• Zagorath@quokk.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    I agree, letting parents do their job of parenting is the best way to deal with this. But the problem is that that’s very difficult, and they currently lack adequate tools.

    The best method would be to make sure operating systems support parental controls that parents can set, and require websites to respect those settings (and browsers to support an API passthrough of the OS setting). That way there’s no need to do any age verification that sends sensitive data like ID or faces to third-parties with sketchy privacy policies.

    Unfortunately, when moves were actually taken to implement this kind of solution, reactionaries pushed back and made sure it didn’t happen.

      • Zagorath@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Some guy put a PR in to the Linux kernal and to systemd, IIRC. The community pushback was huge, despite it literally just being a field users could fill in themselves if they wanted.

        I’m not sure if he ended up succeeding. IIRC last time I checked it was in systemd but not Linux, but that could have changed and I could be misremembering.

        • azuth@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          I think it was accepted in systemd. There was no commit in the kernel because such things are really don’t belong in the kernel.

          But the law it was a response too is horrible. If any ‘app’, regardless of it including any unsafe content (or content at all really) must ask for this information from the OS. Otherwise the developer and/or controller (which can be whoever installed the app) is liable for thousands of dollars.

          This only makes sense if you think the only ‘apps’ that exist are ones written by FAANG.