>It doesn't answer the question of "what do we do about parents that don't do their job properly."
Like with normal cases - have court go over this.
But decision if any form of age lock should be implemented or not is up to parents. You cannot just shift argument to "you HAVE to restrict children from internet or else!"
What about the California version, where the government says you HAVE to offer parents the choice to restrict their children from the internet or not? That seems like a pretty reasonable middle ground, and solves the actual problems without denying privacy.
or cyclists should have their own lanes, pedestrians shouldn't walk on them - and vice versa. and if you're stuck behind someone slow just overtake them when you can.
Safe or not - it is up to individual to decide if it is worth the risk.
I hate this approach to them problem, because it is not a technical problem.
Because it focuses on technical aspects and accepts the premise of 'age verification must be solved'. It doesn’t, and discretion what content and and what age children and teenagers can consume should be up to parents.
it's the fact that fines are part of agency's income and it is their best interest(as a bureaucratic agency) to keep them at highest level where companies will still pay them.
Effectively this makes this a tax, enshittifying everything even worse.
if fines were decoupled from agencies, and had exponentially rising curve for repeat offenses, i think that would work better than ban, as much i would prefer for them to get banned.
> it's the fact that fines are part of agency's income and it is their best interest(as a bureaucratic agency) to keep them at highest level where companies will still pay them.
and yet there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever that they've done this. The fines that have been levied are easy to pay.
Because this does not address the problem at all. Or rather - it does not address my problems as a citizen, and it just pushes responsibility of parents onto 3rd parties and punishes everyone collectively for it.
Also fundamentally speaking - this does just take away your right to privacy. do you just let your rights be taken away?
I don't want 'minimization' of intrusion of privacy, i want no intrusion of privacy.
Technology is what solutions are made of. The "nontechnical solutions to societal problems" are the things like "wishful thinking", "pretending the problem doesn't exist", "wishing it away", etc.
(Which is fine when the problem is bullshit and there is nothing to solve, which actually may be the case here.)
Right, I would argue they are part of technology, because bureaucracy clearly is, laws move in scope of what's possible and economically feasible, and culture is entirely downstream of that.
Or, put another way, you cannot "just change culture", not any more than you can make a river flow uphill by pushing water with your hands. You can splash some water around and make a little puddle, but it'll quickly flow back to rejoin the river and continue on its way.
Culture is always seeking a dynamic equilibrium, in a landscape defined by economics and technology constraints. The only way to achieve lasting change is to change the landscape.
>Right, I would argue they are part of technology, because bureaucracy clearly is, laws move in scope of what's possible and economically feasible, and culture is entirely downstream of that.
then you’re using different definition that everyone else, and bring nothing into discussion other than confusion.
>Or, put another way, you cannot "just change culture"
it isn't shaped just by technology. There are economic factors and cultural exchanges between different cultures.
This is purely tautological line of thinking, that brings nothing to discussion.
I wish it was decade for me, in early 2010s they were still teaching 90s approach to handling complex projects(upfront design, with custom DSL for each project and fully modelled by BA without any contact with actual users, with domain experts being siloed away - and all of that connected to codegen tools for xml from the 90s)
It can be worse! I went back to school for some graduate work in the early 00s after having been in the industry for a handful of years. There was a required class that was one of those "here's what life is like in the real world instead of academia".
The instructor was a phd student who'd never been in industry.
He kept correcting me about industry practices, telling me that I had no idea what the real world was like.
I still see software sold as soa compliant, whatever that means. I think we have just started recycling and mixing sw memes at this loint. Like you see someone wearing bell-bottoms with an 80s dayglo jacket. We do agile soap waterfall kanban model driven design here.
Like with normal cases - have court go over this.
But decision if any form of age lock should be implemented or not is up to parents. You cannot just shift argument to "you HAVE to restrict children from internet or else!"