News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verificatio... by Ajedi32 on Tuesday May 26, 2026 @12:48PM (#48282295)
The standard OP is describing doesn't exist. So whether it "fails to achieve most of the social goals" is yet to be determined. Blocking unrated content seems like a pretty desirable feature to me. Why wouldn't that be one of the "social goals"?
Re:California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verificatio... by fc417fc802 on Tuesday May 26, 2026 @03:39PM (#48284919)
You can turn on filtering and subscribe to a whitelist today. People don't seem to be satisfied with that solution. Why not? The answer to that question is what needs to be solved.
Re:California moves to exempt Linux from its age-verificatio... by Ajedi32 on Tuesday May 26, 2026 @03:50PM (#48285054)
There's no web standard for labeling content, so "subscribe to a whitelist" today means crappy page or network-level content blocks implemented by a third party tool that has no understanding of the actual content on the page or application. That's not at all what's being proposed in this thread.

With a universal labeling standard the UX would be much better, and there'd be a much greater incentive for website owners to participate (they'd be implementing a universal standard, not adding support for one particular parental control tool).