Comment by hdgvhicv

Comment by hdgvhicv a day ago

I don’t have to show ID, but I do have to pay the bill, which means a direct debit, which means over 18.

The correct solution (in addition to bill layer control and arguably compulsory support for an “over 18” tag in dns which would be easy enough to implement for the same sites that currently demand over 18s, would be to help parents utilise parental controls (having recently been through it with Minecraft and fortnight it was a nightmarish gordian knot.

The hand wringing about how evil vpns are is the same. My son can’t install mullvad or whatever on his phone without my approval thanks to apple’s parental controls. I assume android has the same.

The goal has never been to empower parents though

RandomBacon a day ago

> direct debit, which means over 18

Incorrect. Source: I had a checking account before I was 18.

Reply View 0 replies

J_McQuade a day ago

I think the correct solution would be to make parents responsible for actually using those controls, as they always have been for controlling a child's access to such materials in other media.

For example, if you have a stack of explicit DVDs and it becomes apparent that your child has access to them, then you will likely get a visit from social services and potentially suffer legal consequences up to and including removal of custody. I honestly have no idea why stuff on the internet is treated differently. Internet providers are already required to check that you are over 18 (much as the person selling you those DVDs is) - if you then share the content that this makes available with a child, then you should be held responsible in the same way. It was sufficient with print, VHS, Sky TV, etc. - why not the internet?

Reply View 0 replies