this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
136 points (95.9% liked)
Technology
72212 readers
4322 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- 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.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
In most of EU there are laws that forbid minors to access some products (like, you cannot sell alcool to minors). Don't see as fascist to make those laws respected.
I mean, if a minor buys a liquor from a store and it is caught, the store pays a fine (or it is temporary closed or whatever the law says), why should be a company that sell pornography (or enable to watch it) not be responsible the same way ? Just because it is on internet and it is a US company ?
Yes, I am familiar with the ‘think of the children!’ Trojan horse tactic.
So in your opinion even the ban to sell alcool to minors is in the "think of the children" category ?
Anyway, the ban to sell pornography to minors date way before internet so what's the point ? EU is not making a new law, it merely try to look if these companies respect them.
Then I could agree that back at the time, when you need to go to the newsstand to buy "the product" the check was easy and now it is everything but easy. Back at the time you just need to show your ID and that's all, the newsagent would never remember you and have nothing about you to be stoles.
Now the only problem I see is that the data you could send to verify you are an adult will be stolen (and sold) and that is a problem.
No, I'd liken it to an adult giving a child alcohol. I don't know of any children who pay for their own Internet access.
If your liquor cabinet at home isn't locked, and your kid steals some, it isn't any different than not having a locked down Internet connection.
Which is still forbidden, except if you are the parent and you are in your own home or anyway not in a public space. And if the kid is educated well, he would refuse alchool from an adult that is not his parent or relatives. If not maybe you should educated your kid better than that.
But I don't know children that can pay for their own alchool either.
Well, I don't need to lock my liquor cabinet because I educated my kids.
And now that they are old enough they know that they can simply ask instead of stealing.
Congratulations, you have found the solution to kids accessing inappropriate content on the internet.
if the kid is educated well, he would refuse watching porn on a website. If not maybe you should educated your kid better than that.
use education instead of invasive age verification systems.
Literally no one but you is arguing about minors accessing porn.
I am not the one saying
I am the one saying that in the real world there is a law that ban minor from accessing porn that should be held valid also on internet.
The one implying that enforcing a law is fascist is you, not me.
Because it’s a Trojan horse. They’re using porn as justification for increased monitoring for everyone who uses the web, and controlling what they’re allowed to see.
Fine, assuming you are right, what's the alternative ?
Skip the part about parental controls and parents that educate their kids, let's talk about something you would do to apply the law that does not cause some form of control.
that's easy, you even said it out loud:
now just replace alcohol with porn, and its done. just like they would drink your alcohol, they are using your internet access, its your job and responsibility to limit their access to both of these.
Just astoundingly stupid.
Do you realize that the "effective and responsible methods" are not bullet proof, right ?
I am not arguing that parental control should not be used or that parents should not educated their kid, I am arguing that since these method are based on something that can be easily bypassed (parental control) or you cannot assume as a standard (kid education) the only other alternative is for the site to really check who is accessing.
The 3 things must work together, none of them is a magical solution in itself.
So since we can’t count on all parents to properly parent their child, we’ll just infantilize the entire population and treat every single person as a child by default.
Yeah. Again, I’m familiar with this ‘think of the children!’ line of support for fascism.
And just as a totally coincidental side effect, the censoring tech will allow the government greater tracking of everyone.
Any other solution to suggest aside the two obvious ones to use when the two obvious ones fail ?
Because face it: there are parents that don't properly parent their child and I suppose that we agree that also these child should be protected in some way.
And again, I don't think that making sure that a law that already exist in the physical world is held valid also on internet is fascim.
We are not living under a fascism regime even if we are subjected to laws that ban something, be it minor accessing porn material, minors accessing alchool or adults driving while drunk or too fast.
Now, that is something we can talk about trying to solve a problem, how to check these kind of things without tracking or unecessary privacy invasion.
You don’t understand. The tracking and spying is the entire point of the maneuver. The ‘children are accessing porn’ thing is just a Trojan horse to justify the spying.
As you pointed out, it’s already illegal for them to access it, and parents are legally required to prevent their children from accessing it. But you don’t lock down the entire population, or institute pre-crime surveillance policies, just because some parents are not going to follow the law. You then charge the guilty parents after the offense.
I understand what are you saying, I simply don't consider to check if a law is applied as a Trojan horse in itself.
I would agree if the EU had said to these sites "give us all the the access log, a list of your subscriber, every data you gather and a list of every IP it ever connected to your site", and even this way does not imply that with only the IP you could know who the user is without even asking the telecom company for help.
So, is it a Trojan horse ? Maybe, it heavily depend on how the EU want to do it. If they just ask "show me how you try to avoid that a minor access your material", which normally is the fist step, I don't see how it could be a Trojan horse. It could become, I agree on that.
No, parents are not legally required to prevent it. The seller (or provider) is legally required. It is a subtle but important difference.
True. You simply impose laws that make mandatories for the provider to check if he can sell/serve something to someone. I mean asking that the cashier of mall check if I am an adult when I buy a bottle of wine is no different than asking to Pornhub to check if the viewer is an adult.
I agree that in one case is really simple and in the other is really hard (and it is becoming harder by the day).
Ok, it would work, but then how do you caught the offendind parents if not checking what everyone do ?
Is it not simpler to try to prevent it instead ?