this post was submitted on 18 Jul 2025
579 points (99.3% liked)

Technology

72895 readers
2824 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Finally it seems the end of Reddit is near.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 10 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

The solution to all of this “think of the children” stuff is that devices owned/used by children should have to be registered as a child’s device, which would enable certain content blockers.

That's kinda the case right now already, but the problem is that adult-only sites don't work with that currently.

So the right solution would be to mandate that e.g. all sites are required to return a header with an age recommendation or something similar, so that a device set to child-mode then can block all these sites. And if a site doesn't set the header, it will also get blocked on child-mode devices

Wouldn't be too hard to do, and accidental overblocking would only occur on child-mode devices, so there's not much of a loss there.

Legislation could then be focussed on mandating that these headers aren't falsely set (e.g. a porn site setting the header to child-friendly).

[–] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

Allow listing sounds like the better solution. Ie the device had a list of remotes approved by the parents.

That way there's no need to police every website in the world in perpetuity.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Listing already exists, but in practice it's quite impractical, mainly because it's either not granular enough or too granular.

If the listing feature allows me to allow/deny on a domain basis, then allowing Wikipedia for example would mean that I'd also allow all the non-child-friendly content on there too. Like the literal full-length porn videos or the photographies of genital torture that are on there. And if I block all of Wikipedia, I also block all of the hundreds of thousands of informative and totally child-acceptable pages on there.

If, on the other hand, I allow/deny on a per-page basis, then using the internet becomes nigh unmanageable, because each click of my kid requires me to allow/deny the next page. It's not that often when using the internet that you access the same exact url every day without clicking to sub-pages.

A header would solve that issue. That way I could e.g. allow all Wikipedia articles that are rated for ages 6 and that's ok. The rating should of course be like for movies, so that it doesn't mean that a child would understand the articles, but that there's nothing child-endangering in there like the videos and images (and accompanying texts) mentioned above.

[–] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Or just block wikipedia and use one of the many encyclopedia websites designed for kids instead (1), (2). This has the benefit of having your goals met, without making the world a worse place for everyone else.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Did you not read my proposal? How does sending a header with extra information make the world a worse place for everyone else?

Please explain in detail, so I know you aren't just a troll who needs to oppose everything just because?

[–] iii@mander.xyz 2 points 49 minutes ago* (last edited 46 minutes ago) (1 children)

How does sending a header with extra information make the world a worse place for everyone else?

It still requires arbitration of every digitally communicated thought, whether it's age appropriate and to what degree. It's mass thought policing, as well as trying to enforce a cookiecutter morality on every person.

I get the desire to enforce thoughts on someone else. But fight it, please. At least let people be free in their own mind.

Especially since the tools to achieve your stated goal, protection of your child(ren), are already available. So you can perform your censorship desire in the confinement of your family bubble. No need for collateral damage.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 1 minute ago

Have you ever looked at how age rating systems work? It has absolutely nothing to do with "arbitration of every digitally communicated thought", "thought policing" or "cookiecutter morality".

With this brainrot conspiracy level post of yours you outed yourself as a troll.

Keep your conspiracies, or better get help. That kind of stuff is not healthy.