If the person behind that false identity is using it with malicious intent then they should absolutely be dealt with accordingly. But if they are not doing anything already illegal or otherwise untoward then they should be free to use whatever identity they wish. Just like if they were using their true identity really.
There is already a 100% effective filter that stops young people from accessing what their parents deem inappropriate content online. It's called not letting them have unsupervised access to the internet until you trust them.
There is already a 100% effective filter that stops young people from accessing what their parents deem inappropriate content online. It's called not letting them have unsupervised access to the internet until you trust them.
There is already a 100% effective filter that stops young people from accessing what their parents deem inappropriate content online. It's called not letting them have unsupervised access to the internet until you trust them.
How do you ensure that though, when you can access the internet on smartphones you can buy for as little as £50? I imagine a lot of kids have them, or have mates with one, or they might go to their friends house and their parents may be less restrictive and might not have filters on their computers etc.
I'm not a parent and don't really want to be but I know enough to know that you can't really stop kids from potentially accessing things, its not as simple as restrict their access at home and they'll never see things. Plus there's dodgy content on TV, let alone the 'net.
There is no suitable age as everyone matures differently. Parents need to educate their kids on the dangers of the Internet and only allow unsupervised access when they are sure that their kids can handle it.
There is no suitable age as everyone matures differently. Parents need to educate their kids on the dangers of the Internet and only allow unsupervised access when they are sure that their kids can handle it.
The usual cliched replies. When will it be ok to allow my daughter to have unsupervised access to child porn, animal porn etc. at what age should she be let loose to access this.? 15? 16 ? When?
What age would you deem mature enough to accesses and understand this. .?
How do you ensure that though, when you can access the internet on smartphones you can buy for as little as £50? I imagine a lot of kids have them, or have mates with one, or they might go to their friends house and their parents may be less restrictive and might not have filters on their computers etc.
I'm not a parent and don't really want to be but I know enough to know that you can't really stop kids from potentially accessing things, its not as simple as restrict their access at home and they'll never see things. Plus there's dodgy content on TV, let alone the 'net.
This is where education and, you know, actually talking to children comes in. Parents need to take responsibility for educating their kids on the dangers instead of expecting everyone else to do it for them.
The usual cliched replies. When will it be ok to allow my daughter to have unsupervised access to child porn, animal porn etc. at what age should she be let loose to access this.? 15? 16 ? When?
The usual cliched replies. When will it be ok to allow my daughter to have unsupervised access to child porn, animal porn etc. at what age should she be let loose to access this.? 15? 16 ? When?
What age would you deem mature enough to accesses and understand this. .?
As her mother, these are questions you should have the answer to.
Hell that's twice I have agreed with you today. Why all the need for anonymity ? What do people need to say under a pseudo name that they cannot say under there own name?
If the person behind that false identity is using it with malicious intent then they should absolutely be dealt with accordingly. But if they are not doing anything already illegal or otherwise untoward then they should be free to use whatever identity they wish. Just like if they were using their true identity really.
I agree with this. Having just run the mill of being accused of being someone else it gets very annoying. I am not the person a couple of people say but if i was what has she done wrong apart from piss people off? There is a difference between that and women who make fake profiles to cream money off of men "rinsing" etc that is criminal and should be dealt with when they are caught.
ok so how about if you wanted to create a facebook account for example, the law would be that facebook had to check your identity via electoral roll or by sending verification via post to your home address first, for you to reply to? Sort of like how they set up online or telephone banking? I know it wouldn't be popular because it would delay the time it takes to sign up and get posting. Also I'd have to delete my three fake facebook profiles, which I actually just use to send myself items in games requests on my main account.
I don't mean to be rude but that's ludicrous.
First you have to convince a US corporation to bow to a UK law that will cost them a huge amount of money. If the UK made it law for them to comply, they would simply say "forget it" and we would have no Facebook. It would be ridiculously expensive and time consuming and they would say "well bugger off then".
But here is the greater problem, you would need a centralised system to check identities (by post, forget it, lead times and expense would be astronomical for that alone and kill all social media sites in this country stone dead).
You would then need to apply this to every community/social media site in the world; which also means getting every country in the world to subscribe to this idea. Doing otherwise is pissing in the wind.
The long and short of it is that you would need to get every country and every website in the world to comply and then have everything that comes with it.
And then, for arguments sakes; let's say this is achieved, (although it would probably be unconstitutional so would never pass in the US; where most all these sites are based), welcome to the most expensive project the world has ever known; even to implement; let alone operate.
I'm sorry but, its not workable. It would be logistically impossible, financially impossible and would destroy communities stone dead.
No to a ban or criminalising using anonymous credentials, it's what you do with any false identity that may lead to criminal charges, not the act of having a false identity.
This is where education and, you know, actually talking to children comes in. Parents need to take responsibility for educating their kids on the dangers instead of expecting everyone else to do it for them.
Talking about things is one thing. It's quite important but if people try to warn teens off things then it can always have the opposite effect. I guess you just have to trust them to not seek out much that could upset or embarrass them?.
Comments
Why online anonymity should be protected by law.
So what in your opinion is a suitable age?
How do you ensure that though, when you can access the internet on smartphones you can buy for as little as £50? I imagine a lot of kids have them, or have mates with one, or they might go to their friends house and their parents may be less restrictive and might not have filters on their computers etc.
I'm not a parent and don't really want to be but I know enough to know that you can't really stop kids from potentially accessing things, its not as simple as restrict their access at home and they'll never see things. Plus there's dodgy content on TV, let alone the 'net.
There is no suitable age as everyone matures differently. Parents need to educate their kids on the dangers of the Internet and only allow unsupervised access when they are sure that their kids can handle it.
The usual cliched replies. When will it be ok to allow my daughter to have unsupervised access to child porn, animal porn etc. at what age should she be let loose to access this.? 15? 16 ? When?
What age would you deem mature enough to accesses and understand this. .?
This is where education and, you know, actually talking to children comes in. Parents need to take responsibility for educating their kids on the dangers instead of expecting everyone else to do it for them.
And that's not cliched?
Jesus wept.
not to charge you, just to verify name/address/age
if people knew they might get caught i bet 90%+ would stop
Probably true. Sadly.
People feigning an illnesses, even the death of family members etc in order to gain sympathy from others for example.
Haha, you don't actually think I was asking posters on DS for answers do you:o:D too funny.
Less painful.
I agree with this. Having just run the mill of being accused of being someone else it gets very annoying. I am not the person a couple of people say but if i was what has she done wrong apart from piss people off? There is a difference between that and women who make fake profiles to cream money off of men "rinsing" etc that is criminal and should be dealt with when they are caught.
It was a rhetorical question.
I don't mean to be rude but that's ludicrous.
First you have to convince a US corporation to bow to a UK law that will cost them a huge amount of money. If the UK made it law for them to comply, they would simply say "forget it" and we would have no Facebook. It would be ridiculously expensive and time consuming and they would say "well bugger off then".
But here is the greater problem, you would need a centralised system to check identities (by post, forget it, lead times and expense would be astronomical for that alone and kill all social media sites in this country stone dead).
You would then need to apply this to every community/social media site in the world; which also means getting every country in the world to subscribe to this idea. Doing otherwise is pissing in the wind.
The long and short of it is that you would need to get every country and every website in the world to comply and then have everything that comes with it.
And then, for arguments sakes; let's say this is achieved, (although it would probably be unconstitutional so would never pass in the US; where most all these sites are based), welcome to the most expensive project the world has ever known; even to implement; let alone operate.
I'm sorry but, its not workable. It would be logistically impossible, financially impossible and would destroy communities stone dead.
That's up to the parents to decide. No one knows their children better surely?.
Talking about things is one thing. It's quite important but if people try to warn teens off things then it can always have the opposite effect. I guess you just have to trust them to not seek out much that could upset or embarrass them?.