• @cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    65
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I have to agree with PornHub’s idea.

    A device should be able it indicate in its browser headers whether its primary user is an adult or a minor and the service can react accordingly.

    It won’t protect all the children but children of parents who can’t be assed to setup a device properly will have problems no matter how much we increase the surveillance state.

    • @General_Effort@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 days ago

      These ideas are all fundamentally misguided. Let’s take a step back what we are trying to do here: We want to create a system so that the government can withhold certain information from certain people. That’s both difficult and dangerous.

      PornHub’s idea requires cooperation from the hosters. You are not likely to get global agreement on that. So you will still need to do something about those foreign sites, such as blocking them.

      At that point, such a law would achieve 2 things:

      1. Society has decided to create a technical censorship infrastructure.
      2. Domestic porn providers have an incentive to support to it because it removes foreign competition.

      Blocklists that parents can install on their devices already exist, so there would be no change in that regard.

      Of course, minors have no trouble circumventing such software. They have plenty of time and they are horny. You can’t win. The only faint hope might be to include such features at deeper levels, similar to existing DRM schemes. This would be ripe for abuse by bad actors or governments. It certainly would be used against the consumer by the copyright industry and tech monopolies; just like existing DRM schemes.

      So we really should ask why we would want to walk further down this expensive, hostile, and dangerous path. Are we afraid that masturbation causes blindness?

      • @cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 days ago

        Government in this case is forcing sites to collect PII to verify age not blocking content not blocking content themselves.

        I am working under the knowledge that these age verifications are not theoretical (Its the end game of all the KYC startups from last decade)

        If you are in the south in much of the US these ID checks are already forced and will only expand

        A browser header gives the result without building a Database of people who like porn

        Browser headers also put the responsibility on sites that promote dangerous things to kids (its in your best interest as a site that can deliver porn, things not suitable for kids to check and respect the header from a liability perspective)

    • @Bzdalderon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      52 days ago

      Kids are babied already but if 14 year olds can vote in party elections, and 16 year olds can consent to sexual intercourse with adults, then I don’t think restricting porn is our problem. Either kids can make decisions, or all of these laws need to align with each other more logically.

      We have taken parents rights away to allow children to make decisions on their gender and name changes, yet we expect parent to be responsible for their actions like accessing porn.

      I could not care less about whatever the final say is on age restrictions, but if there are gonna be rules, at least make them make sense you know? I also do not love that I have to verify my identity to use the internet. Look at the UK and how that’s working out there even without IDs. Talk about authoritarian control.

      This stuff is the whole reason I switched to this platform.

      • @cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I am actually in full agreement.

        A header would put the setting on the device and only indicate “Minor” or “Not Minor” which would allow to restrict or allow porn without having to collect everyone’s PII just so they can crank their hog.

        If you read previous things though such an indicator would put a lot more responsibility onto Social Media platforms to not show harmful content to minors. Today they get away with it because “TOS says only 18 year olds are allowed to us this service”

        South Park kind of nailed the attitude https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Park_(Not_Suitable_for_Children)

        • @Bzdalderon@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          But how would that header be verified?

          It has to be verified at some point by someone.

          That header could also easy be used to exploit children online. All I would need to do is a simple intercept to log headers.

          Either trust parents to do their jobs fully, and then hold them accountable, or draw a line at which point a child can be reasonably held responsible.

          If a 6 year old steals, it’s the 6 year olds fault. They’re tried differently, but they still know bette, this isn’t any different. But obviously a 6 year old should not be accessing porn for a plethora of reasons.

          • @cubism_pitta@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            12 days ago

            Sites and services today that we are considering forcing to collect PII (driver’s license) for age verification would be compelled to check the header as it would provide what these laws are chasing in a way more respectful towards privacy

            As far as exploiting children online. My point has been clear that is already happening, TikTok, Youtube, Instagram ALL exploit children online today. They do not face consequences because they can hide behind their TOS this would put responsibility with regards to not breaking our already existing laws back into their hands

            I trust parets. I have kids myself the plethora of tools and systems available to invade you kids’ privacy is great… and those are also even way worse than a header (especially when you consider what they do to work)

    • @slacktoid@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -453 days ago

      What’s gonna stop a pedo from changing the headers to child so that they can access the child internet where all the children are? Like it’s not a great solution to me.

      • Dojan
        link
        fedilink
        English
        112 days ago

        The same thing that’s stopping pedophiles today of course.

      • @ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 days ago

        So what if it was no different than now?

        Nothing stopping adults from playing Roblox now, but we know why they are there

      • @humanspiral@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 days ago

        Lucky for the pedo, you never have to prove you are under 18, if that is what you tell the website.

      • gian
        link
        fedilink
        English
        22 days ago

        I think he means that the headers come from the device making the call, not the one receing it, so a pedo should be able to change the headers of my device which is not that easy.
        Then yes, the receing end could simply ignore the header anyway, it would be way easier.