zlacker

>>furcyd+(OP)
Ah, the classic “think of the children!” argument. It is no one’s responsibility other than the parent to ensure their child isn’t watching inappropriate content (which will be different for every family and individual).

This article suggests that machine learning and collaborative filtering are incapable of producing healthy recommendations. I beg to differ, the New York Times may not like the result but they work for the vast majority of users on any service with too much content to manually curate.

>>roster+gh
> It is no one’s responsibility other than the parent to ensure their child isn’t watching inappropriate content

Society has had laws in place to prevent children from viewing things they should not be (inappropriate movies, magazines, etc).

>>RHSeeg+gl
No we don't - not in the US. Short of literal pornography that could fall afoul of corruption of a minor the state isn't involved. That is just from ratings cartels and pressure groups.

If nobody gives a fuck enough to affect business you can give the complete SAW series to 3 year olds and all the offended can do is yelp indignantly.