• grandkaiser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    Instead of guessing, you could just… Google it. It’s about making harmful content unavailable to minors. I’m all for Internet freedom, but something makes me uncomfortable about protesting against protecting children from porn. It’s probably something to do with me seeing porn when I was young and it fucking me up for a long time.

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      All bills targeting your freedom are labelled “child porn” or “terrorism”.

      After terrorists attack in France, state of emergency was declared, special powers to restrainesuspicious powers at home. We MUST protect people frometerrorists, right? If you’re against that, which side are you on? Very first usage of the power: restrain non-violent eco-activists to their home so that they don’t disturb the COP.

      That pattern repeats over and over. They’re counting on you being sensitive to “child porn”, I bet you the initial list will include “eco-terrorists” sites (label used on anyone attending a climate protest they tried to prevent), political activists sites (you try to be anonymous on Internet? That’s SO suspicious!).

      I’m sorry for what happened to you, but ri seriously doubt this bill is really intended to prevent that.

    • Veloxization@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s not the government’s job to parent someone’s children… Parents should take the time to learn about how computers and the internet work at a sufficient level so they can both teach their children how to act and what to expect on the internet, and to control what their child sees on the internet. The former is a backup in case the latter does not work.