realitaetsverlust

You literately wrote “If there is one person that has all the influence, it’s you as a parent.”

Yes, because it’s true. The kid spends most of it’s time in your care. But that doesn’t mean you can negate all the other influence. But you can and should keep track of what is happening in your childs life.

but now you shit on people that for one or another reason have children that turn out badly

I’m not really trying to shit on people, sorry if you get that impression. There are reasons why children turn out bad despite you doing your best - especially if the partner leaves and you’re a single parent. It’s nearly impossible to feed yourself and your child while still paying 100% attention to what it does.

However, my impression is that many people want to have children but not take care of them. That’s what I see in my daily life. Kids come home from school, get something to eat and then the parents put them in front of a TV or a tablet so they can keep themselves busy while the parents do whatever. And don’t get me wrong, it’s not even wrong to do that every now and then. Everyone needs a pause. But in many - especially poorer - families, this is common practice and it’s no surprise the kids turn out as they do.

Do you think that it is the parents full responsibility, that their 13 year old child committed suicide because of bulling?

If bullying gets to a point where it’s so bad the bullied kid feels the need to kill itself, there’s so many things wrong before that. It’s not like a child is bullied once and immediately jumps off a building, that is a long process that goes on for weeks or months and the changes that happen to the child are noticeable to adults in the childs life. Doesn’t want to go to school anymore, scared to go out etc. - if you’re a somewhat attentive parent, those change are noticeable. My mum, for example, almost always ate lunch with me when I came home and talked with me about the day. If I was bullied, she would’ve noticed within days.

So no, they don’t carry the full responsibility. But they are certainly partly responsible, even tho that might sound cruel to you.

I never said children will never be influenced under good parental care. That is impossible to avoid. Of course your child will be influenced by things online and offline, no question. But if you notice your child is drifting into the wrong direction, you can sit them down, talk with them and try to correct that. I know I drifted into the wrong direction as a kid but my parents still got me into a pretty successful life by raising me correctly.

It’s a battle against billion dollar companies and it won’t be easy

Nobody said having a child is easy. But you decided to have a child and now you bear the responsibility.

Age verification without disclosing all your private data is absolutely doable.

Not reliably, which is not what governments want. They want ironclad methods to determine who does what online.

and “we should not block anyone’s access to anything on the internet” from privacy advocates is lazy

Personally, I consider it significantly more lazy to have a child, not give a single flying fuck about what it does in the world and expect the entire world to raise your child - but I guess we’re just having different perspectives.

public schools and kindergardens are essential for modern society

Yes, because those are supposed to instill essential skills like reading, calculus, history etc. They aren’t supposed to tell kids “Hey kiddos being on tiktok 12 hours a day is bad don’t do that” - that is your job as a parent.

We shouldnt just hope that parents successfully fight the hydra of online dangers by doing DNS filtering & running ad blockers on all devices their children can get their hands on.

You’re right, we shouldn’t hope - we should expect. Dumping a child into the world and not taking care of it is irresponsible beyond belief. If you can’t raise a child, don’t have one.

Why should we not be able to do the same for internet usage?

Because the requirements are significantly more extreme.

Blocking a child from a brothel requires a security guard to take a look at the child and maybe check the ID if he’s unsure. That’s it. Blocking a child from tiktok requires age verifications across the entire internet - which are then bound to an ID, probably stored somewhere and will then be used to eliminate online privacy completely.

It’s also denmark planning this - so the very same country that proposes and heavily advocates for chat control. So just another case of trying to control the internet under the guise of “BuT tHiNk Of ThE cHiLdReN”.

As a parent, I have limited influence

Nonsense. If there is one person that has all the influence, it’s you as a parent.

confiscate their smartphones & ground them

Idk why parents think punishing their child is the only thing that works lmaooo.

How about you learn what your child is doing online and talk about it if it does something it shouldn’t do. Set up a local DNS (like PiHole) and every evening, check what your child is doing. If it accesses sites it shouldn’t access, talk about it. There’s also plenty of software out there that lets you monitor your childs phone usage. Kid is 12 hours a day on tiktok? Install TimeLimit, restrict the time. Done.

You made the decision you have a child - now take the responsibility and stop relying on the government or companies to educate your children.

Not only US Big Tech, but Big Tech in general. More selfhosting, more open source - less proprietary bullshit with vendor lock-in.

He’s hating them because they won’t just freely let his tech bros do what they want in here.

I can assure you, you will never need them.

I got a USB stick with ventoy installed, got a gparted and an arch linux iso on that thing, I do use those regularly.

I don’t get the point. Because their friends are on social media that absolves you from educating your kids?

Yeah why educating kids on the dangers of social media when you can restrict them …

Even the oldest, sickest pet will still make an effort to keep themselves alive however they can: eating, drinking water, moving out of the way of danger, etc.

That’s wrong. Especially old cats are very prone to just not eat when they’re old and sick.

That user agent would make them easily identifiable and therefore blockable. It’s more likely that they are trying to hide as a legitimate user.

I would expect AI scrapers to fake a windows user-agent tbh.

This is what too much windows does to your brain kids.

That isn’t entirely true. While a phone without a SIM can still listen to broadcasts, it never registers as a subscriber because It’s missing a IMSI. So no, without a SIM you are indeed invisible to carriers. It’s a bit like screaming into the woods - someone might hear you if you do that, but if he doesn’t scream back, you have no idea he’s there.

The only exception to this if you’re actively calling emergency services - in that case, your phone will attempt an emergency attach to any network it can find, which is the point where the carrier of that network could see your IMEI. However, apart from that, you are indeed completely invisible without a SIM card.

Not having a SIM-Card in your phone is like having a tank without a main gun - it drives, but it can’t really do what it’s supposed to do. I don’t think that it’s a good idea. Also, not having a SIM-Card doesn’t make you invisible - only airplane mode really does that. Without some kind of network connectivity, you have an expensive, glorified brick that can make photos, play games and lets you listen to offline music.

Also, I’m wondering what exactly you’re trying to achive. Get a private OS like graphene, don’t install any google services, have anti-tracking protection installed into the browser (or use a safe and sane browser by default) and you’re good.

Not having a SIM doesn’t do anything for you except hiding from your carrier, however, if your threat model involves you being worried by being tracked by your carrier (and by extension, the feds), you’re in really hot water already and you’re probably better off with detaching yourself from the modern world.

I don’t think you understand what is being decided here. This isn’t about making legal what other countries are already doing, this is creating the framework for countries to introduce this kind of shit legally.

only voluntary … No chat app is going to voluntarily add it

To cite bender from futurama:

Hahahahahhahaha.

Oh wait, you’re serious? Let me laugh even harder.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Not sure if you’ve noticed, but “voluntary” usually results in mandatory after a while. We had this happen so often already. Remember the “Voluntary” Code of Conduct on hate speech in the EU? Yeah that started out as voluntary - then there was the DSA, digital services act, which uses the “voluntary” code of conduct as the baseline of determining if they are compliant. So the thing that started out voluntary is not effectively mandatory.

Or, in the US, there was the REAL ID system which was a voluntary system aswell - well, until it wasn’t because it is now required to board flights or you’ll be denied entry into certain federal facilities if you don’t have it.

So no - voluntary isn’t voluntary for long. There is usually mission creep which, at some point, makes it mandatory.

and even if they did you can easily switch to a chat app that doesn’t, which isn’t illegal

Very weak argument, as messaging apps are only popular if people use them - and we know exactly how hard that is for most people. Whatsapp has been shitting on people for years and still it’s the most popular messaging app.

Just because there are a bunch of fascists trying to implement it doesn’t mean the entire EU is working against the general population.

That is not the point. The problem isn’t whether people pushing it are “fascists”, it’s that the policy is structurally dangerous because it can be used by fascists in the future. Once the framework is in place, changing the rules becomes a matter of weeks.

Of course “the entire EU” isn’t acting in bad faith. But harmful laws don’t require bad intent or unanimous malice. They only require a majority that underestimates long-term consequences. And please remember that this would not be the first badly thought out law they had passed.

In germany, there is a saying which roughly translates to: “The opposite of well done is well meant”.

Hate to break it to you, must most member states are supporting chat control by now

https://fightchatcontrol.eu/

Counterpoint: Chat Control