[earthnail]

I’m gonna go on a limb here and say that I like this draft.

It’s an opt-in measure for parents with a one-click solution. Think ad blocker but for adult content.

Parents have to actively enable it. It’s on the device itself, not in the internet backbone. No censorship happening; government doesn’t even know whether parents use it.

It’s a good solution.

[Eddy_Viscosity2]

Step 1. Force companies to develop the censorship/surveillant technology by passing a law to make it available. Claim its to 'save the children' and/or 'fight terrorism', whichever threat is currently the most scary.

Step 2. Make the use of the technology optional, and fairly non-intrusive to ease acceptance and normalization.

Step 3. Make the technology mandatory for certain groups/areas like all schools or certain businesses. Or for people who work for them. Also incremental changes are applied which makes the system a bit more restrictive, and bit more surveillant.

Step 4. Make the technology mandatory for everyone (except politicians and certain private persons like CEOs of big corps)

Step 5. Continue incremental changes until the system completely transfers all real power and control of the system from the individual to the corporation/state.

[earthnail]

With that way of arguing you can’t have any laws or regulation at all.

[Eddy_Viscosity2]

Sure you can. You can pass laws that require companies respect a 'do not track' setting in browsers and don't collect data or make you jump through 'accept cookies' hoops. You can make right to repair laws. You can pass laws that require interoperability like making phones use a standard cable (they did this and I think its great). You can pass laws making companies like MS at least make available a no-tracking, no subscription, no ads, no telemetry, no bloatware, no AI, no bullshit version of windows OS for regular individuals at reasonable cost. They can do stuff that like that.

[txrx0000]

Yeah, this is the right direction for moderation features in general assuming it's implemented offline on-device and works without contacting a remote server. It eliminates excuses to implement age verification online.

And it's correct in principle: each parent should be able to decide what their child sees, but not what anyone else's child sees. Parenting a child is the responsibility of that child's parents, but it is not the responsibility of governments or other people.

Though I do have some gripes with it being a mandate rather than a recommendation, it is a much better proposal than age verification or censoring the entire Internet.

[earthnail]

We have mandates for all kinds of things, like movie ratings etc. I think it’s appropriate here. It just makes it easy.

I don’t understand the pushback from tech companies either; all OSes already have a kiosk mode (incl the major Linux DEs). Should be very low effort to implement.

[txrx0000]

The concern is that OSes which don't implement the feature will be outlawed.

Movie ratings don't outlaw movies and actually provides a good framework: instead of mandating that OSes implement this, publish a client-side filter spec that OS devs can choose to implement. And if they implement it, their OS gets a label like "PG-capable". Then make it illegal for minors to possess a non-PG-capable device.

[iamnothere]

Movie ratings are not mandatory, at least not in free countries. MPAA ratings like “R” and “PG” are a voluntary classification system and films are free to opt out, though many theater chains may be less likely to show your film. But small theaters and streaming platforms don’t usually care.

Authoritarian states like China and the UK do require classification/certification of films before release. Imagine requiring a painter to have their paintings reviewed by the state before exhibition!