| ▲ | physicsguy 3 days ago |
| I listened to a British politics podcast the other day called Not Another One and they were discussing that among western governments there is some looking at the UK’s porn block because in general politicians think that things have gone too far in children being able to access to extreme content, and that if 20 years ago it had been suggested this had been where we’d be, it wouldn’t have been seen as acceptable. They used the example that if you want to publish a very explicit book in the U.K., the Obscene Publications Acts would put limits on you doing so, but putting it online would be allowed |
|
| ▲ | traceroute66 3 days ago | parent | next [-] |
| > things have gone too far in children being able to access Look, the reality is that kids will be kids ... Remember the pre-internet days when the porn mags were on the top-shelf at the newsagent ? I'm sure many of that generation will tell you stories of copies of Playboy being passed around in the school playground. Or back in the VHS or DVD days .... someone in the playground would be passing around some porn. Or, a UK-centric example would be the famous Page 3 of The Sun newspaper.... "giggle giggle...boobies...giggle" Moving swiftly forward to the modern day. You can legislate about it all you like, but kids know their way around tech and will soon discover what you can do with a VPN or any of the other many workarounds. I think the reality is more that the government is trying to legislate for things that could be resolved by good old-fashioned parenting and teaching. Educating your child properly is better than doing the helicopter-parenting routine and trying to smother little Billy in cotton wool. |
| |
| ▲ | sunrabbit 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Previously, it was controlled by kingship
Now, we suppress freedom under the pretext of safety. If you have read "1984", the story is fast. I'm a korean, And a fake news censorship law has been drafted here.
When We asked what the standard of fake was, the answer came back that "it was not important". It's actually the case.
Because they already have standards. | |
| ▲ | physicsguy 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | You say that but I’m sat at the cricket match today listening to another Dad talking about their 11 year old kid turning on their phone this week and watching a video they’ve been sent by another chile of Charlie Kirk being shot by another child. That’s not going looking for it right? | | |
| ▲ | traceroute66 3 days ago | parent [-] | | The trouble is where are you going to stop ? Are you going to not allow the kid access to mainstream radio or TV incase they watch/listen to the news where you have eye-witnesses being interviewed, often live with minimal/no editing ? Or not allow the kid to visit mainstream media news websites, because most mainstream media outlets copied the same social media clip you referred to and just edited out the exact moment. But the kid can still use their imagination for that half-second moment. Are you not going to take them on public transport incase some adults start chatting about it in detail ? Don't get me wrong, I see your perspective. But the point is there are so many moving parts to today's fast moving world that you can't put them all back in the box, wave a magic wand and revert to the pre-internet days where there were only four TV channels showing highly scripted content. Yes modern parenting is tough. But thinking everything can be solved just by throwing more and more broadly (and badly) worded highly-intrusive kitchen-sink legislation at it is not the answer either. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [deleted] |
|
| ▲ | Hizonner 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > if 20 years ago it had been suggested this had been where we’d be, it wouldn’t have been seen as acceptable 20 years ago was 2005. We were "here". |
|
| ▲ | bboygravity 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Ah, the good old "think of the children" argument. Does anyone buy that? |
| |
| ▲ | ipnon 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | “Think of the children” is a persistent nemesis of modern civil liberties precisely because people buy it so often! One of the easiest emotional arguments to make is “your children are in danger” because parents have extremely low risk tolerance for the safety of their children. | | |
| ▲ | lazide 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Also parents of young children are typically overwhelmed and freaked out, and easy to manipulate. | | |
| ▲ | tesch1 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Don't the parents have a legitimate interest here though? Just being tired does not make them irrational or credulous as seems to be implied here. | | |
| ▲ | lazide 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I take it you’ve never had a sick 18 month old before? Or three under 5? There is a legitimate interest, but subtlety and critical thinking are some of the first things to go out the window. Personally, it completely redefined my concept of ‘exhausted’, though the military veteran family of mine seemed to consider it a not entirely uncommon level of suffering. They were all enlisted though. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | moi2388 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Perhaps the children who don’t have free access to information anymore. Oh, right.. | | | |
| ▲ | sofixa 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Yes, especially lots of people with children are terrified that their little darlings will be able to access the best German BDSM content in 4K at an early age. | | |
| ▲ | tesch1 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Terrified? Maybe they just calmly rationally don't want them to have access to the best German BDSM content in 4K at an early age? | | |
| ▲ | sofixa 3 days ago | parent [-] | | I was exaggerating a bit for comedic effect. I can completely sympathise with the sentiment. If there was a way to prove one's identity/age online, double anonymously (so both the website doesn't know who you are, and the identity service doesn't know what website is asking) I'd be a 100% for it. It would prevent minors from accessing stuff they're not ready for (on average), and it would limit the amount of bots and foreign interference. | | |
| ▲ | tesch1 3 days ago | parent [-] | | If and only if? The dispute here is balancing people's human right to wank anonymously against the right of parents (and society's?) to limit access to (absurdly) age inappropriate material. What does "ready for" even mean, when is anyone ready for 4k German BDSM. There's also this slippery slope argument that preserving the former right is absolutely necessary to prevent creeping fascism. Which is absurd. Shouldn't it be the responsibility of the wankers to create some palatable solution to the conflict of interests, rather than demand the parents figure out how such wankers can preserve their anonymity? Parenting is necessary for continuation and health of society. 4k German stuff is not. | | |
| ▲ | rangestransform 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Privacy is absolutely necessary for the continuation of western liberal society as we know it, and for society’s constant fight against authoritarianism | | |
| ▲ | sofixa 2 days ago | parent [-] | | > Privacy is absolutely necessary for the continuation of western liberal society as we know it IMO, so is the fight against active hostile foreign or local actors bot flaming on the internet to stoke tensions. These kinds of acts aren't only online (cf. Russia paying Moldovans and Serbs to commit anti-semitic and anti-muslim acts in France to stoke tensions between Jews, Muslims and everyone else), but they are drastically more effective online with the help of social media algorithms. To preserve healthy democracies, something has to be done. > and for society’s constant fight against authoritarianism And it pipes into this one. The people profiting the most from those tensions, which they stoke too, are wannabe authoritarians (cf. Trump). How to fight against them and their tactics without giving them the tools they will abuse once they're into power to shut down dissent? |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | viralpraxis 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | I’m not a parent, so it might be I completely do not understands some important aspects of this due to lack of expirience, but I hope I’ll be more smart than my parents. It was quite easy to google things my parents were silent about, but I still remeber that feeling of guiltiness. It affected me much more than knowing what the bdsm is |
| |
| ▲ | ACCount37 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Unfortunately, yes. Maybe it'll die off in a generation or two, when cynical millennials and zoomers become the backbone of politics. But for now? "Think of the children" is hilariously transparent to us, but it enjoys moderate support across population, and, much worse, it gets overwhelming support of geriatric politicians. Which is what makes fighting for liberties so hard. |
|
