285
UK’s Starmer gives Apple, Google 3 months to stop children sending nude images (www.scmp.com)
submitted 4 months ago* by to c/technology@lemmy.world
94 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Do they actually know how the technology works? They will have to scan everything inbound and outbound connections, basically managed devices.

Apple and Google have been given a three-month ultimatum to make it impossible for children to take, share or view nude images on their smartphones, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said on Monday.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 4 months ago (3 children)

I feel like all these locks and bars that people apparently believe that they need to be good parents to their children are a little... much? My mother wasn't an exemplary parent exactly so I wouldn't go down her route, but I think there's a case to be made for connecting to your child on a human level, and being their guide rather than their warden.

It makes me think of this hysterical American mindset I've bumped into over the years. I've got friends who likened me walking a couple of blocks to school as a six year old as child abuse, when they themselves have no idea how to operate a washing machine. I did experience abuse, but it was more of the slammed into the floor and choked out, than going to and from school on my own.

There's a happy medium to be made, where you can gradually introduce concepts to a child at a level that's appropriate. Fostering a connection to a child that makes them feel like they can trust in you, and safely go to you when they need it, while also having the freedom to make decisions and grow on their own.

Oh and one more thing. When are we punishing Google, Meta, etc., for allowing intentionally child-targeted adult themed ads and recommendations? Or did we forget how YouTube allowed incredibly disturbing content in ads and recommendations FOR KIDS (as in, literally injected into playlists meant for kids)?

I think this is the far more pressing issue. Capitalism will gladly throw the health of people under the bus if it makes them a quick buck.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago

    It's a different approach based on age, too - the parental controls Apple provides are great for a toddler on an iPad, and may even work into elementary school... but not forever. You can't hide kids from reality, no matter what you take away. I knew too much and more by age 8 and we didn't even have the internet. When our son gets to be 6 or 7 we'll probably have to start explaining the concept of porn and online bad actors, and that's depressing, but it's the world we live in.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    The issue is that unfiltered access to the internet is dangerous to kids - and at a certain age, kids do want to discover that side without any parental interference.

    Limiting what they can access is not an unhealthy approach. It's protective, especially nowadays when certain companies (looking at you, Roblox and Meta) will shelter paedos because it's a financially viable thing to do, repercussions and hurt children be damned.

    And there HAS to be a balance between adults having unfettered access to the entirety of the internet, without having to take a selfie every time they want to have a wank or approach any remotely adult topic. It literally takes a single penstroke from the government to categorise a mundane topic "adult" and start listing people - because ID-ing yourself in a "trust us, your data is safe" (except ignore all the data breaches that have already happened!) environment will TOTALLY not lead to issues. I mean what could go wrong when you start collecting the IDs of trans kids reaching out for help because of abuse, gay/bi/lesbian/etc. kids similarly seeking help, suicidal people seeking help, and the list goes on? What problem could there be from that data leaking, right?

    This bullshit WILL get reversed the moment a prominent politician's weird porn browsing habits leak, and I do hope that happens sooner than later. But even when that happens, we need a SANE option to protect children - and that's by giving the tools to parents, parents whom are mostly overloaded with work, and can't afford to spend hours a day not interacting with their children but reviewing what they do on the internet.

    Yes, being a better parent to your child IS part of that, but so is setting up virtual boundaries.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 6 points 4 months ago

    You say things I agree with, and things I don't.

    I struggle to see the benefit in virtual boundaries, and think it's better to foster a healthy trusting relationship with one's child. They'll encounter bad situations at some point sooner or later, and at that point having shielded them from it in lieu of giving them the tools to deal with it, will have been harmful rather than helpful.

    Further, this kind of informational censoring can be used to actively harm people as well. I've met many people whose lifelines are their virtual connections to their communities, and had their parents been at all technically inclined these people likely wouldn't be alive today.

    Children won't spontaneously combust if they encounter pornography. My first exposure happened at around six or seven, same time half of my classmates. Someone found a pornographic card deck in the bushes during recess.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent