VPNs Are Not a Solution to Age Verification Laws
VPNs are having a moment. On January 1st, Florida joined 18 other states in implementing an age verification law that burdens Floridians' access to sites that host adult content, including pornography websites like Pornhub. In protest to these laws, PornHub blocked access to users in Florida....
You're viewing a single thread.
It's ironic that the EFF proposes its own set of severe restrictions as the better alternative to age verification laws. How about not restricting the internet at all?
Or better yet, teach parents not to neglect their children 😱
We aren't their children's caretakers, they should be responsible adults and not let their kids access gore and porn.
I don't think it's actually possible for parents to stop kids from seeing porn if the kids want to do so (without home-schooling them in the wilderness). Even a very attentive and tech-savvy parent can't stop their kid from looking at porn on a friend's smartphone. Laws won't help unless they're as restrictive as China's.
I was mainly talking about neglectful parents, but it's still possible to make an effort. Some don't even try, though :/
I think there should be some bare minimum standard, both for teaching adults/children internet safety, and safeguards on porn/gore sites.
Which severe restrictions do you mean? The linked article talks mostly about gdpr-like privacy protection stuff, no?
I'm not sure I'm entirely on board with GDPR but (unless I'm very confused) the EFF's proposal would go further than that.
The proposal would deliberately destroy the business model of large tech companies, which would make a lot of users (most Americans on the internet) quite unhappy and lead to their use of foreign services that don't have to obey any US law (which is what we're seeing with the TikTok ban).
Then there's
Companies must be prohibited from processing a person’s data, except as strictly necessary to provide them what they asked for.
"Strictly necessary" is quite a high bar to clear. Does even a non-commercial website like a Lemmy instance currently satisfy that criterion? Would you be willing to risk running an instance if that meant that anyone who disagreed could sue you?
Severe restrictions? Seriously?
Perhaps if you are a big tech corporation, considering that the EFF is an advocate group for digital rights and consumer protection policies.
How about not restricting the internet at all?
No. Every internet user should agree that some types of content should absolutely be prevented from appearing in public pages.
