| ▲ | kulahan 2 hours ago |
| I can’t think of a better solution to the issue of children being so aggressively harmed by the internet. That doesn’t remove any of the problems associated with this. |
|
| ▲ | Gigachad 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| It’s not just kids. Adults are having their brains fried on AI generated political videos online right now. The state of the internet is an absolute disaster. |
| |
| ▲ | HoldOnAMinute 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | An enormous portion of the world is effectively addicted to a drug. Solution: Maximize the distance between yourself and the people | | |
| ▲ | Gigachad 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | Rather than becoming a social outcast I’d rather support any proposed laws that take down the social media companies. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | 999900000999 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Parents taking responsibility for their kids. I grew up in a neighborhood full of drug dealers. Street sellers, not the classy Walter White kind. Ironically being on a computer all day kept me out of trouble. But with these laws in place I guess you might as well start doing stupid ish in real life. |
| |
| ▲ | II2II 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The thing is, those dealers can end up in jail for selling drugs. More to the point, if a kid walked into a convenience store and the clerk sold them a pack of cigarettes, the clerk wouldn't get off the hook by claiming, "well, the parents are responsible for their kids." I'm also not sure how one would justify holding parents legally liable for crimes they played no role in committing. I'm not saying that I agree with these laws. They appear to be taking things too far. But that has more to do with there being no clear way to define sites that are only of interest to adults (no gatekeeping needed) and sites that should be restricted to adults. | | | |
| ▲ | kelseyfrog 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | So what happens when parents don't? Too bad? | | |
| ▲ | iamnothere 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | What happens when parents don’t lock the liquor cabinet? When they smoke in front of their kids? When they leave porn laying on the table? Too bad! | | |
| ▲ | Jtarii an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | >What happens when parents don’t lock the liquor cabinet? When they smoke in front of their kids? When they leave porn laying on the table? The state can't control those things, it can control putting an age restriction on certain websites. Unless you are advocating for the complete abolition of all age restrictions throughout society. | |
| ▲ | kelseyfrog an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | How is it more like leaving a liquor cabinet open than not buckling them up with seatbelts? I'm glad we're discussing parental liability. It seems no one else is advocating for "social media access is criminal neglect," so I appreciate the novelty. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | liveoneggs an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Most people want to operate within the boundaries of their society. A simple G/PG/PG-13/R header for websites would solve 97% of actual issues anyone could care to present. (violence, porn, etc) Forcing people to identify themselves will not solve skinner boxes, gambling-for-children, focus-degrading slop, etc. Bluey-themed slot machines are still harmful. |
