zlacker

>>azalem+(OP)
One thing I’ve realised over the past few weeks is that some parents must be delighted to have the government control the web for them.

When the parent does the enforcement themselves then they can be put under direct pressure by their children to drop the ban. When the government does it then the parent can say, honestly, sorry, there’s nothing they can do about it: It’s out of their hands. The child only has access to tier 1 support [parent] and the support agent’s only response is “sorry, corporate policy [law] requires AV for certain sites, there’s nothing I can do. Is there anything else I can help you with today?…”

I don’t say this to make the laws easier to swallow but the social economics of it make it more understandable why this law might be so popular with anyone already overloaded with angry teenagers.

Next up: the Bedtime Is At Nine PM Act 2026, Tuck Your Shirt In Act 2027, and No We Have One At Home Already Act 2028.

>>gorgoi+Xa
Reminded me of the Youtube Kids. It's supposed to filter out inappropriate and irrelevant content. So, there you can't see things like trains or steam locomotives, or harvesters at work (inappropriate!), but there are infinite cheap-ass 3D cartoons with "toy world", without any words, nor plot.

>>culebr+Gg
God, I hate so much these videos. My son son used to ask for these when he was younger, they were so bad...