What they are finishing right now is the convenient way. To surveil 97% instead of 94%. And to make it official to reduce expenses.

        And sorry, but “moderate leftists” are those who made it happen, first dreaming how on big centrally moderated platforms the “bad” speech and people will be censored (how irritating it was that in the free Web those people could write whatever they wanted) and theirs won’t be, and propaganda won’t flourish, and after that dreaming how they can demand loudly enough that the platforms would work for them and not for themselves.

        I perfectly remember how people loving Steinbeck and expressing anarchist views would look at me like at an enemy for saying that Facebook, Twitter etc are bad and a trap, and such hierarchical systems can’t be good. That arrogant obnoxious “see, in the real society we collectively press for our rights and the rules are made and obeyed”, yes, I’ve met fools who told me things like that. Where’s your society now, bitch.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      It plays quite well with the “I think about things for two seconds, and mostly think with my lower intestine” crowd.

      They hear “kids shouldn’t be able to access porn” and they think yeah what’s wrong with that. Then they hear “Democrats want your kids to get porn” and they hit share.

    • Vinstaal0@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Age verification has it’s place online, but not for porn. That is just gonna push peopel to worse sites.

      For gambling and stock market sites and the like I can understand it, but I would prefer if we wouldn’t need to send our ID to those sites. Heck if Valve would implement it I could actually gamble on steam again cause currently I cannot open a Tf2 crate …

      • piyuv@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s not age verification, that’s KYC (know your customer) which includes age verification. I agree, KYC has its place on the net, but this is definitely not it.

        • Vinstaal0@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Well yeah fair, we are mostly interested in other stuff than the birthdate, but payment providers and gambling sites do it as well to verify your age.

    • Auli@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      For a lot of people it is hard and over walking because they don’t understand.

    • ilovecheese@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 days ago

      It’s the parents that wont face the fact that it’s them paying for their kids internet access.

      Parents intentionally and deliberately pay for their kids to access this shit. But none of them want to accept that when it can all be someone elses fault.

    • elucubra@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Most parents are way less literate than their kids. Most censorship/site restriction, can be circumvented easily.

      • Fondots@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        1 day ago

        We’re at or reaching a tipping point where I’m not sure that’s true anymore.

        Most people with kids now are (roughly) in their 20s-40s. At the older end of that range, you have some gen-xers who might have missed the boat on computer literacy, but by and large we’re talking about millennials and older gen-z at this point. Kids who grew up with the internet, probably very clearly remember their family getting their first computer if they didn’t already have one when they were born, had computer classes in school, etc.

        And we’re running into an issue where younger Gen z and alpha in many cases are less computer literate in many ways. A lot of them aren’t really learning to use a computer so much as they are smartphones and tablets, and I’m not knocking how useful those devices can be, I do damn-near everything I need to do on my phone, but they are limited compared to a PC and don’t really offer as much of an opportunity to learn how computers work.

        There’s a ton of exceptions to that of course, some of my millennial friends are still clueless about how to do basic things on a computer, and some children today are of course learning how to do anything and everything on a computer or even on a phone.

        But overall, I don’t think there’s as much disparity in technological literacy between the children and parents of today as there was in previous generations, and in some ways that trend may have even reversed.

      • Auli@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 hours ago

        I don’t think so. It’s like cars everyone has a car and can drive it but very few can fix them. Tech has become that.

    • hansolo@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      It’s more like who supports this in theory vs. who supports this how it’s written and implemented.

      Realistically, no one should love how easy it is for anyone of any age to go to any search engine and search for (Edit) “sex” and just get a million images of genitals and porn. I’m not a parent, but I know my parents when I was a teenager would have loved something like this. Kids are sneaky and smart, and this is a blanket thing parents think will once again put porn behind a barrier.

      In a perfect world, a system could very easily exist that would 1) allow for a super-secure government owned digital ID system that isn’t a surveillance nightmare, 2) that system use a hash to verify over 18 age anonymously in real time. That’s how it’s supposed to work with digital IDs - only the data you need to verify is displayed to a vendor. Over 18 is a binary yes/no - a full DOB or name isn’t even needed.

      The government ID wallet or site would use a no-log system to generate a hash value for you when you ask for one. You ask your ID app or site for an age verification hash. You get one that’s valid for about 2 minutes. Copy, paste as needed. The site uses the hash to only know “is this person over 18 or not?” and nothing else. The ID system shouldn’t keep the logs of which site asked back to confirm “is this hash valid?” This is exactly as secure as going to a liquor store with your passport or ID card and having tape over the name, address, and doc number. It’s even better because your face is not displayed, and your actual DOB should not be displayed either.

      However, in our present shitty reality, companies who are trying to get contracts for these systems can’t help but feed their existing, and lucrative, addiction to selling our data and using poor security to store that data. So they want your Google/Apple/Samsung wallets connected to a government system that is actually ran by a 3rd party vendor with questionable security practices, and to provide far more information because no one has set an international standard for neither digital ID checks, nor IDs in general, enough to make it anything less than the surveillance state nightmare that is holding a government ID with all your info, while you move your face around and give them a 3D face scan that the platform doesn’t keep, but the verification company does.

      • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        Hard disagree with your initial premise that seeing boobs in google images is somehow a bad thing. What is it supposed to achieve? Hide the existence of breasts from kids until they turn 18? Thats absurdly repressive.

        • hansolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 hours ago

          SMH

          Fine, changed the search term to “sex.” Fewer letters in fact. I was trying to just provide a subtle example, I didn’t expect people to need to be hit over the head with it.

          So you love the idea of young children seeing porn? Because studies and surveys routinely find that kids as young as 7 are seeing porn online, and many under age 12. Really? You think that’s perfectly fine for a 12, 10, or 7 year old with granma’s iPad doing an image search and getting even accidental porn?

          And hey, I spent my teen years scouring the earth for playboys and staying up until 3 am to catch boobs in R rated movies. I get it. I’m not saying that any system or method will prevent anyome from seeing all adult content their whole life short of being Amish. But as a tender 13 year old, did I need to see all the porn in the universe? Probably not. Adding friction (pun not intended) to general access, without violating privacy, is all I’m saying might be a good idea.

          • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            Nah 7 year olds should not be using any internet without parental controls either way so the protection is absolutely moot here. Also your “sex” example returns absolutely zero sexual content on google, Bing or duckduckgo images while boob does.

            Also tbh I’m not particularly convinced that seeing porn is all that damaging. Doing quick research it seems that there are no proven damages or development impacts and real actual danger of porn is teaching teens and young adults distorted views of sex and gender roles. Seems like kids in your example aren’t even capable of such frameworks to begin with.

            So despite how nasty it sounds there’s no convincing evidence that its even a real danger. In fact, it seems like exposure to violent images like gore and freak accidents thats having real damage.

            If you have some oposing evidence I’d gladly take a look but I’m really unconvinced here that googling boob could be in any way detrimental.

      • Naia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 day ago

        Realistically, no one should love how easy it is for anyone of any age to go to any search engine and search for “boobs” and just get a million images of boobs.

        First. let’s not pretend the idea of a kid seeing “boobs” is in any way shape or form actually harmful. Pushing that taboo is why there is any issue in the first place.

        Second: This is always a slippery slope. Even if we gave the benefit of the doubt that these things are done in with honest intentions, someone will abuse the system eventually. At least in the US the fascists have already laid out intention to classify LGBTQ people as “porn” in an effort to both silence us online and ban us in public. And what of the countless queer kids in an abusive home?

        And even without someone explicitly exploiting it, there had already been instances where kids who were being actively sexually abused by the adults in their life were blocked from resources that could get them help because of content blocking like this.

        Thirdly: People can take responsibility for their crotch spawn and be a fucking parent.

        • hansolo@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Saying “boobs” was trying to be subtle about it - any child of any age is at all times, unless their parents filter their device, 3 clicks and 3 letters (autocomplete could even oopsie that for them) away from seeing very explicit images. It’s absurd to think that it’s “puritanical” to have nothing in between 10 years olds (or younger) being able to so easily access pull on porn. This isn’t about what you personally want or care about, this is also about the fact that every country in the world has this same issue. Taboos are cultural, but you don’t set the culture of Honduras, or Gabon, or France, or India. So each cultural context needs to be respected, not only your personal cultural context.

          It shouldn’t need to be a slippery slope is the thing. In technical terms, this isn’t even a heavy lift. To my original point, it’s the in theory part of this I support because, in a perfect world, giving everyone the tools to effectively accomplish this isn’t hard. But it’s a lot of work that is actually fairly technical or fairly terrible from a privacy standpoint to place adult content filters on a child’s devices. Not every parent has the skills to do this, and so when a blanket option is available that is sold as a solution like this, of course they’ll go for it. But, as I said before, in our current shitty reality, we only have the worst of all worlds - a system that exists to exploit trying to limit a system that exists to exploit, all baked into a system that exists to exploit, and kids still able to see porn online easily.

          I’m very much a staunch privacy advocate, and I won’t fucking touch a digital ID system because it’s nothing but a surveillance state level at this point to persecute specifically trans people and brown people - for now. I see the writing on the wall with this, and it’s terrifying. And no one is going to force this into the working system category, so it’s just going to be the shitpile system designed to victimize added to the systems of exploitation.