Unbound DNS if compiled with --with-libnghttp2 can listen for DoH and your Unbound/Pihole can forward to any destination you desire. This is what it looks like on my firewall:

    # https://doh-int.mydomain.net/dns-query
        interface: [ip of lan port]@443
        interface: [ip of wifi port]@443
        https-port: 443
        http-max-streams: 220
        tls-service-key: "/etc/unbound/keys.d/unbound_server.key"
        tls-service-pem: "/etc/unbound/keys.d/unbound_server.pem"

Null routing the open DoH resolvers is just having a startup script that reads a list of all their IP addresses and

    ip route add blackhole "${IP}" 2>/dev/null

People will argue that DoH can run on anything which is true but all the major resolvers will always use dedicated IP addresses as to not risk blocking CDN end points.

If the childs account is not able to gain admin privs then their ability to change settings can be disabled.

99% of people have no idea what this means, but they do understand voting.

Yup I was just replying to the .001% that was discussing it.

OK but we're talking about a general social problem (parents understandably don't want their kids corupte dby adult stuff, and some adult services vendors are unscrupulous but the internet makes it easy for them to hide.

I personally think this current version of the legislation is a good compromise. Tech workarounds are fine for the few of us that understand the relevant technology (though I have never bothered to compile DNS in my life and have no plans to do so in the future), but they are simply not practical for most people. Every time I hear someone suggesting this sort of thing I find myself tempted to say 'why worry about legislation? If you don't like what it mandates you can just write your own operating system.'

Of course this would not be helpful because writing your own OS is extremely hard beyond classroom/toy examples. And likewise, tech workarounds and even parental controls are hard for most consumers - partly by design. I have an xbox console and have been trying to figure out why it keeps freezing on certain apps for months now. I suspect a telemetry problem but it's just a guess, there isn't really any way to look at logs so it's a trial and error process because most consumer hardware/application vendors want their products to be black boxes.

> I personally think this current version of the legislation is a good compromise.

I don't think it is a good compromise. It seems to cover the wrong use cases.

My use cases have nothing to do with children on any level. Why would I want to submit to government restrictions? That makes zero sense.

It's as if the right-to-repair-movement would suddenly be undermined by a lobbyist advocating how restrictions are great. Or Jackie Chan suddenly praising the sinomarxist mono-party.

I'm sure than intelligent person like yourself understands that a lot of voters have kids and prioritize feeling that their kids are safe, even if those feelings are not always grounded in rationality. Most people shy away from complexity.

Yes, but equally so, some intelligent voters (who might've moved out of CA by now, as moving might be the best way to solve that disconnect) might also believe that we should be living in a Republic (and the government should not impose majority-favoured restrictions to the detriment of minority) rather than unrestricted Democracy. .

Well, you can't.

Like no past generation could stop their kids.

> no past generation could stop their kids

Past generations absolutely protected their kids from cigarettes and alcohol. A gate doesn’t have to be 100% effective to have net benefits.

If one kid is able to bypass the system it means it's zero percent effective. Same thing with alcohol, and cigarettes. Especially if it means I have to show my ID to buy those things.

> If one kid is able to bypass the system it means it's zero percent effective

No. Like, obviously no. That’s not how effectiveness is ever measured.

It feels more complicated.

Some kids getting access to booze here and there with planning and coordination is different from kids walking into a liquor store or bar whenever they want.

It's literally all or nothing[1]. Either measures are 100 percent effective or they are completely broken and should not exist.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_(psychology)

Shit thanks for pointing that out. My door lock isn't 100% effective at stopping thieves, so I guess I can get rid of that annoying thing. Will be nice to never worry about being locked out again!

are you… are you /s-ing right now? it’s unclear to me whether you’re being satirical/sarcastic or not and i want to check before i point out a thing.

There is never a simple solution to a complex problem, although there are many complex solutions to simple problems.

Guess we should get rid of murder and rape laws, right?

I'm not saying parents shouldn't try.

But like your examples, it's not guaranteed to work.

Install a DNS filter. Firefox circumvented that? Smart kid :)

Censorship circumvention might be a good skill to have in the near future.

Well in the past there were laws banning the selling of cigarettes and alcohol to minors. Selling alcohol to a minor can cause you to lose your liquor license. With much of the online content being free and not involving a physical product it has become significantly harder for a parent to protect their children.

> Past generations absolutely protected their kids from cigarettes and alcohol.

I'm sorry, but what? Cigarettes, sure. Alcohol? Binge drinking was absolutely rampant at my school, and I don't think I'm alone. Don't get me wrong, some parents just buried their heads in the sand, but unless you're giving them a breathalyzer when they get home and severely punishing them all the time it's pretty hard to prevent.

Yes, but when I go to the grocery store, U don't buy alcohol or cigarettes (because I don't drink or smoke), and no one cards me. Even if I never accessed a single site like the ones being described, and despite there being no kids who have access to my devices because I don't have any children, according to these laws every OS I install is required to force me to provide proof of my age. That's a huge escalation over any of those other checks, and I'd be similarly against any check that required anyone to present id to literally enter a store that happens to sell alcohol or cigarettes.

(Yes, you might get carded before you can go into a bar or a club, but we're talking about every possible device that can connect to the internet here; that's a lot closer to the grocery store than a bar or club terms of how much of a staple this is for most people's daily lives at this point. Cutting off my ability to access to my bank account, contact doctor, or pay my bills should not be something that should require additional steps because my devices which no children ever used could theoretically be used for a child to try to watch porn).

> but we're talking about every possible device that can connect to the internet here

I agree these proposals are garbage. But if everyone who can credibly say that is busy trying to block any age gating, this is what we’re going to get.

> But if everyone who can credibly say that is busy trying to block any age gating, this is what we’re going to get.

I'm certainly not busy trying to block a bunch of hypothetical policies that no one has proposed when there are garbage ones that are literally getting pushed right now. It sounds more like too many of the people who recognize the harm of this policy are too busy trying to claim that the burden for coming up with a non-garbage policy should be on the people who fundamentally disagree with that framing.

> the burden for coming up with a non-garbage policy should be on the people who fundamentally disagree with that framing

Things a good way to put it. Yes. Regardless of whether you disagree with that framing, that is the frame that’s been set and is being run with. So you can make theoretical arguments against the framing. Or practical arguments against the policies within the frame.

Just like no past generation had so much information so readily available. One quick quip can always be rebutted by another quick quip, but it doesn't really move the conversation along in any meaningful manner.

With all due respect.... this younger generation (zoomers and "alpha") is on average utterly clueless when it comes to technology.

Fluent in pod tide trends and latest sticker packs, but utterly unable to comprehend anything not working, be it wifi, proxy, dns, their phone's mobile connection. Unable to even ask the question "_why_ is something not working" or "what can I possibly do with this arcane message obscuring my $app's screen".

I know that's a quite broad generalisation but I see this in my kids' school across basically all their peers, and I can observe it online.

Anything broken -> passive hang up until fixed (of course if they cna talk to their bestie about the issue, this is what they do).

You could block the default DoH services for Firefox, I reckon.

If your kids are in the smart 1% who can bypass your authority, they will. Be proud. For the rest, we don't need a police atate

> what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something like this?

Nothing. VPNs exist (including free ones), some of classmates will have unlocked devices, etc.

Next question?

Teens for sure bypass all restrictions. Teens are young adults. My suggestions are for small children. Once a small child evolves and adapts to their surroundings, they too will one day bypass things. Reward them when they do this, it means they're smart and you did a good job.

block all VPNs?

You mean all vpn protocols? Otherwise in the next step you'll call to ban of all dedicated servers, vpses and compute from hyperscalers.

Also make sure to block all OSes allowing to install apps from outside the app store, lest someone uses a private socks proxy on their free Cloudflare Worker account.

Make sure to ban/backdoor all the encryption protocols so the traffic not yet blocked can be analysed. And ban all free OSes or someone will write a "black market" encryption/communication protocol.

There's insanity in your request and it needs to be called out.

You but them smartphones, tables, laptops, and internet access and then complain there is too much access?

Yeah, why should it not be desireble to give them access to the good properties of such devices and the internet?

What are the good properties that justify giving kids smart phones?

How much of your current knowledge would you simply lack were it not for the Internet?

It is trivial for a parent to gather materials for the kids without exposing them to billions of strangers/companies with who knows what intent toward them.

You describe a use case for you. That's fine.

Here we talk about use cases for EVERYONE. I don't see how your use case is fine for me, because I personally do not agree with it on any level at all whatsoever. You believe in restriction. I don't. There is no common ground here.

> It's not realistic for me to be watching over their shoulders 24/7

Is this your job? At which age will you stop monitoring them?

> what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see

99%? Where do you get those numbers from?

Besides, what stuff anyway? Even then the issue isn't about your kids. It is about laws for EVERYONE.

Support getting rid of Citizens United and support your representatives to support enforcing antitrust.

This is the main problem that needs to be addressed. Everything else is just a byproduct of it. If you support the by product of what was created by conditions that are not being address, you only make the problem worse.

That's an interesting problem. Even if you have full control over your children's devices they can still simply toggle the DoH feature back on unless you do complicated enterprise style device management things.

However DoH isn't obfuscated and in order to operate the list of resolvers that firefox uses must be published somewhere. It follows that you should be able to filter the major DoH providers at your gateway.

> what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something like this?

The better question is "Why do I need to give up privacy on my devices that no children ever use and are used for all sorts of mundane things that are entirely unrelated to what you're trying to protect your children from to solve this problem?" The solution being proposed here is to require ID checks at the OS installation level; this would be like requiring me to flash my ID when I walk out of my house because kids would have to go outside if they were going to try to buy alcohol.

> what can I do to keep them away from stuff 99% of people agree isn't for children to see, without something like this?

> before they're ready to handle it

You can restrict any access for the network to them. Extra bonus, this will save your child from addiction.

...unless they go and visit Mikey over the fence, whose parents are cool unlike you and let him – willingly or not – wank to hardcore porn at 11.

funny, but seriously.. Caring about child safety is not only about restricting network access, but also choosing the right (read as safe/predictable/stable) place for living.

I understand that this is not always possible, but... it's spectrum - try to reach maximum and do your best.

Also, consider that I don't have any experience in raising a little human, so, probably, I'm talking nonsense

Don't you control the client devices? What's stopping you from disabling DoH? If you use your own DNS servers, they can just use DoH in the background. There is much less threat using unencrypted protocols on your own encrypted network.