There are a lot of GOP-controller legislatures in the USA pushing through so-called “child protection” laws, but there’s a toll in the form of impacting people’s rights and data privacy. Most of these bills involve requiring adults to upload a copy of their photo ID.

  • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I see what you’re asking, and I agree if we’re going to prevent physical access to strip clubs by minors, it makes logical sense to take steps to prevent minors from accessing prurient content online as well.

    The question becomes the exact methodology used to achieve that. It’s the same basic premise of making encryption illegal: Are we willing to sacrifice our privacy in the name of “protecting the children”?

    Come up with another way to restrict access that doesn’t further encroach on privacy. I don’t have the answer for what that is, and it may not need to involve the government, but allowing them to put bills like this in place sets dangerous precedent. Once we relinquish power to the government, it’s damn near impossible to get it back.

    • Bizarroland@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If they really wanted to block access to adult only material, and not be a surveillance state in the process, the correct solution would be that every home router and every cell phone plan would have a secondary password that had to be entered in order to access that data.

      Then by default only the parents and the people deemed responsible enough to have access to that password would be able to view adult only content.

      That is very secure, it would sweep the floor with a huge percentage of successes with a minimum amount of intervention into people’s daily life.

      Sure, some kids will get the password one way or another and view adult only content, but at least they would know they had to go through the extra steps to do something they weren’t allowed to do.

      • Aetherielle@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        While that technically may not be a surveillance state, it would be an authoritarian state which could decide worker’s rights or the history of slavery are “adult material” because what kid needs to know about them? Kids don’t work or own slaves, so it’s not suitable for them and they can’t access it.

        This idea sounds absolutely unhinged to me.

        • Bizarroland@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”

          -Ben Franklin