11 ms·

The problem is that not all parents are "concerned parents" and children dont deserve to be taken advantage of by trillion dollar corporations for the crime of

• imhoguy 3mo ago
  These parents will do age check themselves on kids devices. Why? To not be bothered or to elevate the kid in peer group. No system is going to fix "unresponsble" parents until we end up with a state completely replacing parent like in Brave New World.
  • kulahan 3mo ago
    You should look into Paul Krugman’s research on nudges, and how he won a Nobel prize showing that extremely small changes can have significantly beneficial effects across an entire citizenry. You’re the person saying that we shouldn’t be default people to contributing to their retirement because people may choose not to. It’s not about perfectly capturing every possible person - you’re running a country, not a concentration camp.
• oneeyedpigeon 3mo ago
  > The problem is that not all parents are "concerned parents" Unfortunately, this doesn't address that problem.
• kelnos 3mo ago
  That's the classic question of when the state should step in to correct bad parenting, and when it should leave well enough alone. I'm sympathetic to the idea that this is one of the "step in" times, but I think the negatives for doing so seem far too costly. At any rate, with age verification, un-concerned parent will likely just want their kid to shut up, and will verify using their own details to give the kid the (adult) access they want. So I don't think that changes much here.
  • program_whiz 3mo ago
    What are the negatives for doing so?
    • saghm 3mo ago
      Forcing literally everyone else on the internet to give up privacy. No kids ever use my devices (there are no kids in my household), but in order to protect the non-existent children who theoretically would use my devices, I'd be forced to share information I don't want to and blindly trust that the process is done in a way that magically doesn't increase the ability to track me across websites.
      • kulahan 3mo ago
        That’s an extremely small negative. We’ve had nearly zero privacy for all of human history. A lockable door in your own home was an enormous revolution. There was a brief period where you could do super secretive things in your own home in America because it was the culture to move out the millisecond you can in order to live on your own, and roommates are viewed as an unfortunate obstacle. Now that the 70-ish year experiment is over, we’re simply reverting to the way we’ve been since time immemorial.
        • saghm 3mo ago
          > We’ve had nearly zero privacy for all of human history. A lockable door in your own home was an enormous revolution. There was a brief period where you could do super secretive things in your own home in America because it was the culture to move out the millisecond you can in order to live on your own, and roommates are viewed as an unfortunate obstacle. The timeline you present is backwards because you misunderstand privacy as a binary. For most of human history we were extremely private to almost everybody in the world, and that's only changed relatively recently. There's a huge difference between my family or close neighbors knowing what I'm doing because of physical proximity and having to broadcast information about myself in order to take part in the way society has evolved to expect for mundane services.
    • 3mo ago
• efreak 3mo ago
  Children also don't deserve to have uncaring parents