this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2025
519 points (98.7% liked)

Technology

68674 readers
3390 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 49 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

This is all dumb. If you're worried about kids surfing porn sites then the legal guardian should act accordingly. There are so many methods to blocking porn sites that it's almost hilarious. Web filtering; most ISPs are able to support website filtering on their supplied gateway or DNS. Parental controls on device; most devices come with opyional locks built-in at this point especially if it's aimed towards children.

Sure, it's not perfect but it's better than removing yet another layer of web anonymity. We see how well browser fingerprinting is going, let's not make it easier to track who is browsing where than it already is. But that's the real point behind these bills, isn't it?

Edit: I guess I was ranting mainly about the porn, but honestly, these are all things that parents should be aware of their children doing. If it's an awareness issue, then that should be the next step. The government going straight from "oh there's a problem" to "let's make it illegal" without trying to raise awareness is extremely heavy handed.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

cosmetics that contain certain chemicals like Vitamin A or alpha hydroxy acids.

I believe I can buy a ton of these chemicals over the counter and shove them all at once down my cockhole without ID. Is dabbing a smidge on my cheeks dangerous?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Perhaps long term exposure, like these products would be?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

These are sold as daily health supplements, where internal dose would seem much higher than topical applications. If its dangerous, it shouldn't be sold to anyone is all I can understand.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Devils advocate - children/younger may have lower tolerances

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Given the 3 examples given in the article, I would say that this time they are wrong. None of the items given as examples should be accessible to a minor without parents approval anyway, expecially if we are talking about medical items.

Not that I think that a law will magically change something, btw.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What? Now kids have to learn how to download a VPN before buying makeup? Should be some good pepperidge farm memes soon

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

VPNs don't help here, the website asks you for your driver's license. Tbf giving your credit card to them is typically enough for them (big tech + govt) to construct a full profile of who you are anyway, and that was the original "age gate" -- though there are some services that make CCs modestly privacy preserving -- not the case for IDs

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago

Yea, age restriction like this is a nogo for me. And yess, VPN would help, since in other countries, they still allow access just by clicking “I am 18”.

[–] [email protected] 134 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (11 children)

I have to agree with PornHub's idea.

A device should be able it indicate in its browser headers whether its primary user is an adult or a minor and the service can react accordingly.

It won't protect all the children but children of parents who can't be assed to setup a device properly will have problems no matter how much we increase the surveillance state.

[–] [email protected] 78 points 1 month ago (1 children)

A device should be able it indicate in its browser headers whether its primary user is an adult or a minor and the service can react accordingly.

I can already see that being used for targeting children with specific ads on the internet.

[–] [email protected] 60 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

The laws around advertising are fucked to begin with but the headers SHOULD be used in advertising 100%

The minor flag would actually remove the LARGE gray area that platforms take advantage of to push harmful ADs and content to kids (Today they just get to play dumb)

This would actually create a framework to enforce existing advertising laws as well as data collection laws with regards to minors.

Examples: Minors should not see ads for holsters, knives, ammo, ED medications, Diet drugs, muscle building drugs, Alcohol, Tobacco products, Online Gambling

These are all things I have seen advertised on YouTube to me; Granted I am not a minor but I am also just using Youtube by going to the site with no account.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (2 children)

If I was an advertiser for those products I'd be pissed that my ad dollars are going non targets anyway. So it would be a win win

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago

advertising some products to kids will probably make them future customers. tobacco/vape/gambling etc.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›