Scanning phones to detect child abuse evidence is harmful, 'magical' thinking

In this case, I think it's your third party app that has the issue, not HN.

I'm saying that by fixing the mistake of ever letting minors onto the internet in the first place, we fix the problem of governments trying to use child safety as a reason to spy on adults.

And no, restricting children from the internet won't end child abuse that occurs on the local level, but that's a whole other can of worms. Besides, it's often friends, family and trusted loved ones who do that sort of abuse as I understand. Or at least that's what they keep telling us.

Yeah, so... I think what we have here is a situation where different people living in different places have different things going on. Where I am, people still use phonebook ads, and stuff like that. restaurants are still spending thousands on that sort of thing for example. Why? Hotels and motels. Their customers don't always have internet available somehow. Even with cellphones being practically ubiquitous nowadays.

Going further north here in Canada, you can actually still find payphones in some places where services like internet are lacking. But that's more of an exception now, I must admit.

> There's all sorts of specialty stores that used to be local, but you can't buy local anymore, because they lost to internet retail. There does happen to be a typewriter repair near me, but not near most others, I might be able to get enough computer parts at BestBuy, but maybe not.

This is slowly becoming a thing here in Canada too, but where I am in one of the bigger cities we have up here, most local businesses are still in business. I guess we can thank our Liberal government for that one, since they basically bailed out a lot of the businesses with all that money they gave everyone.

But now with the interest rate hikes and inflation rate that comes with all that easy money... We'll see what happens. A lot of places did go under as well, but that was for varying reasons that are hard to speak about in a single discussion. Restaurants again, for instance; are touch and go by my opinion. I think the worst ones lasted through it, cause they didn't mind cutting corners that they could while following the rules they couldn't cut corners on.

Meanwhile, the ones who followed all the rules and letter of the law, did worse. And so we lost some places that way. I wouldn't be surprised if its mostly the same for other small businesses of similar nature, following the rules and what not.

My current job for instance, is one such place. They had to shut down for many months, just so they could guarantee they could stay in business once they re-opened. Many places tried to just stay open... as I understand. This place runs on a reservations model, so Uber Eats and other such companies definitely weren't going to save their bacon. Not like other places I have worked at, and have potential lawsuits against if I decide to spend the money to take them to court. (I'm not kidding when I say a lot of places seemed to just say fuck it to the rules and regulations.)

Anyways, that's all side tracked topic. Getting back to the main point. Internet.

Yes, it's proving to be quite useful to society in many ways. So many, that people are starting to have a hard time figuring out how to live life without it.

And so I think that's a perfect reason to make sure that children understand what life is like without it. That way if/when it goes down; they aren't caught by surprise when they are older and have no idea how to live life anymore.

Besides, No one was really using typewriters anymore in the 90's... except maybe some people like me. (I'm weird, okay!) I learned to type on a typewriter before I got a word processor, and that was before I got a computer. The pay off is I have a blazing fast typing speed now, but holy shit were those things awful. The mechanisms for typewriters basically had a max speed. If you tried to go faster, you would jam the machine, very easily. Word processors weren't much better, since you could type faster, but you had a single little LCD screen to see your words being typed...

Computers were a god send, but even then I didn't have internet until later because all we had access to was dial up; and my mother refused to share the phoneline with the internet access. (it was also very expensive to have it, or to get a second line just for the internet.)

So we went for years without internet before getting dial up, and then everyone else was on DSL while we still had a 56k modem in use.

Anyways, the point I am trying to make here is this.

If there is a will, there is a way. People will find a way, once there is a will to do it. I guarantee it.

But we will never have a reason to do it, if we just keep on going with the flow of things. Not always a bad thing that, going with the flow.

But that's also how buffalo jumps operate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo_jump

> Are you suggesting the laws of one country should be enforced on all countries?

> If you are, keep in mind the US is less than 5% of the worlds population, so it’s unlikely to be their laws which get enforced. ---------------------------------------------------

{Please see the word "if" in my comment.}

Alright, so I did. And I found it. And the way you used it is not in the same function as you are trying to imply at the moment. They way you used it is implying that "If I am suggesting X, then I must be in the US" since your stats you quote are from the US, thus you are implying I must be from the US.

That said, I accept that you meant to use it a different manner. But that is how it comes off the way you wrote what you did write.

{You think Australia, New Zealand, Belgium, etc. etc. shouldn't be included?}

I never said they shouldn't. I am merely saying that the article is about the UK and Europe. Belgium may be part of Europe, as per your list, but the other countries you mention are not.

Also, just because X country does something different, doesn't mean other countries have to conform to their ideas of what is right or wrong either. Just because they do things that other countries see as backwards, wrong, immoral or otherwise unethical; take your pick... doesn't mean those countries have to accept it.

I do not agree with allowing children in bars. I don't see it as needed. It's not a place meant for children (anymore at least), and just because some of them have old customs, doesn't mean they need to continue them.

Just like how just because kids used to drink beer back in the day because it was safer than water once upon a time ago, doesn't mean they need to continue to do so. Water is safer now.

Besides, most of those bars that have kids in them in those places, probably also serve food as a local restaurant, much like how my old town had a pub doing similar. We went to the local bar to have dinner, we were to go straight to the restaurant side, and behave. We were never allowed to go into the bar side, except to enter/leave the building, since that was the only way in or out anyways for customers.

Now, are we good here?

Perhaps. But then, when my parents recognized they couldn't sufficiently make ends meet while living in one town; they did the only thing they knew would work.

They moved.

I know, that's not always possible for everyone, since people tend to have such a 'I can't do X' mindset. But they didn't. They sold everything not truly needed, and made it happen. That meant that we went without some things for a while, while we lived in the bush for a year or so, while dad got his job prospects back in order, and mom got the finances figured out again.

I think we sometimes put ourselves in our holes, and that's where some of these gaps come from. Not all of them mind you. Some are just... there. Like you said, when you give to all, it means all move, meaning the gap moves with all.

But if more people gave up on trying to live like the Jones, and just did what needs to happen for themselves, then I think that gap would disappear more and more.

At least, it worked for us. And we were not a well off family, or anything like that. It required that my mother grow large gardens, go hunting, and get into making crafts and clothes using furs and such. I had squirrel mittens one year.

Squirrel, mittens. I shit you not.

We also were homeschooled for that year, since the bus route didn't come through that area of the province, and gas prices were going up during a time when the paychecks couldn't cover that kind of expense. But homeschooling could be covered due to government programs, if I understand correctly. (Funny how that works, huh?)

So, I totally get what you are trying to get at. I lived it.

But unlike many parents out there who basically just give up and blame the government, my parents didn't give up. Oh, they still blamed the government alright; but only for what it was actually responsible for, like causing a recession. (Of which they never will ever admit to lol.)

Anyways. I think the best way to end my reply here is to say this.

Kids need to experience what life is really like without all the technology, so they can understand how to live life without it. So they can understand how life was like, without it. And quite frankly, I think society would be better off this way anyways, because it would have less kids trying to pretend to be adults online in places they don't belong anyways. Or rather, really shouldn't be in, without some sort of parental supervision.

Example: How many Redditors in political subreddits do you think are children? How about Twitter? Should they even be in those places? There are some pretty heavy topics going on there that kids probably shouldn't be partaking in, and should be focusing more on oh, I dunno... Being kids.

I know that's probably not something they would like to hear, but I know that, because I didn't much like hearing it either from my parents when I was watching the news as a kid and trying to tell them how to better manage their finances by doing things like stopping fucking smoking.

See the parallel?

Guess what they told me?

Yeah, "Go outside and play."