mastodon.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
The original server operated by the Mastodon gGmbH non-profit

Administered by:

Server stats:

379K
active users

@eff

Which is fine, how do we stop kids viewing hard core pornography, violence etc OR how do we enforce that PARENTS need to take responsibility

@zleap @eff
So, in your mind, even more unwelcome surveillance is preferable to kids looking at dirty pictures? I've gotta say, I don't agree with your priorities.

@TheGreatLlama @eff

I agree that age verification will just cause more data to be collected, which will be a target for criminals looking to steal that data.

@zleap @eff
So are you familiar with the expression, "the juice ain't worth the squeeze"?

I'm unconvinced that the "problem" of kids looking at pornography is even a rounding error compared to the problem of the constant invasion of privacy inherent in online life.

@TheGreatLlama @eff

Kids viewing content online is one of the reasons the UK government want to bring in verification.

@zleap @eff
Sounds like a terrible justification for increasing the surveillance state, but I'll let you handle your country. This was an article on a proposed law in California.

@TheGreatLlama @eff

Problem that does need to be addressed,

But yeah i don't think verification is going to work and will be a security / privacy issue

@zleap @eff Rather than trying to enforce at the *servers* (where it impacts the rights of everyone, including adults) it is better to give tools to parents to enforce on the *devices*

At least for younger kids, it seems reasonable that devices kids use should have controls that parents and schools can use to monitor and control what they see

Such systems will not work 100%, and yes that is not different than before the Internet when kids did sometimes get their hands on porn magazines

@eob @eff

I agree which is why we need to find a solution or have one forced on us

We have an online safety bill in the UK

@eff
True. But supervision is necessary to have a safe environment where groups gather (esp anonymously).

So, the question really is about finding the right balance and ensuring transparency of decisions.

@eff As a teacher seeing the harm being caused to children, I am conflicted on this issue.

Can we somehow shift this burden to the ISP end of the connection to make it easier for parents to protect their children? Could we require ID verification to gain access to the uncensored Internet and still protect anonymous browsing?

The only sensible way to hide large parts of the Internet from children while still giving them some access would be through software that is in their parents' full control and runs on the computers and devices that children are given limited access to. Implement all the censorship you need there.

Some of the kids will find ways around it, but that is also true for every other system that's been proposed or imagined. ISPs need not and should not get involved.

@kbal I used to believe that this was a solution. Having worked as both a teacher and and IT admin in a school I was faced with parents begging me for help because they could not parent their children. They simply didn't have the knowledge or background to do so. Much of the documentation is not written in their language or at their reading level.

The only way to help them is to have the default position as off.

Having sensible defaults and well-designed software that does the job is not easy, but that doesn't change the fact that it's only the system vendors that can be expected to do it. Apple for instance already locks down its iOS products and makes users jump through ridiculous hoops if they want to "jailbreak" them, so it's not that they don't have the tools or the willingness to do that sort of thing. Giving parents easy and default-safe options at device setup time to lock or unlock chosen features is within their power.

The difficult part is in deciding what to block when the device is put in child safety mode, which is of course a responsibility they don't want.

@scerruti @eff >> “Could we require ID verification to gain access to the uncensored Internet and still protect anonymous browsing?”

No. Any ID verification you could do online would have this problem. The ISP or some third-party service would have to hold your sensitive ID data and it would be a juicy target for hackers, which is another reason why it’s a problem.

@MisuseCase @eff Are you saying you can get an Internet connection without an ID currently? Could a child?

@scerruti @eff I thought you were talking about full-on ID verification (which is what the EFF article is about). I don’t need that to get online. I need to log into some sites and things I use though.