Should the Internet be Age Restricted?

[Fist and Faith]

I don't allow looooong sentences in the Close. Keep that shit in the Tank, where it belongs.




Yup, that's a joke.

[High Lord Tolkien]

And what of privacy? Thats an issue that will have to be considered. And what if an older person is being cyber bullied ... who will be notified? When and how?

I still say "privacy", like Elvis, has left the building.
Pretending it's still there as a reason not to be proactive seems like a waste of time to me.

I envision something like if you send a text that gets flagged as bullying or threatening your ISP or Cell provider sends you a text warning, three warnings and your cell service gets suspended for 30 days.

This is the end of the world for teens and millennials.
They would have to go to their parents and explain why, and if they are underage their parents would have to appeal to the provider.
It would shut that shit down nationwide in a few months.

As I write this I realize that kids can't even get internet or a cell phone by themselves. There is an age restriction.

Age restriction on credit cards...on everything except internet use!

[Fist and Faith]

I still say "privacy", like Elvis, has left the building.

Been saying the same thing. We've been watching it in SciFi since Star Trek.
"Computer, tell me about Eric Kniffin."

Eric Kniffin was born December 10, 1963. He lives in Walden, NY. He has three children. He has worked for Hudson Valley DDSO since May 7, 1998. His most common internet screen name is Patterner. He..."

Now that it's actually here, we're surprised and upset? I know how to look up how much anybody in my county paid for their house, how much their taxes are, etc. I assume it's available in other counties and states.

[High Lord Tolkien]

It's ridiculous.
I googled "live cam Iceland" yesterday on my laptop browser and within 10 minutes I had Iceland ads on FB, Twitter (my cell phone) and in my Gmail spam filter.

Everything we do online is mined and collected and exploited.
But if I tell someone they should kill themselves its "private"?
Only because it has no monetary value it seems.

[wayfriend]

Your Phone Is Listening and it's Not Paranoia

A couple years ago, something strange happened. A friend and I were sitting at a bar, iPhones in pockets, discussing our recent trips in Japan and how we'd like to go back. The very next day, we both received pop-up ads on Facebook about cheap return flights to Tokyo. It seemed like just a spooky coincidence, but then everyone seems to have a story about their smartphone listening to them. So is this just paranoia, or are our smartphones actually listening? [link]

Is your smartphone listening to everything you say? We asked the experts

If you worry that your smartphone might be listening in to your conversations, you're not alone. The internet is rife with anecdotal stories about digital eavesdropping. Many people feel that conversations they've had within earshot of their phones have been used to tailor advertising. [link]

It turns out, though, you really aren't paranoid - your phone is listening to you, and Vice's Sam Nichols has delved into how.

In fact, according to Dr Peter Henway, a senior security consultant for cybersecurity firm Asterix, your phone is always listening. Technically, your phone only records what's being said when you issue trigger words like "Hey Siri" or "Okay Google" but, because it needs to listen out for said keywords, it always has its digital ear listening out.

To help process your requests, and understand those all-important keywords, it processes what you say on-device instead of via the cloud, like it would for genuine commands. This onboard data can then be accessed by any third-party application on your phone with the adequate permissions - such as Facebook, Twitter and Snapchat apps. It's totally up to these apps if they want to use the data or not, and what they want to use it for.

"From time-to-time, snippets of audio do go back to [other apps like Facebook's] servers but there's no official understanding what the triggers are," Henway explains to Vice's Nichols. "Whether it's timing or location-based or usage of certain functions, [apps] are certainly pulling those microphone permissions and using those periodically." [link]

[Zarathustra]

It's ridiculous.
I googled "live cam Iceland" yesterday on my laptop browser and within 10 minutes I had Iceland ads on FB, Twitter (my cell phone) and in my Gmail spam filter.

Everything we do online is mined and collected and exploited.
But if I tell someone they should kill themselves its "private"?
Only because it has no monetary value it seems.

If you use DuckDuckGo stuff like that won't happen. I have no problem finding things I need with this search engine. And everything I search is not stored online.

[High Lord Tolkien]

If you use DuckDuckGo stuff like that won't happen. I have no problem finding things I need with this search engine. And everything I search is not stored online.

I've heard good things about duckduck. I'll try it. Thanks.

[Fist and Faith]

And everything I search is not stored online.

That's exactly what they want you to believe.

[Vraith]

If you use DuckDuckGo stuff like that won't happen. I have no problem finding things I need with this search engine. And everything I search is not stored online.

I've heard good things about duckduck. I'll try it. Thanks.

It partially protects some privacy. But I found it highly annoying to use...and the annoyance was higher than the protection...I mean, it blocks certain data issues---but your ISP, or instance, still knows every single thing you do and saves every scrap of data...

Anyway, there are other things...for instance, if you use Chrome browser uBlock Origin alone will stop you getting most targeted/particular ads and some other things.

But DDG might not annoy you, if it doesn't, it's decent.

[Zarathustra]

And everything I search is not stored online.

That's exactly what they want you to believe.

Well, regardless, I'm not getting targeted ads based on my searches. If they have some other reason for storing my searches, it's not visibly affecting me. And if they aren't making money off of it, I don't really see the incentive for them to do it.

But maybe you were just being funny?

ISP, or instance, still knows every single thing you do and saves every scrap of data...

How do you know? How does that benefit them to pay for storage of all that info? I don't doubt it, because of the NSA or something like that, I just don't see the benefit to them unless it's required by the government.

[Vraith]

How do you know?

How does that benefit them to pay for storage of all that info?

It's not a secret, Z. I haven't paid close attention in a while...I don't THINK your ISP sees/saves every post you've made on KW...but they do know every time you come here [and everywhere else you go] even if your browser doesn't.

And they SELL that info...usually aggregated/anonymous. But it doesn't have to be, and our gov't has recently stopped/removed privacy protections.
Other ways, too...for instance, in the discussion on open internet:
You were pretty strongly in favor of allowing throttling/fast-laning/all that crap.
How do you think your ISP knows who is paying them on both ends [you and the content/service], and how much speed for which places they're required to "promise" you [[heh--they aren't required to make sure you actually GET that speed...just that that speed is POSSIBLE]] Cuz they track it. All of it.
Of course SOME data is necessary for the system to even WORK. But they save several layers deeper than that.
If you use DDG to hunt down some nice shoe-fetish vids, DDG won't know, your significant other or your curious kid can't check your history to see it...but your ISP knows.

[Fist and Faith]

But maybe you were just being funny?

I was trying, anyway.

[Fist and Faith]

But maybe you were just being funny?

I was trying, anyway.

[Skyweir]

Thats all true re data collection .. but here you cant easily legislate without addressing privacy issues.

Its a hoop in the process that must be jumped.

So if an adult was subject to cyber bullying .. it would be difficult and arguably impracticable to get legislation up that involved personal or even simple identity data disclosure.

Its a nod to the need to safeguard privacy .. as it is indeed meaningless compared to the amount of data that is voluntarily and deceptively collected via these systems.

Someones discovered an algorithmic gold mine and are profiting from our combined internet usage... ie our interests, likes, dislikes etc.

Still back to the issue .. legislating age restrictions for the internet.

I agree with Cail .. the last decade has been spent converting hard copy sources to soft copy sources. Most students access those sources, well here via authorised school sites .. most here have soft resources available via their electronic libraries ...

So carte blanche banning may have to allow approved internet access.. and authorised sites.

[peter]

Look - every device that is capable of accessing the internet has to be registered to a user; there is surely no serious bar to insertion of an age limiting legislation at this stage? I use a phone from which I can call, text and use as a calculator, but it has no internet access and no need for registration. The kind of activities that lead to the deaths and other tragedies we are talking about are not carried out on the same devices for which 'research' for school homework is done (besides which any such research can easily be carried out in controlled environments - and if my knowledge of pre-adult behaviour is anything to go by the time spent on such research equates to minutes per day compared to the time spent on social media). An eighteen years plus age restriction on handheld devices with internet access would go a massive way toward combating the problem and yeild other positive side effects to boot.

[Skyweir]

Ok so you are talking just hand held devices now?

I will note that I can do everything on my iPhone that I can on my lap top though .. but ok.

Im not being obtuse .. Im addressing practicalities.

So what if a kid has an iPad .. or an ultralight lap top? All the devices are capable of accessing the internet.

Further, I know this is cold but what is the suicide rate resulting from cyber bullying?

And cyber bullying isnt the only source of bullying. Age restrictions for the internet wont prevent deaths resulting from schoolyard bullying or workplace bullying.

Domestic abuse is yet another source of bullying..

What about LGBT kids that take their own lives .. thats a huge issue.

My point .. it is noble to seek the safeguarding of children and youth .. and its absolutely right. No question but the issue is far larger. And legislating age restrictions may help but not fully address the issue.

And how will it be policed, enforced? If this is the measure you seek, so many more questions need to be addressed.

[peter]

No- I'm talking all unsupervised access to the internet, but I maintain mobile phones with internet capabilities are the place where most damage is done.

It isn't just about cyber bullying; it's about this, and paedophiles grooming, and pornography, and gaming addiction, and debt and self-harn imagery and terrorism and religious indoctrination.......

......... it's about protecting children in a wild-west environment that they simply do not have the experience and judgement to be let loose in.

The internet is a library where every book, film, record, shopping mall and public meeting place that ever existed is contained. One day it will be seen as a measure of our nievity that we were prepared to present it to our youth unfettered in the way it is.

All of these other forms of bullying are tragedies in their own right - and all made easier to conduct and worse in their effects by social media.

Again I say, it is not about policing or expectation of enforcement any more than anti smoking or drinking legislation is; it's about supporting parental control by state sanctioning of their instructions. It's about changing mindsets.

[Avatar]

And here's me feeling like the net is so regulated and monitored and controlled and restricted now, compared to the good old days.

I think all of that is pointless. You can't legislate harm away.

Rather educate people on how to deal with all those things than try to shield them from all exposure.

If you don't learn that kind of thing, you're vulnerable no matter if you're 12 or 20.

--A