I think a lot of these states are going about this wrong. We should be helping parents restrict access for their children rather than trying to verify identities of adults who likely want to remain anonymous.
Yeah I think that’s the proper route. Parents who want to restrict what their children see need to take responsibility for doing so and not try to make the government do it for them at the expense of everyone else’s privacy.
Make a kid safe tld that requires whatever government certification. Done. Now parents, if they choose, can filter all but the kidsafe tld. Trying to instead blacklist is never going to work.
Whether companies choose to certify and publish there is something those who want this type of thing should provide incentives for.
I think a lot of these states are going about this wrong. We should be helping parents restrict access for their children rather than trying to verify identities of adults who likely want to remain anonymous.
I am pretty sure these laws have nothing to do with “protecting children”
It’s the same rhetoric that the UK government are using to get a backdoor on messaging apps with E2EE.
Yeah I think that’s the proper route. Parents who want to restrict what their children see need to take responsibility for doing so and not try to make the government do it for them at the expense of everyone else’s privacy.
Make a kid safe tld that requires whatever government certification. Done. Now parents, if they choose, can filter all but the kidsafe tld. Trying to instead blacklist is never going to work.
Whether companies choose to certify and publish there is something those who want this type of thing should provide incentives for.
Creating a parallel internet for children is a very intriguing idea