Anyone know if this is true or not?

  • Bazoogle@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    It’s going to have exactly the same efficiency: none

    It’s objectively wrong to say the regulations had no efficiency. They absolutely made it more difficult gain access to. Kids should not be a single google search away from accessing hardcore porn. Will they be able to access it still? Of course. But they’ll likely be older, and learn to be more tech savvy to get around the block.

    “Child’s protection”, “anti-terrorist”, “against pedophile” so many emotionally triggering words so that we slowly accept more and more control.

    I do not want to be associated with right wing Conservatives because I kind of agree on a single topic. The only part I mentioned was child development, which research has shown to have a negative impact (just like we did with cigarettes and alcohol). The hardcore Conservatives seem to want to take it away from everyone, adults included, but I don’t give a shit what adults do.

    I don’t acknowledge vaporware.

    I am not asking you to. I am saying that it should be implemented this way. That’s it. I am advocating for secure and private age restriction on internet pornography witb true zero trust implementation. The more people that advocate for it, the less likely it will be vaporware. Research is already being conducted on this exact thing, it absolutely can happen. If it’s going to happen at all, this is how it needs to.

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      But they’ll likely be older, and learn to be more tech savvy to get around the block.

      The school my kid attens provide Chromebooks, with a tight control of course.

      That’s why 11y old had to learn from one of their classmates how to bypass the control. Thanks to tech protection they were safe from accidentally finding porn (did that ever happen to anyone in real life??) for at least one week.

      The only part I mentioned was child development, which research has shown to have a negative impact (just like we did with cigarettes and alcohol).

      We all agree. Yet I don’t understand why you so much want to defend a mechanism that is already failing its stated purpose. In case you missed it: it is a miserable total failure. It just increased VPN usage. That, and the massive data collection. Period. Nothing else achieved.

      So now I guess it’s going to be ok to control VPN.

      https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vpns-porn-online-safety-act-childrens-commissioner-b2810092.html

      That’s going to fail, by the way. Then I guess you must ban Tor at ISP level. Completely block it, for the sake of the children.

      Then, then, then…

      Then children are still exposed to porn, but we’re working on it! Meanwhile, would you come to the station explain why you visited that website and posted that nasty anonymous comment about the PM last wednesday night?