6 ms·
In my opinion, Google makes the UI too complicated and geeky which means parents are less likely to use it. Furthermore, they apply partial solution instead of
by codedokode 2mo ago
In my opinion, Google makes the UI too complicated and geeky which means parents are less likely to use it. Furthermore, they apply partial solution instead of complete architecture. In the article, the app must actively ask for age which means apps not asking the age, like Telegram still would allow access to inappropriate content.
There should be a single checkbox, "parent mode", which applies government-approved configuration, and the minority who bother, can manually edit it further. Many people are too lazy or not good with computers so the UI should be simple and not what is shown in the screenshots.
There is no need to ask the permission to get age information.
The parent mode should work on "white list" principle:
- only white-listed apps may be installed (list provided by government, parent may edit)
- in those apps ("age-aware apps"), only age-appropriate content is available. In a messenger, only parent- or school-approved contacts may be added.
- the browser refuses to open any web page not having a government-approved signature in HTTP headers (geek minority can add their signatures to the white list). Adult sites are not allowed to have such a signature.
- there should not be multiple age gradations, 3 is enough (adult, teenager, tiny child).
So all parents or store employee should do is to tick the checkbox and set a password or fingerprint for management.
It wouldn't solve the problem completely because there are many irresponsible parents.
- aceazzameen 2mo agoHaven't video games solved this a long time ago with age ratings on the games themselves? Sony and Microsoft's parental controls are convoluted garbage with logins galore. But Nintendo's, at least on the Switch 1, was dead simple. You enable parental controls, set an age rating, and password. Done. There's an app to set time limits, whitelist/blacklist games, etc. That was the easiest UX I've seen. Games (apps) dont need to know the age of the user to access them. Even the parental control didn't know the child's real age. It just knew if the child had access to E, E10+, T, M, etc. Why are we trying to reinvent this? Oh yeah more data collection.
- codedokode 2mo agoThe problem that apps are not games. For example, a messaging app might not allow to add contacts or subscribe to channels (blogs) without parent permission in "child mode", and have no restrictions in "adult mode". And Youtube might hide some videos and topics in "child mode". Obviously, you could make several versions for the app, but that is code duplication and nobody likes it.
- aceazzameen 2mo agoThere's games like Fortnite that have multiple games and modes within it, each with separate age ratings. Fortnite's parental controls allow parents to whitelist the various features/modes. All I see are issues that have been solved before, that app developers have never had to think about. And big tech is lobbying to reinvent it so they can consume more data in disguise.