I honestly feel that this falls into parental responsibility. Both Android and iPhone comes with parental controls and the same is true for browsers on computers.
Android example:
iPhone example:
It’s a search away to find step-by-step guides for this stuff, so you don’t even need to know how to do it yourself.
Instead of, or in addition to, DNS filtering is also an easy technique (1)
Until kids learn to change DNS servers.
Edit: Downvoting this doesn’t make it less true.
My belief is that if you put restrictions on a child’s device activity, they will eventually circumvent it, from my experience of having parental controls for some devices I had.
Sure, if they learn how to circumvent their way to unrestricted internet access, they will be able to access pretty much everything, but the word “learn” is key, they will become more literate in the tech they use.
And again, from my experience, the child would pretty much only start trying to circumvent stuff when they become a teen, so it’ll work for a while to keep them off explicit content, then you’ll probably wanna weigh your options, should I put different parental controls on their devices since they got through it, or should I just let them enjoy their internet freedom?
Edit: so that edit you made, “downvoting it doesn’t make it less true”, sure, that might be the case, but your comment seems to be getting downvoted since it is pretty defeatist, like nobody should try because it’ll be removed at some point. It’s just like not wanting to put a cast on a broken arm because “it’ll just be taken off anyway.”. It doesn’t mean it’s not useful.
deleted by creator
I feel that parental responsibility and carefully crafted regulation can coexist to protect children. Device makers can also make it easier to access such settings or a “kids mode”.
I think most parents know techbros have created an internet that is generally not safe for children and do their best to take measures to account for that. Any system that empowers parents to do that is welcome.
I feel like it’s hard to make it easier then they’ve already made it:
https://support.google.com/googleplay/answer/1075738?hl=en#zippy=%2Cfor-family-members-who-manage-their-own-accountsAll it requires is knowing how to read and follow step by step instructions and the parents are in control.
In contrast all the control and surveillance systems being introduced as child protection will end up being used outside their first promised scope.
While “First they came for the porn” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came) sounds silly, if they can ban or control access to sites on a device level then what will they ban next?
Quite many right wing political groups would eye the lgbtq+ movement and they’d probably introduce that as “for the kids” too.That’s the next step. They want to label Trans existence as basically pornographic and targeting the children.
I have heard this argument from the fascist where I have to go now. I have nothing against gays, I just think it shouldn’t be done infront of children, whatever the fuck that means. These people are extremely dangerous and giving them more surveillance power is not what the EU needs to do right now.
The EU, like Texas, Florida, etc wants age verification on porn websites. To “safeguard children” ofcourse.
They pinky promise that the surveillance machine they’re building will never be used for harm!
I play the game called “VPN to the US south and try to find pr0n”
It’s not very difficult. Only the big sites apparently have to comply with the ban. It’s still fucked up and authoritarian tho
This has resulted in many porn sites simply denying users from those locations.
Years ago the .xxx TLD was introduced for adult websites. If we’re going to regulate adult sites. Why not require them to use .xxx for their domains and let parental controls do the rest?
Because that’s not authoritarian enough.
Daddy state gonna protect your children for you…
Just like they did with the Catholic church, trust me bro
Shit. Dark but fair.
DNS for security? What could possibly go wrong…
We’re not taking about security. We’re taking about unsupervised children seeing boobies.
That’s exactly a security concern from a design point of view. Your desire to trivialize it doesn’t change its nature, access control is access control. That’s not what DNS is for and making it do that is going to cause everyone regret.
You’re not wrong. But if I had to pick between blocking .xxx on my kid’s device or uploading a photo of my ID to various porn sites, I know which one I’m choosing.
“I want people to accept a bogus solution so this will all just go away.” Okay? But surely you can appreciate that people are not likely to be moved by your bad faith suggestions.
Access to .xxx domains can be mandated to require detection of parental controls, and needing proper age verification if they are not in use.
Or I am missing some design problem here?
This is a parents are too lazy to parent concern not a security concern.
It said the platforms also do not appear to be abiding by requirements for porn sites to use age verification tools to protect children from accessing adult content.
Good, no implementation of this not privacy nightmare.
It comes amid wider scrutiny of online pornography services worldwide, with many regulators looking to crack down on those that do not have age verification in place.
HAHAHA good luck with 1 billion head hydra.
In a January blog post, it said age verification should take place on users’ devices, such as through their operating system, rather than on individual, age-restricted sites.
The details of this are potentially problematic, as they could preclude the use of open source browsers and operating systems.
It would be great to standardize an HTTP header that says the user is underage, which could be sent by any OS/browser combination that has suitable parental controls.
It would be great to standardize an HTTP header that says the user is underage, which could be sent by any OS/browser combination that has suitable parental controls.
I think this underestimates the tech savvyness of teenagers when it comes to circumvent such measures. Or maybe i am mistaken because when i was in that age range it was common to know more about computers than the parents.
Kids can’t use computers, and that’s not good for the world. If teenagers figure out enough about how the computer works to get around the parental controls and watch porn, I consider that a net win.
I don’t actually care if teenagers sophisticated enough to do that see porn.
https://lemmy.world/post/30075546/17215433
I’ve got my kids using Linux on Raspberry Pis, and I honestly want them to break it so that then they have to figure out how to fix it.
you can have your Pi and break it too!
Banning teenagers from porn is not a fight worth anything.
It is kids we should be worried about. 8 year olds who get in contact with hard core porn or fetish porn or violent porn. That is not good for their development.
I agree, and I think my solution in combination with some filter lists addresses that problem pretty well. Very few eight year olds will have the ability or desire to bypass restrictions like that to look at porn.
Kids today are not tech savvy. UIs are streamlined and bugs are much less common in popular apps so they have to do less self directee troubleshooting to learn from.
Technical solutions don’t do shit and only inconvenience or compromise regular users. Where are the parents in all this?
It is increasingly unrealistic to entirely prevent children from having unsupervised access to internet-connected devices from a young age, but attempts to make it impossible for anyone under 18 to access porn are equally unrealistic, and often far worse than the problem they purport to solve.
With good parenting, the possibility of accessing porn won’t harm most kids. It’s not just about keeping them away from it, but about teaching healthy and realistic attitudes toward sex.
One day I am going to make a monster truck and call it “For Child Safety” and you know that shit will be the most unhinged monster truck ever because it will be driven by a teacher who’s career doesn’t exist anymore.
I do not think politicians know what children see on Roblox
A recent EU workgroup on this spend 50 minutes discussing the implications on the “metaverse”.
These people really have no idea how technology works. They just know the marketing of the big few social media companies.
Someone should tell them about IPFS.
It makes no sense that the age limit is 18 when most European country’s age of consent is lower than 18. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_in_Europe
Holly shit. At least I’m not in the worst EU country, but second worst, really? I thought it was 18.
Uh ? What’s wrong about that ? These are basically generalized romeo&Juliet laws.
The highlighted age is that from which a young person can lawfully engage in a non-commercial sexual act with an older person, regardless of their age difference. If a participant in a sexual act is under 18 but above the age of consent then sexual acts with another person who is at or over the age of consent may still be illegal if the older participant is in a position of authority over the younger person.
Despite what the text says, here in France, being over 18 while the other person is not can often be enough to be considered in a position of authority btw
European here, they’re that low because our politicians fear they might piss off their pedophillic donors (rich white people), and many citizens think it’s like for a close-in-age thing.
I love when these clowns regimes come for the chidren but they didn’t do anything about the Catholic church.
Bad faith behavior all around.
You are comapring present with past.
Pedohiles gets locked up hard, no matter your religion. At least in Europe.
Well demand apparently EU member states actually did some prosecution unlike the US
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_sexual_abuse_cases_in_Europe
I had no idea there was enforcement. I thought the popes just kept playing musical chairs with the offending priests to cover for the church.
Won’t somebody think of the children!!! If we ban Pornhub then all the children will be saved forever!
The Fediverse exists. AFAIK, there is a Lemmy porn instance.
What happens on the Fediverse, stays on the Fediverse.
WHAAAAA
Do kids go to websites to see porn? Or they are bombard with pornography in social medias?
I certainly did as a kid in the late 90s and early 2000s. I found dirty magazines before I had access to the Internet, and after I visited both pornsites and outright gore like rotten.com. None of it harmed me in any way.
If anything, the various shock sites we were tricked into seeing, like goatse, tub girl, lemon party and 2 girls 1 cup were worse, but even those weren’t too bad, and I appreciate understanding the cultural references to them.
The real question is whether seeing some porn is actually a problem. I’d argue not, provided there’s also sex ed teaching you that porn does not model healthy sex or relationships.
True… Just observe the YouTube ads…
Why does it seem to me that Britain is becoming a testing ground for bad laws that then turn into EU directives that then member countries must implement?
Good. The effects of porn culture is a serious problem and free sites like pornhub are extra exploitative of the workers who create the content.
I’m glad the EU is attempting to gate keep this filth but its never going to work. The kids will bypass this of course, they aren’t stupid. The EU would also have to ban all kinds of VPNs, AI generation and file sharing to achieve this goal.
Regulation doesn’t always have to produce absolute prevention, even strong deterrence can be impactful.
We’ve seen how excessive porn consumption impacts the development (particularly of boys) so increased regulation is a thoughtful move.
Regulation doesn’t always have to produce absolute prevention
Making laws with the intent that they will be broken, has the additional benefit that almost everyone is a criminal, ready to be re-educated.
I’ve already lived this way in the DDR. I do not recommend to others.
Making laws with the intent they will be broken is different from having an understanding they will be broken.
People break speed limits every day. There is no intent they will be broken but an understanding that it will happen. Overall though, people obey them and roads are safer as a result.
Overall though, people obey them and roads are safer as a result.
Ooh boy, you clearly have never driven in Italy.
Making laws with the intent they will be broken is different from having an understanding they will be broken.
The consequences are the same, even if intent differs: those breaking the rules, in this case not giving personal information to a 3rd party, in the other example speeding, are criminals.
If someone hits you because they love your, or they hit you because they hate you, either case you’ve been hit.
