by jtmarl1n 4 hours ago
Parental controls are extremely weak on all the major platforms. Apple, Google, Amazon, etc. they all have them so they can check the box but they are not good and certainly not a solution.
That said, it is better than nothing, but that’s about it.
You can control which apps children can install, how much time they are allowed to use those apps a day, decide if they have access to the web, which web sites they can visit, and decide who they are allowed to communicate with.
What features are missing that makes everyone giving up their privacy a better option?
granular control over push notifications would be great
see: recent article about Snap sending pushes to kids during school hours
> Parental controls are extremely weak on all the major platforms.
So pass laws and enact regulations that require them to be made strong.
Not only does this moot the demands for capture of photo ID, beefing up the parental controls that already exist in every major OS means that -say- adults caring for their dementia-damaged parents can restrict those adults' access to things that could be very dangerous to them and/or their finances. A strictly-age-based "protection" scheme absolutely does not do that.
One might argue that one could "merely" require a "This adult is seriously intellectually damaged. [0] Make sure to protect them from scammers and predators!" flag that can be flipped on by a Registered Caretaker. I humbly suggest that that is information you should never disclose to a company that makes its money by trading in dossiers of its users.
[0] Dear downvoters: I understand that this isn't the PC term for the effects of these sorts of ailments. If you've ever had to watch over and care for someone who gets cored out bad by this shit, it's hard to describe it as anything else.