this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2025
277 points (99.3% liked)

Privacy

41001 readers
941 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This was bound to happen, and it’s ridiculous

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 6 points 3 hours ago

Even if kids see porn the lessons they learn are directly a result of how their parents approach the topic with them. Public education can't functionally provide useful sex ed due to politics.

I guess if you can blame your kids for breaking the law you never have to have "the talk" with them.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 29 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

How about tell the parents to pay attention to what their fucking kids are doing online instead of dragging the rest of us into it?

[–] krunklom@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 hour ago

How about nobody else'a fucking children are anybody else's fucking problem.

Fuck your stupid fucking kids.

Not literally of course. I'm not a republican.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 5 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

I don't think helicopter parenting is the solution.

[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

When you teach your child to look both ways before they cross the street, is that helicopter parenting? Or how about when you teach them not to talk to strangers even if the stranger is wearing a uniform? Do you allow children into your liquor cabinet to pour themselves a tall shot of whiskey? Etc et al. I don't consider it helicopter parenting to put age appropriate restrictions on what your child can engage with on your network. I call that sound, responsible, parenting.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 2 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

It's not about what you teach them. You can teach them whatever you want, it doesn't mean they're going to do it. The only way to stop them from doing it is to hover over them (hence the term helicopter).

[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 2 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Teaching a child isn't about creating robots. I said it earlier in this thread, but you have 18 years of bootcamp to equip your child with all the tools necessary to make, wise, prudent decisions in life. You're not going to be there, hopping out of bushes, wagging your finger at them forever. However, while they are in your charge, they are your resopnsibility to keep safe and secure. You are the network admin.

[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 1 points 56 minutes ago* (last edited 56 minutes ago)

I do't understand what any of that has to do with this conversation.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 6 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Well they should just leave it be, but If they have to do something better that than invading everyone else's privacy and ruining the internet.

[–] Gaja0@lemmy.zip 6 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I mean who was asking for the government to show their ID to view porn as the solution to children having access to pornographic material (has never been an issue until now randomly)

[–] willington@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Don't believe for a second that this is about children.

Imagine the policies of someone who actually cared about children's wellbeing? Those policies would not look like bans or restrictions for the children.

[–] Squiddork@lemmy.world 3 points 1 hour ago

Google and Microsoft have to be dragged kicking and squealing into proper policy that actually damages their business models.

They have been completely silent on these age verification checks, in Aus this is being implemented by an un-elected government official whose career was largely working for Microsoft for the past 20 years.

This is all about data mining.

[–] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 9 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Talk more openly about how none of these people give a fuck about protecting kids, and just want to ~~make life shitty for everyone including them~~ grab power.

Point out bad faith and don't let it be about anything else, until it actually is. We can't get anywhere because nobody's actually dealing with the actual situation, which is people lying publicly.

Stop going along with that shit. Every time you talk about the fake issue, you're helping them by pretending they're telling the truth when they aren't.

[–] yermaw@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Its simple. Give them more control and power over you or youre a pedophile.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 2 points 4 hours ago

Pedophile or minor, there isn't another option in the UK. Just let us know you're old enough and when you view porn.

[–] socsa@piefed.social 3 points 4 hours ago

Who would have ever thought a small amount of water would ever fall on meeeeeeee??!

[–] mugita_sokiovt@discuss.online 3 points 4 hours ago

Parents really need to prevent the watching of pornography by children. That's getting out of control.

No VPN ban or OSA-style BS needed.

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 29 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (2 children)

I know none of this is actually about protecting kids... But even if it was, their reasoning and methodology sucks.

some of the 16 to 21-year-olds surveyed saying they had viewed it "aged six or younger".

So there may have been a problem at least 10 years ago. Does that problem still exist? (never mind the obvious "is the problem parents ignoring their kids on a tablet"...)

Josh Lane was addicted to porn by 14-years-old after first finding it via a Google search when he was aged 12.

Okay, now let's address the parents being the problem. By default, Google's "Safe Search" is on, and the kid actively searched for porn. So no parental supervision of the 12 year old kid on the internet. Someone setup a google account, and changed the default settings to show those results. (oh, but that person is 25 now, so that was also 13 years ago...)

Almost all of the big websites have parental control settings that would alleviate the vast majority of these "problems" if parents actually used them. Parents being willfully ignorant isn't going to be resolved by legislation. They know that. This is all a smoke screen to put the entire population behind a firewall and control the narrative. It isn't even a very thick smoke screen.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 7 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Could we take wind out of the excuse "it's to protect the children" by implementing a signal like DoNotTrack/GPC but for NSFW content?

[–] irmadlad@lemmy.world 35 points 9 hours ago (4 children)

I've been biting my tongue hard these past few months in a concerted effort not to be offensive. I'm not trying to be intentionally offensive, however, I feel there is an element in this situation that is being disregarded in favor of someone else doing your work. When I say 'You', Your', etc, I mean it in the royal sense. So, warm up the downvote finger and man the flame throwers.

If it's genuinely for the children, then when are we going to require parents to be parents? Look, you brought this service into your home voluntarily. You might say 'Well I need it for work' or 'I need it for school'. Tons of people use hundreds of thousands of hotspots daily to do their thing on the internet. This service you voluntarily brought into your house, has both the ability to be highly beneficial and highly detrimental all in the same breath. Technology always, always, always wields a double edged sword.

And what do the majority of parents do with such power? They give it to their vulnerable, under aged, highly curious, children, un-monitored, uncensored, and uninhibited. Are you insane? So when little Johnny is caught surfing porn hub, the parents freak and cry out to their government 'We need to ban porn!' No! What we need is for parents to be parents.

There are literally hundreds of services, and ways to lock down your internet. I hear parents say 'I'm not technologically inclined.' Get there. The safety and well being of your children hang in the balance. Take a class at your local Tech College. I'd be willing to bet that when little Johnny's mom was pregnant, she most likely did some reading on the topic. Some even take a class on childbirth. The internet should be no different. Access one or two of the billions of tuts out on the internet.

Now, will locking down your internet like a multi-billion dollar enterprise with a Brinks Kit keep little Johnny from seeing some skin? No! Why? Because it's natural for humans to want to see what other humans look like naked. Children are naturally inquisitive. The prime directive of all life is to replicate. So, have frank, open, direct, and yes, awkward conversations with your children. Let them know in no uncertain terms what is acceptable on your network. Tell them why these things are not appropriate for their age group. This relationship with your children starts at Day 1.

You have 18 years of boot camp to equip your children with all the tools necessary to make wise, prudent decisions in life. You probably taught them how to ride a bicycle, or drive a car, or any number of teaching opportunities parents have with their children. The internet should be no different. We live in a technological time line that is ever changing, so it behooves parents to know exactly what is going on with their technology and how their children are using it. Get with it.

Being a parent takes work. Being a network administrator also takes work. Anyone who is a seasoned veteran of this chan knows, to secure a network in order to be as private, secure, and anonymous as possible on the internet, takes work. I find, a large portion of parents are unwilling to do the work and would rather fob off their responsibilities as a parent, to the government having jurisdiction. I'm not painting all parents with this brush. Kudos to parents who are very involved in their children's lives. There are enough of them tho, that are not, and this is a big issue. It gives governments the justification they desire to surveil their citizenry.

Let the roast begin.

[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 6 points 7 hours ago

So, warm up the downvote finger and man the flame throwers.

cracks knuckles, pulls out pitchfork and flamethrower

reads full comment

Goddamnit.... they're right.....

throws toys out the pram

[–] interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml 5 points 8 hours ago (2 children)

I grew up with the internet and I turned up jjuuuuusstt fine

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

I know you're being facetious but same and actually.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 3 points 7 hours ago

"I need internet at home for work!" - Okay, so plug in the one computer you work on? Do you really need to blast 100% of your home with internet via Wi-Fi, probably not. Even if you do (for some reason), why do you then also have to give little Timmy a Wi-Fi capable tablet at all? Download some episodes of Paw Patrol and let your kid watch them offline...

[–] tane@lemy.lol 6 points 9 hours ago

Nobody’s booing you because you’re right

[–] PacketPilot@lemmy.world 22 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Honestly I think access to AI chatbots at an early age is way more harmful to the developing brain. Character.ai is a very popular platform among younger gen z. LLMs are giving grown adults full blown psychosis, where's all the concern for the children when it comes to a dangerous tool like that? What a bunch of geriatric fucking clowns.

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 3 points 5 hours ago

I agree, using saas services is a curse.

If you don't self host your goon llm she's a prostitute

[–] DreamAccountant@lemmy.world 19 points 10 hours ago (2 children)

Same religious garbage they've been trying to pull for the last 75+ years.

"Someone think of the CHILDREN!!!".

They scream, as they take away your rights to information, privacy, and anything else that they possibly can. They don't want you to have rights.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] SugarCatDestroyer@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

They're probably thinking --> "Damn it, how dare these future employees watch pornography and undermine their motivation to work?"

[–] Jumuta@sh.itjust.works 28 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago) (1 children)

children figuring out VPNs in a week while these bumfucks (state that they) didn't manage to understand it in the years they've been given just goes to show the many orders of magnitudes of difference in their intelligence

[–] AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone 22 points 11 hours ago (4 children)

No, this is intentional, the ultimate goal is a censored internet a la China. This was just the easiest gateway to doing that.

They are coming for VPNs next.

[–] StarryPhoenix97@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

This. The tech giants are trying to 'solidify' the current structure of the internet and gatekeep its information. We're going from archival libraries to curated and policed propaganda. Google seems to be the key piece of the upcoming change with the most broad general access to user data through the cell phone.

It's not just them. There's like a council of 4 or 5 but Google is the best placed. Kind of a 'community leader'

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] pankuleczkapl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 29 points 12 hours ago (5 children)

This is so fucking stupid, you cannot stop VPNs, because things like ShadowSocks exist. When will they learn that the only way to stop VPNs is to disable the internet completely. As long as the internet exists, VPNs will too. Ask your friend Xi Jinping about that.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Coleslaw4145@lemmy.world 108 points 14 hours ago (3 children)

Josh Lane was addicted to porn by 14-years-old after first finding it via a Google search when he was aged 12.

Now 25 and happily married.

Wow. Porn really destroyed this mans life. What a tragic tale.

[–] synapse1278@lemmy.world 23 points 10 hours ago

He told Newsnight the addiction caused him to isolate himself from friends and family because he was "afraid of anyone discovering that I was hooked."

Mr Lane described finding "the only place I could get, I guess, love and intimacy was from pornography" at the same time as feeling "heaps of guilt and shame"

The problem seems to have more to do with lack of proper sex education and social pressure rather than pornography. Why did he have to feel so ashamed that he isolated himself? That's a real issue here!

[–] MoonMelon@lemmy.ml 44 points 11 hours ago (3 children)

If jacking off constantly at age 14 doomed a person we would never have left the Miocene epoch.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com 114 points 15 hours ago (4 children)

It feels like a return of the pornography/video games/rock music moral panic of the late 20th century. I wish these conservative idiots would just fuck off. We'll do anything before we tackle things that are really affecting children. Like poverty and hunger, in one of the world's richest countries. We're a joke of a country, no wonder people keep making fun of us. We deserve it.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Soot@hexbear.net 22 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

Governments have persistently censored and surveilled the internet ever-more on the basis of "but the children :(" without ever doing a single actually good thing for the children like decreasing class sizes or letting parents spend more time with their children. Both of which would actually help address the issue.

This is the equivalent of abstinence education, just keep 'em ignorant and then when they finally see porn on superundergroundillegalporn.com.illegal it'll just be 10x worse.

load more comments
view more: next ›