> (Once it's tracked and officially acted on, it's going to be a sex offender case like sexting became, right?)

I'm not 100%, but I think recent guidelines in the UK advised that is an underage person is caught "sexting" with another underage person of the same age, they'll be no criminal repurcusions.

That's right. The Crown Prosecution Service (the national body which prosecutes essentially all criminal cases on behalf of the state) takes the view that charging under-18s for genuinely consensual sexual activity is generally not in the public interest. This policy (and guidance on essentially all other charging decisions) is helpfully published online as part of the CPS legal manual.

It's still a matter of prosecutorial discretion rather than being actually legal, though.

What does that have to do with sexting?

Because it's a sexual activity, illegal if done with pictures of under 18s (but not generally considered in the public interest to prosecute by the CPS if the pics are of the perpetrators themselves and it was consensual - so no "revenge porn" setting or whatever).

> Is that a real problem though?

Yes. I search for children's content on Youtube. Youtube returns children's content. We click to play, and I get a pre-roll ad for a horror film, or alcohol, or gambling.

An iOS app advertises itself as suitable for ages 4+. It contains ads. Those ads are sometimes for gambling, or alcohol services. I'd say that app isn't suitable for children, and the uk regulator is looking at that.

Wait, but is that related to the proposal? Not my native language and all, but I thought this is basically age-gating .. porn sites.

If you have a random app (unrelated, not a porn site) showing ads (unrelated unless a porn site) of alcohol services (not sure what that is, but .. unrelated/not porn), how does this apply?

How would you age-gate ads? Wouldn't that require a new X-KID-PRESENT: 1 http header so that each and every ad network can suppress ~questionable~ content? In fact: That's a great thought experiment: Is a site that serves ads that might contain 'adult' ads at times a porn site according to the British government and would need to verify that the visitor is of age?

> That's a great thought experiment: Is a site that serves ads that might contain 'adult' ads at times a porn site according to the British government and would need to verify that the visitor is of age?

The simplest solution is to just require ID from everyone everywhere. They'll figure it out sooner or later if you let them build the infrastructure now.

Age gate all adverts ;)

> How would you age-gate ads?

They currently are age-gated. The age gating clearly isn't working. Advertisers in the UK are not allowed to target children with alcohol or gambling ads.

I don't care how it happens, but showing alcohol ads to children in apps for children because the parent has a credit card and owns the phone is sub-optimal.

Maybe, yeah. But is it neglect on the part of the developer (What are the consequences? You installed the app, no?), on the part of the parent not supervising (I'm kinda defending this position in this thread) or a reason to fix this with a generic law?

I'm not trying to be difficult, I really think that it's the parents' responsibility. And if ads are considered harmful in your household, don't use ad based apps / use an ad blocker? That should solve the problem on a local level.

Edit: It just came to my mind that ad supported apps are often/usually free.. Is that the case here? Because I seriously dislike the idea of blaming a developer of a free application for different ideas about morality or a bad choice ('copy/paste some ad integration code' - stupidity vs malice?) in implementing a way to make some money.

> Yes. I search for children's content on Youtube. Youtube returns children's content. We click to play, and I get a pre-roll ad for a horror film, or alcohol, or gambling.

Out in the real world, people will think you're weird and/or a religious nut if you don't drink at a business function. So why should I worry about my daughter seeing an advertisement for alcohol before her episode of Paw Patrol starts playing?

Because I don't want my son to think that drinking is considered something he should do without knowing limits (although there are warnings, he can't read). Because gambling is a designer addiction and I don't want him to install such an app before he can know the consequences of his actions.

But mostly because I don't want him waking up at night screaming from nightmares. I like my dearly won sleep.

Do you understand how selfish you sound, or has the magic of parenthood vaporized all of your self-awareness?

You made the choice to have a child. You made the choice to entertain them with YouTube. The possibility of them seeing an advertisement for alcohol (my goodness! Your son will turn into a tattooed hooligan in a week!) is not sufficient reason for handing the internet over to state censorship.

In short, stop trying to make society raise your kid for you. Give independence and self-responsibility a try, you might like it.

You don't seem to understand the context: In the UK internet advertising is already censored, and has been for some years.

In the UK advertisers are forbidden from advertising alcohol to children.

Here's the regulators page for adverts aimed at children: https://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Hot-Topics/Children-an...

Here's their page for adverts about alcohol (note that some of those ads were online): https://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Hot-Topics/Alcohol.asp...

There's currently a gap in regulation. App makers have apps targeted at children (and with an age range of eg 4+); those apps carry ads; those ad networks use information about the phone owner to decide the age suitability of ad.

This loophole is likely to close in 2017 or 2018

I can't help but find amusing their statistic that "30% of young people have been bothered by an ad in the last 12 months". I don't know about the UK, but at least here down south, the really disturbing ads are the official ones, particularly the safe driving campaigns. The Spanish ads in particular are often very graphic and gut-wrenching.

I do agree that apps (or videos) directed at children shouldn't show non-child-safe ads. I just don't see what does that have to do with the proposal under discussion.

The less you talk about drinking the more he'll hide it from you. Ditto with gambling and sex. My parents talked about everything besides sex and I never drank or gambled in excess. And I'll leave this post at that.

Have you ever spoke to someone dependent on alcohol? Because the vast majority of those people say that they were brought up around alcohol.

I'm not trying to say that it causes alcoholism. I'm just responding to someone dumping a useless anecdote.

I guess my original post wasn't very constructive. I wanted to say that seeing ads probably doesn't cause alcoholism, but OTOH, being unable to handle the thought that your precious snowflake could get to know about X too early is a sure way to lose his trust if he does get to know. And the OP indeed seemed a bit paranoid.

How about you deal with your irrelevant problem on your own?

Maybe don't let your kid that DOESNT EVEN READ yet zombiefy itself?

Maybe complain to Google/Apple about particular ads? Install some ad blocking software? Pay for youtube red? Purchase the ad-less versions of the apps?

Basically don't think that your inability to deal with the world warrants nationwide heavy handed regulation, please

There is a simpler solution. Ban advertisements for alcohol and gambling products like many countries already do.

You can already solve this problem - install uBlock.

Adblock

I don't think that help DanBC's problem with ads in iOS apps though.

One of the downsides of apps vs the open web is that you lose control of the experience.

With the open web the user can decide to remove sign up/social media/breaking news/in your face modals and pop-overs.

It's certainly easy to stumble across unsavoury content - I have done so accidentally in the past and was amazed how easy it was.

I can't say how much of a problem it is, but then I suspect nobody can.

As a parent (and yes, as stated already, I do limit internet access) I know that most parents definitely wouldn't want these things to be viewed early in life - I have no problem with adults viewing whatever they want, although I would suggest that people who constantly search for the NSFL content are possibly not well adjusted.

I don't claim to know the answer - I just get the impression that these options are always pushed away due to 'freedom' but there is little alternative offered to help society maintain a healthy mental balance.

If you want to filter traffic at home, I don't think it's that hard. There's a whole industry trying to solve that problem. Google "internet family filter" and choose one. Your ISP probably provides one as well (my last 3 ISPs did) I'll likely use one as well when I have kids. But I'm absolutely against any government program to enforce the same.

But my experience is much different. Apart from sexualised models advertising things, I've not run into anything (by accident) I wouldn't share at a family table.

It is SO easy to break NetNanny an the like. They don't work. Any 12 year old determined kid can figure it out. MAYBE if you combined a family friendly ISP with a parental controlled fire wall, AND several layers of software/browser based filtering this could be accomplished.

Putting this aside, no matter how much you protect your children at home, you can't protect them away from home.

"It is SO easy to break NetNanny an the like"

IIRC, people in china have no problem using a vpn or whatever to bypass the great firewall? Why would government purchases blocking software be more effective than parent purchased blocking software?

mobiuscog's comment was in the context of accidental content, not one you want to find. There's no solution for the later.

And I'm not sure stacking protection helps. There's going to be a massive overlap in the lists of those services.

We agree that government is not the right way of solving this issue, but it's incredibly easy to have images to show up that are far from appropriate for children... or that you would share at the table

> I have done so accidentally in the past

Did your wife believe you?