this post was submitted on 06 Aug 2023
122 points (88.1% liked)

Asklemmy

43917 readers
1399 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There are a lot of GOP-controller legislatures in the USA pushing through so-called “child protection” laws, but there’s a toll in the form of impacting people’s rights and data privacy. Most of these bills involve requiring adults to upload a copy of their photo ID.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Bizarroland@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If they really wanted to block access to adult only material, and not be a surveillance state in the process, the correct solution would be that every home router and every cell phone plan would have a secondary password that had to be entered in order to access that data.

Then by default only the parents and the people deemed responsible enough to have access to that password would be able to view adult only content.

That is very secure, it would sweep the floor with a huge percentage of successes with a minimum amount of intervention into people's daily life.

Sure, some kids will get the password one way or another and view adult only content, but at least they would know they had to go through the extra steps to do something they weren't allowed to do.

[–] Aetherielle@kbin.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While that technically may not be a surveillance state, it would be an authoritarian state which could decide worker's rights or the history of slavery are "adult material" because what kid needs to know about them? Kids don't work or own slaves, so it's not suitable for them and they can't access it.

This idea sounds absolutely unhinged to me.

[–] Bizarroland@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

-Ben Franklin