this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
123 points (98.4% liked)

World News

39595 readers
2893 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Under the UK's Online Safety Act, all websites hosting pornography, including social media platforms, must implement "robust" age verification methods, such as photo ID or credit card checks, for UK users by July.

Regulator Ofcom claims this is to prevent children from accessing explicit content, as research shows many are exposed as young as nine.

Critics, including privacy groups and porn sites, warn the measures could drive users to less-regulated parts of the internet, raising safety and privacy concerns.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 70 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago) (6 children)

My problem with all this nonsense is that it doesn't actually solve the problem, while causing many more. You'd need to fundamentally rethink the basic design of the technology if you were to actually prevent children from accessing sexual material with it. That's something they don't want to do, however, presumably because they're addicted to the power it offers them to spy on everyone, and exploit the population for profit.

We're in this mess right now because the one absolute truth preempting every other decision made by those who wield power is that the solution must first increase their power. Literally everything else is an afterthought.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 6 hours ago

Well you see... Despite what people say, the reasons behind these rules has very little to do with children. So they don't actually care if it solves the "problem".

[–] [email protected] 18 points 8 hours ago

I agree, the country is delving deeper into authoritarianism by each second. The children and minors is just another exploitable class to them.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 hours ago

Oh it does.

Kids have access to phones and data. No matter how good my DNS is, means fuck all if my son can use his data (if he was old enough to have phone) and browse, under UK, he can't easily access the most common porn sites without verifying.

As open and pro porn internet social bubble might be. I'm not okay with my son gaining access to it easily and too early.

At times, I wish there were more adults and parents online to counter the sea of basically male teenagers pushing what they think isright. And I know I'll get a "I'm a parent of 3, porn is healthy for them!" Type of response... And that's irrelevant. We all are raising a human being and we all have different morals and ideas. There's zero chance I'll consciously allow a loophole before he turns 12.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 hours ago

Nah, you just need parents to care about what their kids get up to and to responsibly educate them without punishing them for being curious.

Bwahhahajahhahaa. Like that’s gonna happen.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

My problem with all this nonsense is that it doesn’t actually solve the problem, while causing many more. You’d need to fundamentally rethink the basic design of the technology if you were to actually prevent children from accessing sexual material with it.

Absolutely - this always happens with these "save the children" laws.

That’s something they don’t want to do, however, presumably because they’re addicted to the power it offers them to spy on everyone, and exploit the population for profit.

Jesus Christ... You ever hear the phrase "never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance?" Politicians do this sort of "make the people feel like we're doing something" shit all the time. They rarely consider the ramifications beside appeasing parents.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

You ever hear the phrase “never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by ignorance?”

Generalities like that can be useful when applied appropriately, but counter-productive when applied blindly. That positions of power are held primarily by those who are motivated primarily by power ought to be the most straight forward assertion possible.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 hours ago

Agreed. I feel we've been giving politicians passes on "ignorance" for far too long. First, ignorance is not a defense in any other situation. Second, these people are supposed to uphold our laws and virtues, so they should be held to a higher standard. Third, if you can find a pattern in their "ignorance" which somehow always seems to benefit them personally - they're not ignorant, but malignant.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

That positions of power are held primarily by those who are motivated primarily by power ought to be the most straight forward assertion possible

Generalities like that can be useful when applied appropriately, but counter-productive when applied blindly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 hours ago (7 children)

How would you solve it then? I'm not saying Ofcom are right, but should it be left wholly on parents to police the whole internet?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 4 hours ago

should it be left wholly on parents to police the whole internet

Nope. Just their kids.

Like always.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 7 hours ago

They don’t have to police the whole internet, just their kids. Frankly children that age shouldn’t be on social media especially unsupervised.

Parents should be using device level controls to monitor their kids internet habits. All of this should be built into the device and browser, and parents need to take basic accountability.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 6 hours ago

It could be. Putting adult filters on your routers and devices isn't difficult.

Whereas if this is implemented, I think it pushes the public towards the dark net...and if your intent is protecting minors, that's absolutely not the result you want.

At least on pornhub these days I have a reasonable assurance I'm not stumbling into something I shouldn't. In the dark corners of the internet, that illusion of protection is gone.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 hours ago

Parental Controls have never been easier to enact. All my.kids have tablets with 4 layers of adguards, autolocks, timers, and app restrictions. It took maybe an hour to set all of them up. Are your kids worth an hour of your time? I think so. Especially if it means we dont restrict freedoms for shitty solutions.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 hours ago

Yes. Parent controls have been available for this stuff for ages. It's not a problem for the state to solve.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 7 hours ago

If the alternative is not solving the problem while making other stuff worse, yeah.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

Understanding that I can't solve the whole issue right here and now on my own, the very first thing I'd take a look at is changing from having an 'on by default' connection to other machines, to having an 'off by default' connection. I'd also worry about complicating the entire process to the point where parents can't reasonably understand/control how their machines are used by their children (the first point assists with that).

One other thing which I believe is important to actually protect children would be to establish and maintain national borders, similar to China's great firewall. The more automatic systems become, the more opportunity exists for bad actors to exploit them for untoward purposes. Understanding that we can't conclusively resolve every potential issue, we ought to at least do what we can to ensure that those participating in the ecosystem share similar goals and values with each other, which is really the point of borders in the first place.