• ThePantser@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 days ago

    Or you know you could punish parents for not parenting. Like if kids are watching porn and caught and if it’s actually against some law then go after the parents.

    It’s not hard to teach parents how to implement a filtering DNS. But no, countries think they need to be the nanny.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      88
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      “Protecting children” is just the pretext under which governments can sell increased surveillance. The fact that there are more effective ways they could act to protect children, yet governments everywhere continue to push for ID checks and monitoring online activity, shows that the aim isn’t what they say it is.

      • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        4 days ago

        Protect from what? I mean seriously. Most of us (guys at least) probably saw porn way before we were old enough and most of us probably didn’t end up as rapists or pedophiles. It’s not a good thing by any means, but it really feels like we’re trying harder to keep sexual material from entering their brains than we are trying to keep them fed, clothed, educated, housed, healthy, loved, and physically safe. Of all the things I mentioned the last seven have a monumentally greater affect on their success and well-being as an adult.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s just the pretext they give to justify it. The real reason is surveillance. Now they have a way to confidently tie your accounts to your individual identity. And most of these solutions use third parties which will then sell that data as well, so now anyone can tie your account to you without you ever knowing.

      Even if the government is barred from surveilling citizens in these ways, third parties aren’t, and the government can just buy that information, no warrant needed anymore.

      And these laws never stop at porn, it’s drugs, LGBTQ information, etc. and they can always easily add additional things later with little fanfare.

      • Epzillon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        4 days ago

        This is it. Theyve been going after encrypted messaging apps for a long time, ig they realized theyre not getting anywhere and figured to just hit it head on.

        The internet has always circumvented this kind of shit, just look at TPB. The ones who are getting really beaten up by this is the older generations and the ones lacking technical know-how.

        • shalafi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          Yep. “The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.”

          LOL, wrong on that last point! Gen X and Millennials are generally hot shit on tech. It’s the young folks who don’t have a clue if something doesn’t “just work”. Present company excluded of course. :)

    • Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      They could just offer a child protection browser where parents could set to child mode and require adult material offering sites to check if user has something like “attention not 18 year old user” in the headers.

      Would be way cheaper, I think.