# PornHub Withdraws From UK Over Online Safety Act **URL:** https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/pornhub-withdraws-from-uk-over-online-safety-act/35049 **Category:** News **Created:** 2026-01-29T20:21:06Z **Posts:** 106 ## Post 1 by @nateb — 2026-01-29T20:21:06Z As of February 2, PornHub will start [restricting](https://techcrunch.com/2026/01/27/if-you-live-in-the-uk-you-probably-wont-be-able-to-visit-pornhub-anymore/) access to UK users. * * * This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at [https://www.privacyguides.org/news/2026/01/29/pornhub-withdraws-from-uk-over-online-safety-act](https://www.privacyguides.org/news/2026/01/29/pornhub-withdraws-from-uk-over-online-safety-act) --- ## Post 2 by @Encounter5729 — 2026-01-29T20:23:49Z Will it work? 4chan also IP-banned UK users, yet they still got fined by Ofcom --- ## Post 3 by @jonah — 2026-01-29T20:30:57Z Probably not to stop the fines if the UK decides to fine them. Like 4chan, I’m not sure what jurisdiction the UK actually has over PornHub though. --- ## Post 4 by @anon80329175 — 2026-01-29T21:07:43Z The British Commonwealth? PH is Canada based. That’s the only connection I can think of. --- ## Post 5 by @micdan — 2026-01-30T01:57:44Z I want to say that I agree with this one in the name of the mental health of porn addicts and teens, but still fucked up shit. :joy_cat: --- ## Post 6 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-01-30T02:21:36Z > Aylo has been advocating for device-based verification rather than requiring services to handle user data, arguing that it is more effective and safer Thoughts on this? Id detest government-mandated age verification software running on _my personal device_, but there’s a case to be made that it’s more secure than trusting some remote megacorpo database to protect PII until the sun explodes It goes without saying, no government-mandated age verification is the _preferred_ solution --- ## Post 7 by @fria — 2026-01-30T02:26:40Z I’d rather do it once than on every service I use. I’m not sure how that works though I haven’t seen any age verification using something like that in the wild yet. --- ## Post 8 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-01-30T02:33:31Z [Check this out](https://developer.android.com/google/play/age-signals/use-age-signals-api) - Play seems to be rolling out an age prediction API based on your local device content. Just stumbled across this earlier on another forum --- ## Post 9 by @anonymous544 — 2026-01-30T05:15:23Z Are they also going to block the US states that require ID? --- ## Post 10 by @ZenByte — 2026-01-31T17:41:46Z I’d rather we return to parents parenting their kids instead of the government. Parental controls have existed even in the 90s. This is ridiculous and it’s saddening to see even people on this forum appeasing this authoritarian overstep. Its also almost like parents don’t need to be buying their kids a bazillion internet devices. I have yet to hear a valid reason why kids can’t get by with a dumbphone and a locked down desktop for schoolwork with parental controls for truly concerned parents. If I had a kid, I’d give them a blank desktop, a library card, and tell them to install Arch or Gentoo. If they can manage to get it working, they can watch as much internet porn as they want. After that, make it more interesting by threatening to hack their computer, online accounts, etc and that I’ll show everyone the stuff I find. Then watch my porn obsessed depraved kid become a privacy and security superstar. That’s called parenting! --- ## Post 11 by @iluvprivacy — 2026-02-04T12:06:21Z Being part of the Commonwealth is just a political thing. The UK doesn’t control or govern Canada anymore. --- ## Post 12 by @anon80329175 — 2026-02-04T12:08:22Z Yes, I am aware. I was joking. --- ## Post 13 by @anon64393658 — 2026-02-04T14:11:38Z They already do. --- ## Post 14 by @KathyM — 2026-02-04T16:40:35Z Seems like a privacy law could get it done. Post office can sell a “digital token” to an adult, proving age. Adult shows website token. Website doesn’t know adult name. Post office knows adult name and token. Maybe a law states post office can only keep name and that a token was sold, can’t by law keep token itself. A law saying a warrant is needed for post office to release name? --- ## Post 15 by @sha123 — 2026-02-04T17:55:26Z That’s not a sufficient solution, since the token could still be used to track activity, even if the person behind it initially is not known. You would need a solution which proofs your age, without allowing to track you. Basically unlinkabilty. --- ## Post 16 by @anonymous549 — 2026-02-04T17:59:55Z i hate when they pull out, just ruins it for me --- ## Post 17 by @anon64393658 — 2026-02-04T21:11:15Z How about not giving the government an immutable record of our browsing history. **There is no way to do age verification and maintain anonymity from everyone including governments.** That’s just the facts. What we need are parents to actually _parent_ their children instead of trying to get a nanny state to do it for them at the expense of everyone else’s rights. --- ## Post 18 by @anonymous544 — 2026-02-05T03:03:52Z Don’t get me wrong i agree with you > [@anon64393658](#): > > What we need are parents to actually _parent_ their children but this isn’t a solution lol. This statement just tells people what needs to be done. It doesnt say anything about how to get there. It’s very nice and easy to tell off parents that they need to be better. But so what? What if they don’t do better? That’s how you get into situations like this in the first place where parents let the internet raise their children. They end up in wild places where we dont want them. We want parents to have the right to raise their children however they want. We don’t want a “nanny state”, as you’ve dubbed, controlling our devices and deciding how to parent our children. But at the same time we also want children a guaranteed standardized threshold for a good life. Examples of this includes education, preventing children from buying alcohol or cigarettes, preventing them from viewing harmful content like porn or violent movies, protection from abuse, free food for when their parents don’t make enough money, so on and so forth. Of course parents need to do better, but the issue is what happens when they dont. Where is the safety net so that we dont have a pandemic of children raised on the internet? That’s why we have laws about child abuse and all that jazz mentioned above. It’s a safety net. This is a difficult conversation because safety nets on the internet is so foreign and new to us. I do not have the answer to this social issue. But I just wanted to say that it’s not as simple as “parents need to do better,” --- ## Post 19 by @anon64393658 — 2026-02-05T03:08:15Z I don’t think there is any crisis here that needs to be addressed. There has been porn on the internet since there was an internet. Only in the last few years has there suddenly been a clamor to put draconian spyware on every device ‘to save the children’. If you want real practical steps for social media; the best thing you can do is ban smartphones in schools or anywhere children congregate. If you break the screen addiction, cold turkey, with brute force you’ll solve 80% of whatever problem actually exists. No spyware needed. --- ## Post 20 by @anonymous544 — 2026-02-05T03:14:32Z Yea this is a more reasonable response. I do beg to differ that porn isn’t an issue. I agree that it’s not a crisis or anything like that, but it’s also something that I think we will inevitable have to look at, whether now or in the future. I have some things to say on the cold turkey thing for social media, but it’s not gonna amount to much here so I’ll just keep it to myself. --- ## Post 21 by @anonymous550 — 2026-02-05T03:40:10Z I won’t comment over the subject matter, but as a hobby archivist I like to save most of the stuff I come across online into portable and durable offline formats. Laws like this one in the U.K. only reinforce my interest in archiving. I’d like to suggest people who care about privacy also check out the topic of archiving. After all, the Venn diagram between privacy and archiving overlaps neatly. It’s hard to lose access to, or be surveilled over, content when most of your engagement occurs with self-owned files without any internet connectivity. :wink: --- ## Post 22 by @Encounter5729 — 2026-02-05T21:03:12Z Just blocks teens from getting bank cards and ban them from buying smartphones and PCs. This way, they can’t buy online (no need for ID-gating) and in-person there is a face/quick ID check. Parents then can decide whether to give it to kids. This will responsabilize the parents on choice for kids. Also ban them in schools (drop in a box for examples). The only issue --- ## Post 23 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-06T10:02:07Z I think I would take EU’s mywallet apporach where you only give the validated birth of date without risking the rest of the information and is preferably stored on-device or backed up with E2EE (eg. Proton-zero-access-like encryption with a recovery key if necessary, maybe also using passkeys for further security). Now I have to emphasize that I still think that we should be regulating parents to do their job, not the internet. regulating the internet and mandating invasive age verification instead of parents to do their job, which is you know, parenting, sets a horrible predicament and enforces the parent’s behaviors to not do anything on their kids as they can now basically justify “well the government is now enforcing age verification what do I have to worry about my child going to bad websites” (literally if you you say something like this as a parent, you either shouldn’t have been one in the first place or missing the plot) --- ## Post 25 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-06T10:15:15Z this or idk, target the group that is causing this mess which is negligent parents for regulation and not the companies or the internet. Obviously make the fines and then jail time brutal enough to face their consequences for not parenting enough --- ## Post 26 by @nateb — 2026-02-06T15:51:57Z Guys, I’m begging you. I am PLEADING with you. Can we please stop just assuming that every parent is a negligent moron? Parenting is a hard, 24/7 job. After the birth of her first child, my sister said that “I didn’t know it was possible to be this tired.” She texted me the first time she was sick and said “I have a newfound appreciation for mom for getting up and powering through it. I can’t take a day off. I have to look after the kid.” There are no days off. Next, you’re discrediting yourself. “ **Just** learn code/networking/Linux/etc.” This is stuff that takes a lot of dedicated research (hold that thought). Not to mention parsing through all the garbage snake oil there like “NordVPN will solve all your problems, baby!” Understanding what the actual hell a tech stack is, let alone how it works, and picking what’s right for you and your needs. That takes a lot of work. Not to mention that at the start, people don’t know what the don’t know. Most parents have no idea they can look into tools like DNS block. My sister’s been on iPhone for nearly a decade and didn’t realize til I told her last month that it has parental controls built into it. People don’t know what the don’t know. You guys are REALLY insulting yourselves when you act like this wealth of tech knowledge you’ve accumulated over years of dedicated study is something that people should just innately know and that anyone who doesn’t know it is mentally challenged or maliciously ignorant. And on the topic of “dedicated research,” parents are tight on time. Most parents work full time these days, both parents. Plus running errands. Plus cooking. Plus spending quality time with their spouse and their kids. Helping with homework. Being attentive IRL and not just at securing their devices. You’re basically asking them to go back to school fulltime (see again that “people don’t know what they don’t know” and “parsing snake oil”) on top of all this. Finally, a lot of people just aren’t that interested in this stuff. You’re in a tech forum. Of course you know all this stuff. It’s obviously your passion. Now explain to me - you yourself, don’t send me a link - how to rebuild an entire car from scratch. Or every system of the human body. Shoot, even doctors can’t do that’s why they have specialists. Explain the deep historical context of every factor that led to World War 1. To you guys, this stuff is fun to study, and that helps make it easy and interesting. A lot of “normies” are intimidated by this stuff, and they find it hard. It’s like math class. They’re just not interested. And yes, there is a baseline tech literacy I believe everyone should have, but blaming them as “negligent” and stupid because they’re not eating, sleeping, and breathing this topic is on par with calling you guys negligent because you can’t explain to me exactly how your various body systems work in great detail. Nobody knows everything. There’s plenty of important topics where you’re ignorant, and that doesn’t make you stupid or negligent. It makes you human. Please, please, PLEASE stop calling parents negligent or stupid. Especially when they’re going up against experts working against them - like algorithms, dark patterns, and data harvesting. It’s gatekeepy, it’s cruel, and it’s false. You’re watching Mike Tyson fight an infant and making fun of the infant for not doing well. --- ## Post 27 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-06T15:58:30Z let me be clear, im not saying all parents are like this, in fact for sure there are mom or dads that are smart and I understand it is a hard job and I have to admit I would try my best but I would certainly struggle myself. but what im trying to say is that it should be common sense nowadays that monitoring your child in a respectful way is important and those that choose the government to do it over themselves is not acceptable. I really don’t think you have to be a perfect parent to grasp the situation we’re in in 2026. Of course I also think **lack of education very much plays a role** here --- ## Post 28 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-02-06T16:44:03Z These statements are all very common beliefs, but they are mutually exclusive imo: > [@anonymous544](#): > > Where is the safety net so that we dont have a pandemic of children raised on the internet? “There is a health/safety/wellbeing issue regarding kids and their internet usage, action is needed” > [@nateb](#): > > Can we please stop just assuming that every parent is a negligent moron? Parenting is a hard, 24/7 job “Parents should not shoulder the blame & burden” > [@anon64393658](#): > > How about not giving the government an immutable record of our browsing history. There is no way to do age verification and maintain anonymity from everyone including governments “Government should not shoulder the blame & burden” Only one can be true imo: - The kids are fine, take no action - Parents are neglectful, they must act - Governments are neglectful, they must act If we reject all three, then we embrace a social contract where citizens bear no responsibility for the wellbeing of other children or society at large, everyone just gets your own house in order, and acknowledge many children will have unrestricted internet access. It’s not a totally unreasonable POV, but most seem to reject this So we have a widely acknowledged issue that needs attention, where nobody is to blame & no solutions are viable --- ## Post 29 by @nateb — 2026-02-06T16:51:02Z > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > Only one can be true imo: With respect, absolutely not. This is a toxic attitude that the privacy community HAS to shed if we’re gonna make any progress. The world is full of contradictory things that are simultaneously true. Sodas are delicious, but are objectively bad for my health. Working out is hard but objectively good for my health. You can do everything right and still fail. Wars can be both devastating and awful but necessary for the “greater good.” The privacy community has this incredibly toxic belief that only one thing can be true: Graphene is the most private and secure, therefore nobody should use anything else. This example ignores the fact that in some places Pixels aren’t available, or maybe someone can’t afford one, or maybe they NEED (yes, NEED) a feature that GOS doesn’t offer like parental controls. Therefore in this scenario, two contradictory things are true: GOS is the golden standard for privacy and security but it’s not the right advice for that person. It’s extremely possible - and likely - that the truth in this case is a mix: parents need to be better educated and more hands-on with their childrens’ tech use while the government needs to step up and do more to protect kids online in some form. In fact, more often than not, two contradictory things are true. Humans are wired to LOVE easy, simple, black-and-white answers but the world is chock full of shades of gray and nuance. In my experience, there’s most often a gray, complex, nuanced answer while there’s almost never a clear-cut black and white. (Maybe “almost never” is an exaggeration but it’s certainly the vast minority of cases.) --- ## Post 30 by @lyricism — 2026-02-06T17:00:10Z It is the parents’ choice to provide their kids with electronic devices which they don’t have adequate control over. They could just not give their kids the iPad, it’s that simple. --- ## Post 31 by @fria — 2026-02-06T17:06:35Z iPads actually have really great parental controls. Probably you can’t go wrong with an iPad (although you can question how early kids should have any electronic devices in general). The problem definitely isn’t a lack of strong parental controls though. Maybe you could argue if your kid has say a windows desktop and an iPad and a Chromebook, dealing with the parental controls on all three separate ecosystems is a huge pain compared to if they had all Apple devices. Maybe there could be some standardized open parental control protocol that every OS could support that would let parents easily control all devices at once. I think we’re in a better place than we’ve ever been though in terms of easy-to-use tools for keeping your kids off things you don’t want them to see, porn sites have been labeling themselves using [RTA](https://www.rtalabel.org/smarty.php?content=faq) to give internet filters an easy way to filter them out. There’s honestly been so much progress in keeping kids off porn sites and I feel like this sudden ban wave is putting a huge wrench in all that effort and possibly exposing kids to shadier porn sites that don’t want to follow the law (there’s plenty of sites accessible on the open internet for piracy for example so it’s fairly easy to get away with breaking the law). --- ## Post 32 by @nateb — 2026-02-06T17:08:07Z That’s a very short-sighted solution. Eventually your kids will need to grow up and learn how to use a phone to be part of modern society - unless you’re in a very unique situation. At that point you’ll HAVE to introduce them to tech. And you can either do it responsibly, or you can just be the authoritarian “not in my house” parent which will result in them being completely unprepared when they get out on their own, and IMO that makes you one of those “negligent” parents people are complaining about. Either way, they’ll have internet access eventually 99/100 times. --- ## Post 33 by @lyricism — 2026-02-06T17:10:34Z > [@fria](#): > > iPads actually have really great parental controls. Probably you can’t go wrong with an iPad True, but I think the argument @nateb is making (correct me if I’m misunderstanding) is that not all parents have enough understanding of these topics to know how to set up those controls, in which case the answer is “then don’t give them the device”. > [@nateb](#): > > That’s a very short-sighted solution. Eventually your kids will need to grow up and learn how to use a phone to be part of modern society Then you need to take the time to be a parent to them and educate them as they do so. Just like anything else your kids need to learn to grow up and become adults, your job as a parent is to guide them on that path. If you can’t take that responsibility on, you shouldn’t have kids. --- ## Post 34 by @nateb — 2026-02-06T17:15:00Z > [@lyricism](#): > > Then you need to take the time to be a parent to them and educate them And now we’re back to my original post about how not every parent should be expected to be an expert. Did your parents have medical degrees? Or economics degrees? Did they teach you biology and calculus? Or how elections work? I’m willing to bet you learned a lot of this stuff in school, in math classes, health classes, economics and government. Maybe not all of it, and maybe your parents helped instill specific _values_ such as being conservative vs liberal or the value of saving money. Likewise, I don’t think it’s realistic to expect parents to have a comprehensive understanding of every possible digital threat. It’s not completely unrealistic to suggest a similar balance here. My main thing is to stop demonizing parents for not being subject matter experts. That’s not fair to them, it’s not realistic, and it sure as hell won’t convince them to care when they find a community who tells them they’re bad parents. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Unless you don’t actually care about winning them over, in which case ignore me. --- ## Post 35 by @lyricism — 2026-02-06T17:25:19Z > [@nateb](#): > > Did your parents have medical degrees? Or economics degrees? Did they teach you biology and calculus? You don’t need a medical degree to know how to set up Apple parental controls. I’m not sure if you’re arguing in bad faith or if you think so little of the average parent that you think it’s beyond them entirely to take an hour to learn what options are available to them to control what their kids do with their iPad. > [@nateb](#): > > I’m willing to bet you learned a lot of this stuff in school, in math classes, health classes, economics and government And usually kids ask their parents for help with their homework, and when the parents don’t know the answer we wouldn’t say they should tell the kid “sorry, do you expect me to have a medical degree?” > [@nateb](#): > > My main thing is to stop demonizing parents for not being subject matter experts Who is doing that? > [@nateb](#): > > tells them they’re bad parents If you are unwilling to spend the time that’s required to properly parent your kids you are a bad parent. > [@nateb](#): > > Unless you don’t actually care about winning them over, I don’t care what bad parents do with their kids, just don’t make it the rest of society’s responsibility through legislation to compensate for it. --- ## Post 36 by @KathyM — 2026-02-06T17:31:27Z This is like saying 95% of this forums users consented to data collection/retention. Don’t they know about Snowden etc. The spirit of this forum is fighting against a system of intrusion with everything stacked against us. You shouldn’t blame another forum member for being overwhelmed about how much there is to learn and choosing a more lenient threat model. Stop blaming parents unless you’re willing to blame privacy guides members for living in a society. --- ## Post 37 by @lyricism — 2026-02-06T17:35:32Z > [@KathyM](#): > > Stop blaming parents unless you’re willing to blame privacy guides members for living in a society. Parents choose to have children. People generally do not choose to exist. You cannot shift responsibility that you have as a result of your choices onto those who did not make the same choices. What gives parents the right to blame society, if we’re not allowed to blame parents? If you want to introduce laws to give parents better tools or easier access to education on how to manage their kids in the electronic age, that would be great. Making everyone else’s lives more difficult is not the answer. > [@KathyM](#): > > You shouldn’t blame another forum member for being overwhelmed about how much there is to learn and choosing a more lenient threat model. Where did I do that? I don’t have a problem with parents who accept the consequences of giving their kids unrestricted internet access (I do disagree with it, but that’s not my problem), the issue is the ones who don’t want that for their kids but expect it to be everyone else’s responsibility to prevent it. --- ## Post 38 by @nateb — 2026-02-06T17:46:37Z > [@lyricism](#): > > Who is doing that? Maybe I’m the asshole then but it sure seems like everyone here does a lot. “Parents are so negligent because they don’t monitor everything their kids do online, set up DNS-blockers, switch all their devices to Graphene, etc.” I’ll shut up. --- ## Post 39 by @lyricism — 2026-02-06T17:56:49Z > [@nateb](#): > > Maybe I’m the asshole then but it sure seems like everyone here does a lot. I don’t think so, I could buy that others are doing it, but I was asking because I felt like you were saying I was and I would disagree with that. > [@nateb](#): > > “Parents are so negligent because they don’t monitor everything their kids do online, set up DNS-blockers, switch all their devices to Graphene, etc.” I mean yeah that’s extreme. But are you negligent as a parent if you give you child an unfettered gateway to the internet with **zero** restrictions at all? Sorry, yeah. Do I particularly care or think you’re a bad person because of of it? No. Just don’t try and give everyone else the responsibility of changing because of your negligence. I think the bare minimum to clear the negligence bar while still giving your kids internet access is to give them an iPad or iPhone with Apple’s parental controls on, and I don’t think that’s asking a lot. If you are unwilling to do that **and** you’re unwilling to let your kid live without a device **and** you try to pass laws to introduce controls on the internet you weren’t willing to set up yourself without affecting everyone else, then sorry but yeah, you suck. (I am using “you” here rhetorically, not referencing you @nateb) --- ## Post 40 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-02-06T19:23:15Z > [@nateb](#): > > parents need to be better educated and more hands-on with their childrens’ tech use while the government needs to step up and do more to protect kids online in some form I guess this is really my issue - I dont see a practical means to place any responsibility on the government without overreach into the lives of me and my family. I can only see policing that ultimately and inevitably infringes on the privacy & anonymity of adults in good standing If I’ve got no tolerance for federal intervention into my family’s online habits, the issue does seem reduced to a binary decision that places all burden on me as a parent. This POV does not harmonize well with your (FWIW very reasonable & compelling) case for parental leniency --- ## Post 41 by @fria — 2026-02-06T19:35:17Z > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > If I’ve got no tolerance for federal intervention into my family’s online habits, the issue does seem reduced to a binary decision that places all burden on me as a parent. I think a conversation on how to make sure parental controls are as easy to use and understandable as possible is warranted. I just don’t see a lot of that, it’s mainly either saying the government should ban all adult content or parents just shouldn’t give their kids technology without a reasonable middle ground. If you set your kid up with a new iPhone as a child account it’ll already by default give you some sane [defaults](https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2025/06/apple-expands-tools-to-help-parents-protect-kids-and-teens-online/) and tries to have a simple interface for you to change it how you want. --- ## Post 42 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-02-06T19:41:35Z > [@fria](#): > > I think a conversation on how to make sure parental controls are as easy to use and understandable as possible is warranted I like this, a lot. Empower parents from all backgrounds with the knowledge they need to protect their family, without a need for federal intervention. Perhaps a compilation of tips, tricks, and best practices for parental privacy control, hosted somewhere reputable & accessible :thinking: --- ## Post 43 by @KathyM — 2026-02-06T19:42:53Z > [@lyricism](#): > > I think the bare minimum to clear the negligence bar while still giving your kids internet access is to give them an iPad or iPhone with Apple’s parental controls on, and I don’t think that’s asking a lot. Or a “family friendly” checkbox people can click while setting up their internet/tv/phone. Deal with the family shield for a few years until they’ve grown up. --- ## Post 44 by @fria — 2026-02-06T19:45:02Z Internet blockers aren’t very effective, you can get around it via third party DNS or VPNs. Parental controls on their devices are the best privacy-preserving solution (ones without any surveillance features, they just block content). There’s third party services that are tantamount to spyware for constantly surveilling your kid and I think that’s the wrong approach. Just use the built-in controls. --- ## Post 45 by @KathyM — 2026-02-06T19:49:20Z I think if a kid is busting out third party dns and VPN then a parent needs to start taking a lot more extra steps. Like confiscating electronics. A checkbox temporarily signing up for a family blacklist from the service provider will do a decent job for 95% of families. Until eventually that 5% gets blown into a big deal. --- ## Post 46 by @lyricism — 2026-02-06T19:50:44Z I think if a kid is able to figure out that they can work around network based parental controls with third party DNS they’ve earned a little extra freedom. --- ## Post 47 by @fria — 2026-02-06T19:50:52Z > [@KathyM](#): > > A checkbox temporarily signing up for a family blacklist from the service provider will do a decent job for 95% of families. A lot of routers already have that as an option when you’re setting it up and even if it doesn’t you can easily add a DNS filter. I don’t think it even needs to be something the actual ISP knows about, a local solution is better. --- ## Post 48 by @anon64393658 — 2026-02-06T19:55:42Z I think it’s option number 1. By most objective data points, kids today are actually better off than they were 30 years ago. As a young, tech savvy millennial I had full access to the open internet since middle school. There are plenty of damaging things that happened to me in my youth. None of them involved an internet connection. If anything communities I found on the internet were a huge help to me to deal with the shitty IRL stuff. --- ## Post 49 by @KathyM — 2026-02-06T19:59:32Z > [@fria](#): > > A lot of routers already have that as an option when you’re setting it up and even if it doesn’t you can easily add a DNS filter. You are vastly overestimating the abilities of the average person. Ask people on the street what a DNS is. Most people I know just get a box from the telephone company that they stick somewhere in the house and use the WiFi password that comes on the label. Anything more complicated than a checkbox will have a big failure rate. Skilled parents I’m sure won’t need said checkbox but millions will. And to clarify, I mean a checkbox when they’re signing up for service. Or when they’re paying a bill. --- ## Post 50 by @fria — 2026-02-06T20:01:11Z > [@KathyM](#): > > You are vastly overestimating the abilities of the average person. Ask people on the street what a DNS is. I guess that’s part of my point though, network level blocking is more complicated and less effective than just using the simple built in controls on your kid’s device. I’m not really understanding what the benefit is. --- ## Post 51 by @KathyM — 2026-02-06T20:05:24Z More complicated and less effective, but for the end user (parents) a lot more simpler. People without kids will scoff at the checkbox and ignore it. Parents who don’t have time at the moment to configure everything just check the box. Maybe they’ll get around to setting up parental controls and turn off the shield at a later date. --- ## Post 52 by @win11.shading291 — 2026-02-06T20:47:20Z Isn’t everybody kind of right in this thread? It’s easy to argue that parents failed their job applying parental control on their router for instance or their devices. Why is that though? Most people I know don’t even know they can access their router and configure it the way they want. Some might know it’s a possibility, but it’s too scary for them because they have no idea how. Is it stupid bad parents negligence that don’t think about their kids? Of course it’s not. Pretty much all parents care about their kids. So who’s to blame then? Is it the government, not doing its job in educating society on how the internet of things work? You could even argue that it is all of us in this community that are not doing our job educating other people on that stuff. > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > - The kids are fine, take no action > - Parents are neglectful, they must act > - Governments are neglectful, they must act I agree with @nateb, I think all 3 are right. Beside, at least in democracies, we are the government. --- ## Post 53 by @Man — 2026-02-06T20:55:32Z What happened to supervised screen time? Most of the damage is done when a child is alone with the device. An adult should be able to see the screen at all times. If that isn’t possible then use a hybrid approach. Allow the child to consume media without interactivity. Take away the remote, or keyboard, in this instance. This is the best of both worlds. --- ## Post 54 by @fria — 2026-02-06T20:56:52Z I don’t think you need to surveil your kid to protect them though, parental controls are quite powerful and granular these days. You can preserve your child’s privacy while also keeping them safe. --- ## Post 55 by @Man — 2026-02-06T21:03:11Z I disagree up to the age of 12. Have you seen the brain rot that constitutes children’s entertainment these days? An innocent looking Pepa Pig cartoon could have violent or sexual themes. Elsa and Spiderman. It’s disturbing. The YouTube Kids section isn’t suitable for children. Every video needs to be screened. Children don’t have a right to privacy in terms of what they watch online. I would only allow vetted YouTube channels or media I watched as a child. I checked and YouTube have thankfully removed most of the disturbing Peppa Pig videos. --- ## Post 56 by @KathyM — 2026-02-06T21:05:52Z > [@fria](#): > > You can preserve your child’s privacy while also keeping them safe. I think it should be “you can respect your child’s privacy while also keeping them safe”. Some children will literally only use corporate apps. Some kids will be tor browser gurus. And this is a reality where child predators will literally target kids who have nobody monitoring them. --- ## Post 57 by @Man — 2026-02-06T21:19:37Z > [@KathyM](#): > > Some kids will be tor browser gurus. This is why I advocate for LAN only computing in private spaces. Banning PornHub or forcing them to withdraw is pointless. An iPad works without WAN. Use a Jellyfin server or go back to DVDs. Glue a piece of plastic over the cameras and seal up the microphone holes. Airgap the child so they develop skills for the modern world without all of the irrelevant noise of the internet. --- ## Post 58 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-07T02:08:34Z > [@ZenByte](#): > > I have yet to hear a valid reason why kids can’t get by with a dumbphone and a locked down desktop for schoolwork with parental controls for truly concerned parents. You would make them a social outsider, not good. Policing teenagers is also not great for building a relationship. I would recommend parental controls to teach very young children about turning off screens, but spying on your own kids, or relying on software to block adult content is time-consuming and doesn’t prepare teenagers for the real world at all. --- ## Post 59 by @mooseberg — 2026-02-07T05:34:14Z > [@ThePrivacyDad](#): > > relying on software to block adult content is time-consuming and doesn’t prepare teenagers for the real world at all Is being exposed to porn and other adult content as a teenager actually important for “preparing for the real world”? > **** > > Edited a part out, I think I took it out of context Also I think you missed a very important point of @ZenByte arguments :rofl: > [@ZenByte](#): > > Then watch my porn obsessed depraved kid become a privacy and security superstar. That’s called parenting! --- ## Post 60 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-02-07T06:00:09Z > [@ThePrivacyDad](#): > > relying on software to block adult content… doesn’t prepare teenagers for the real world at all > [@mooseberg](#): > > Is being exposed to porn and other adult content as a teenager actually important for “preparing for the real world”? I’m with PD on this. Kids need to learn healthy behaviors more than theyd benefit from being forced into perfection. The child who learns to eat junk food in moderation will continue to eat healthy as an adult. The child who was never allowed to touch soda will only drink Coke through their 20s. The former knows how to control themself, the latter was never taught God help the soul who discovers the internet in their 20s, and has no idea how to handle it bc NextDNS did all the work for two decades --- ## Post 61 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-07T06:02:44Z I think this is where around the age of 16-18, they would get unfiltered and in the event they get into the no-no content (more on the level of corn) you can discuss it first and let them continue if on satisfactory level. I think this balances the necessary freedom kids need to receive before adulthood (eg. after college/high school of adulthood). but perhaps you can let them continue themselves in plarforms where their ToS states they should be 13 and above but again I would still use parental controls in a privacy respecting manner at that state until they turn the range of age I specified but yeah --- ## Post 62 by @privacy.slouchy — 2026-02-07T06:04:25Z I reckon 17-18 is a little late, but that age is certainly up for debate, I am not a child development expert. Pre-teens should not have unfiltered internet access --- ## Post 63 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-07T06:06:38Z Yeah it’s at least my thought process on this and what PD says but @ThePrivacyDad is the expert and has experience so I would certainly use and listen to their advise since they have that experience. I only remember that as a kid, even though I may have gotten an email early (gmail), I was never allowed to be on Facebook until 13, from there it was mostly smooth sailing. but to be honest around the early Gen Z generations we’re lucky we managed to Dodge this horrible state of social media/messengers is now and I must admit I have discovered the corn before I turned 18 (& Admittedly to be fair this was before youtube got stricter with content not being made for kids/partial 18+) with my unfederated access but fortunately not to the point of crippling addiction or whatever it may be. But I also understand late Gen Z to Gen A (at least most or some) are not so lucky than the early Gen Zs when it comes to this (if im being honest what I need to break out of my addiction now is gacha games xD) --- ## Post 64 by @anon17897338 — 2026-02-07T07:34:37Z the only massively affective parental controls Ive seen is the one for iOS and while many dont like this this is mainly due to the browsers all being webkit based. with Family Link on Android being a closest second because they disable changing the DNS within chromium based browsers and you vet what apps your child downloads and this is only on phones. Computers, especially Linux are still seriously lacking in effective parental controls. Every other parental control option ive seen is DNS based and you do not need to be super technical to bypass these either. Especially among teens once they find a workaround it spreads like wildfire As an older Gen Zer when i was in high school everyone was using proxies or VPNs extensions to byass the youtube blocks and when those were getting cracked down upon I was putting me peers on Invidious I am more technical than my parents and have had to manage THEIR devices for them and my siblings are also parents and know jack shit about tech . People here sometimes vastly overestimate average persons level of tech literacy. You can be great parent in terms of managing your kids in healthy ways but if you dont know how to help your child because its out of your scope you cant necessarily say they are negligent I see the slippery slope but at the same time I am very anti-porn because it has seriously bad effects on anyone consuming and I dont believe it is good for anyone but if people want access to it yeah we should be authorizing who is an adult but then its like What about reddit, twitter or fuck even NSFW content within the fediverse? What about places like Discord or Roblox where they seem innocent on the surface but warcrimes are happening behind the scenes. I grew up as a chronic sexter in niche websites with my peers without my parents ever knowing. I think it’s pretty hard for parents to protect someone from a threat they don’t know exists --- ## Post 65 by @Man — 2026-02-07T08:44:59Z Some of us grew up before the internet was a big deal and adapted to it just fine. The idea that children NEED an internet connection to be normal is wrong. I’d argue that children who grew up without it are better adjusted. By all means use a phone to coordinate with friends but information overload is unhealthy. A personal phone doesn’t need social media. Going outdoors should be internet free time. --- ## Post 66 by @Man — 2026-02-07T08:58:37Z We keep developing up to the age of 25. My parents were older than I am now when they got a dial up internet connection. They aren’t addicted to it. I didn’t have unrestricted internet access until my early teens. It wasn’t good for me. I would have been happier without it. If I ever have children they won’t have unsupervised internet access until they move out or pay for it themselves. They will be highly computer literate by that time. --- ## Post 67 by @Bumbashirovich — 2026-02-07T09:08:42Z From english cinema I know that the Englishmen sexually are very shy. So this taboo is in keeping with the ethnography of the British Isles. If someone feels more liberated, he can always use a VPN. Thank God, this state does not legislatively influence EU privacy. --- ## Post 68 by @Man — 2026-02-07T10:31:23Z I checked a website which claims PornHub was the 14th most visited domain in the UK for 2025. It is almost tied for top 10 with several other sites. It recieved more visits than Netflix. Traffic dropped by 9% but we need to consider the impact of the Online Safety Act and how many gooners now use a VPN. Times are changing. --- ## Post 69 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-07T11:28:34Z > [@mooseberg](#): > > Is being exposed to porn and other adult content as a teenager actually important for “preparing for the real world” Not using parental control software is not synonymous with exposing your children to porn. Our best solution has been that no screens are allowed in the bedroom. As a high school teacher, I was always really shocked by the high numbers of my students that were allowed to take their smartphones to bed, not just for the possibility of access to adult content, but more than that, sleep deprivation. --- ## Post 70 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-07T11:43:07Z > [@ThePrivacyDad](#): > > but more than that, sleep deprivation. beyond that this may cause decreased time awareness or otherwise the ratio of being aware of the time to taking action to be on time had to learn the hard way (not mentioning none believed me that I had ADHD until I was diagnosed formally in 2025 didn’t help) and I am trying various things to try and curb that to almost no avail --- ## Post 71 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-07T11:43:15Z > [@Man](#): > > By all means use a phone to coordinate with friends but information overload is unhealthy. A personal phone doesn’t need social media. Going outdoors should be internet free time. I honestly tried this approach with my kids and gave them dumb phones around the end of primary school (for when they needed to get in touch with us). But around the age of 13/14 things really change socially at school, and I have found, despite my own views about the negative impacts of smartphones, that it wasn’t fair to my kids to ostracize them by keeping them out of the different WhatsApp groups going on, some of which are in fact study-focused. So our best approach has been to slowly introduce smartphones and create an unwritten agreement of not just randomly creating accounts on all kinds of social media platforms. It has worked well so far. My kids are now older teenagers, and they tend to talk to me about setting up new accounts, and even taking their devices to the bedroom when they need to record something for a project. One of my kids has really taken an interest in dumb phone and now even Linux phone culture; one of the others less so, but still understands privacy, as became apparent when I interviewed them about Ente ([My Teenager's Review of Ente's Privacy Photo App | Welcome to The Privacy Dad's Blog!](https://theprivacydad.com/my-teenagers-review-of-entes-privacy-photo-app/)). So the bottom line is you cannot predict which way your kids will go, but don’t underestimate the high importance of being socially connected at middle and high school age. Luckily, I am sensing a bit more awareness amongst fellow parents here and some of my kids’ friends are also using privacy apps. With regards to parental controls, my personal view is that they become a negative element from quite an early age. It’s much better to limit time kids spend in isolated physical spaces with internet-connected devices. I really had to adjust my thinking about parental oversight after I spoke to my oldest, who is now an adult, about their experiences with my parental controls ( [Special Post: Honest Feedback from the Oldest Child | Welcome to The Privacy Dad's Blog!](https://theprivacydad.com/honest-feedback-from-the-oldest-child/) ). --- ## Post 72 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-07T11:45:46Z > [@Bumbashirovich](#): > > From english cinema I know that the Englishmen sexually are very shy. Hm..I would maybe look at sources of information other than certain British films, haha. --- ## Post 73 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-07T11:51:59Z I looked at the last article yeah I do prefer if the parental control actually offered privacy of the kid/teen and only do I feel like I need to investigate if something goes wrong and even then if let’s say they do get exposed to corn, I would have a friendly talk with them, basically saying “While it won’t be harmful to you at first, let’s make sure you’re educated on its dangers and then I’ll leave you alone” type of conversation, and of course also a perfect time to discuss online safety. Honestly Apple seems like the king in Parental Controls because it does alot right including consenting, I really like that Apple takes the being educated and consensual basis not needing to make the kid/teen feel like they’re being censored or monitored or anything like that --- ## Post 74 by @anon42475305 — 2026-02-07T11:54:48Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > consensual basis That consent is completely meaningless when the alternative is no device at all. --- ## Post 75 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-07T11:56:50Z not the point here, Also have you read what @ThePrivacyDad said and shared? there are implications to not giving a teen a devices they can use for the good things like communicating with friends and family, that of course while the parent has enough control to not let them get exposed into harm, just enough being also the fact that overreach is admittedly a problem that can occur. Teens can feel missing out from friends communication, fun. This also won’t help them growing up when they become an adult when they would need a phone, a laptop etc. --- ## Post 76 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-07T11:57:51Z > [@nateb](#): > > Maybe I’m the asshole then but it sure seems like everyone here does a lot. “Parents are so negligent because they don’t monitor everything their kids do online, set up DNS-blockers, switch all their devices to Graphene, etc.” Wow, I scrolled up and just read the whole discussion preceding from where I joined it. It’s great to see @nateb taking a strong stance on this as one of the employees of PG! The irony to me-a parent- is that some forum members are so sure that the simple solution is not giving your child devices and/or using parental controls when in my experience as a parent, those things did not work. I would say I am a somewhat tech informed parents and I’ve tried all those things, and they were not the answer, because I underestimated the importance of belonging to the group, and of being prepared for a digital world. So it’s fine to chime in for non-parents, but the solution some of you are offering (just don’t give them devices; get educated on parental controls) in fact don’t work in practice. A solution that works is keeping screens out of bedrooms and developing a culture of negotiation rather than control. --- ## Post 77 by @anon42475305 — 2026-02-07T12:04:51Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > not let them get exposed into harm You and I disagree that parents should completely prevent their kids from being exposed to any and all harm. My point is that if you are going to strong-arm your children into using devices as you see fit, then that’s your prerogative, but don’t use their coerced consent as some sort of moral justification. --- ## Post 78 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-07T12:10:40Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > **enough** control to not let them get exposed into harm, **just enough being also the fact that overreach is admittedly a problem that can occur.** Unfortunately overreach is so much that can be done, the best a teen can do is try to tell legal guardians, whenever that’d be cousins, uncles, aunt if they’re brave enough to open up but again I would refer to what @ThePrivacyDad said. I still think needing to ask to approve say contacts or a website visit or downloading an app is a good idea, it’s literally like a teen asking their parent if they can go out with their friend they met at school, or if they can go to some shop to buy something or visit an arcade. Parents can question, say no or yes, doesn’t make a difference. At this point you are arguing that like me and almost many other kids they should go about their lives unfederated and probably when PrivacyDad has argued with proof being based on his experience that is not the way to go. --- ## Post 79 by @Man — 2026-02-07T12:18:32Z > [@ThePrivacyDad](#): > > it wasn’t fair to my kids to ostracize them by keeping them out of the different WhatsApp groups going on, some of which are in fact study-focused. I have a different perspective on this. The users fixated on WhatsApp are performing ostrasisation. I didn’t own a smartphone during my school years, so I have no idea how that relates to study in 2026. We didn’t use email much either, despite everyone having a school email address. This is where I would take a hardline stance. No Meta products for my hypothetical children. The social cost doesn’t factor into this decision. Meta is evil. I might feel differently if I had children of my own but telling a child NO is a lost art. So is compromise, so I respect your approach. My approach is similar to Stallman’s on this topic. I’m not a free software purist but children have simpler needs and must be shielded from predatory corporations. If we keep making concessions the corporations win. Schools are now using biometrics. Younger family members had RFID wristbands. When I was at school they didn’t even have locks. We used to live in a high trust society. Email was so pointless my teachers didn’t even bother to lock their computers. Nobody cared. These technologies weren’t important. --- ## Post 80 by @anon42475305 — 2026-02-07T12:30:09Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > At this point you are arguing that like me and almost many other kids they should go about their lives unfederated and probably when PrivacyDad has argued with proof being bases on his experience that is not the way to go. You aren’t going to create well-adjusted adults by shielding them their entire childhoods. What do you think will happen when these teenagers who are coddled and never experience anything remotely harmful are suddenly let loose on the real world that is the internet on the arbitrary day they turn 16 or 18. I think it’s healthy to be gradually exposed to harmful things and to have parents that don’t coerce you and who you can therefore trust to ask and learn about those harmful things. Protecting children’s freedom and autonomy matters. Porn isn’t uniquely dangerous to a well-adjusted person compared to many other forms of content teenagers are already exposed to, like algorithmic social media or brain rot. It’s treated differently because of a longstanding moral stigma, not because it’s inherently more harmful. > [@anon0179693](#): > > it’s literally like a teen asking their parent if they can go out with their friend they met at school, or if they can go to some shop to buy something or visit an arcade. Parents can question, say no or yes, doesn’t make a difference. And if you’re the kind of parent that forces no on your child for no good reason (good reason in their mind) your child will stop asking and go anyways. --- ## Post 81 by @Man — 2026-02-07T12:53:01Z > [@anon42475305](#): > > What do you think will happen when these teenagers who are coddled and never experience anything remotely harmful are suddenly let loose on the real world that is the internet on the arbitrary day they turn 16 or 18. We used to say this about teenagers who spent all day at home on the computer. The internet is merely a facet of real life and the less essential it becomes the better. Pornography exists outside the internet too. The internet is nowhere near as harmful as it used to be. Maturity and self-restraint can develop without the internet. I’d argue that children who grow up without it are better adjusted. The later we are exposed to harmful things the better. Adults have less malleable brains. Look how many young men have erectile dysfunction due to early and prolonged pornography exposure. Sometimes we need to remove the option for children to be content and safe. --- ## Post 82 by @Man — 2026-02-07T13:08:29Z > [@anon42475305](#): > > Protecting children’s freedom and autonomy matters. Porn isn’t uniquely dangerous to a well-adjusted person compared to many other forms of content teenagers are already exposed to, like algorithmic social media or brain rot. It’s treated differently because of a longstanding moral stigma, not because it’s inherently more harmful. I totally disagree with this, depending how you define porn. Porn can be algorithmic brain rot too. Brainrot is bad. Binging on junk food is bad. Children being exposed to pornography is bad. I viewed a small amount of pornography as a child and it was bad for me. Pornography is like a drug. It isn’t an innocent form of entertainment. Habitual consumption and addiction is worse the earlier it begins. I am not morally opposed to pornography. As an adult I enjoy pornography sometimes. As a teenager I viewed too much pornography with nothing and no one to stop me. Children shouldn’t be exposed to adult sexuality. When my grandparents married they didn’t even know what sex was. They were married until the end and had plenty of children. Most adults today won’t marry and sexual activity between consenting adults is on the decline. Dating apps are bad. Hookup culture is bad. STIs are bad. I’m not saying you can’t enjoy those things but children should be steered in the opposite direction. --- ## Post 83 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-07T13:28:01Z > [@Man](#): > > but telling a child NO is a lost art. This is where your argument loses nuance. I tell my kids NO all the time. I first said no phones, then no smartphones, then no social media, and now no TikTok and still no screens in bedrooms. But as they grow older you have to make these little adjustments so they can get ready to be adults. I never thought I would allow my child to use WhatsApp, but I did. It wasn’t laziness or not daring to say no. It was because I realised that my child would feel left out of quite a significant aspect of social life in high school, and I didn’t want to do that. It doesn’t matter who is right or wrong about WhatsApp, what matters is that, at the time at least, that’s where that communication was taking place, and having my child be the only one missing out felt more harmful than the intended good. --- ## Post 84 by @Man — 2026-02-07T13:35:29Z I used Facebook in highschool too. My thoughts apply from 2026 onward. Social media was nothing like it is now. We couldn’t have imagined a future where big tech cotrolled our lives to the degree it does. I’m also differentiating between children (\<12) and teenagers (13+). I would allow other applications but nothing from Meta, X, Microslop, Apple, Snapchat. Basically anything designed to be addictive or exploitative. --- ## Post 85 by @Man — 2026-02-07T13:58:38Z To reframe my thoughts – if I wouldn’t or don’t use it as an adult, my children won’t either. The government doesn’t decide these things for me. My children will use VPNs. Parents choose what to feed their children. How they are educated. Where they go. What they wear. Computers are an extension of this. If my 12yo daughter wants to wear a crop top like the neighbours 14yo the answer is no. I don’t care how many other children wear croptops. If they bully my daughter I’ll teach her to rise above it. If she comes home with sunburn I might look the other way. Children always rebel, I know that. Small concessions are neccesary. But it isn’t abusive, negligent, or irresponsible, to say no to Snapchat. It isn’t arbitrary either. My child (under 18) lives by my rules. If the situation changes we will adapt. My children will be loved and respected as individuaus. They will also resent me for it. I will offer an alternative or compromise whenever possible. But downloading WhatsApp isn’t allowed. I’d confiscate the phone. It is my property and I’ll make sure they understand that. Allowing my children to be groomed online isn’t an option. I would encourage internet free private screen time for age appropriate activities. As long as they spend plenty of time outdoors they can play games indoors as much as they want. I am aware other teenagers will give them access to pornography. This is ineviatable but the longer I can protect them the better. This does not mean they will be soft or unusually vulnerable to addiction later in life. They will know happiness and prefer being around real friends. I was over 18 when Snapchat became available. I didn’t own a smartphone. Yes I missed out on sending stupid selfies. Does that matter? No. I don’t use WhatsApp either. Do I miss out? Yes. Does it matter? A little. Can I live without it? Yes. Will my children be happy without it? Yes. --- ## Post 86 by @fria — 2026-02-07T15:04:57Z > [@ThePrivacyDad](#): > > So it’s fine to chime in for non-parents, but the solution some of you are offering (just don’t give them devices; get educated on parental controls) in fact don’t work in practice. I’m not pro-parental controls but I’m coming at this from a harm reduction standpoint. Giving your kids a heavily nerfed smartphone is infinitely better than giving them a dumb phone with terrible security or installing some third party nightmare surveillance software like many parents do. > [@Man](#): > > This is where I would take a hardline stance. No Meta products for my hypothetical children. The social cost doesn’t factor into this decision. Meta is evil. The alternative is unencrypted SMS. Surely we can agree that E2EE WhatsApp is better than that. --- ## Post 87 by @win11.shading291 — 2026-02-07T16:01:15Z > [@fria](#): > > The alternative is unencrypted SMS. Surely we can agree that E2EE WhatsApp is better than that. Depends on if this is true or not: [What a new lawsuit claims about WhatsApp’s end-to-end encryption | Proton](https://discuss.privacyguides.net/t/what-a-new-lawsuit-claims-about-whatsapp-s-end-to-end-encryption-proton/35020) --- ## Post 88 by @Man — 2026-02-07T16:59:59Z > [@fria](#): > > The alternative is unencrypted SMS. Surely we can agree that E2EE WhatsApp is better than that. No I wouldn’t allow SMS either. They can use Signal with some constraints. I don’t have children yet, so there will be more choices than when @ThePrivacyDad was raising his eldest. WhatsApp is better than SMS but my household will be FOSS or nothing as far as my children are concerned. Stallman style. My children will only have access to phones outside for emergencies. Firewall rules to prevent anything other than Signal. I will monitor their network usage in bytes. --- ## Post 89 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-07T22:22:19Z > [@Man](#): > > Children always rebel, I know that. Small concessions are neccesary. It isn’t about rebellion but about becoming their own persons. Are you just like your parents in every way or did you choose a different path? Children don’t live in a kind of child bubble until 18 and then suddenly emerge as adults with their own independent ideas. It’s a gradual process that happens at home. They are not going to like some of your views not just for the sake of it, but because they are developing their own identities and will have different ideas to you. --- ## Post 90 by @Man — 2026-02-08T01:40:39Z That’s an interesting insight. A better way to phrase my meaning is to test boundaries i.e. turn a t-shirt into a crop-top. Rebellion was maybe too strong a word. Every child resists and resents parental imposition at some stage. There will be a point of friction somewhere. I’ll be lucky if it’s only clothing; where I can compromise. WhatsApp is non-negotiable. Posting on Instagram or TikTok would result in drastic action. I would limit the bandwith to kilobytes per second so it can only transmit text messages without significant delay. --- ## Post 91 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-08T10:36:55Z It sounds like it’s theoretical at the moment, but just be careful you don’t give them fuel for rebellion if you do have kids later. --- ## Post 92 by @Archer — 2026-02-08T16:14:06Z > [@privacy.slouchy](#): > > Thoughts on this? Id detest government-mandated age verification software running on _my personal device_, but there’s a case to be made that it’s more secure than trusting some remote megacorpo database to protect PII until the sun explodes If they implement it, it would be only acceptable if its 100% libre software --- ## Post 93 by @Archer — 2026-02-08T16:18:36Z > [@Man](#): > > My children will only have access to phones outside for emergencies. Firewall rules to prevent anything other than Signal. I will monitor their network usage in bytes. > [@Man](#): > > I would limit the bandwith to kilobytes per second so it can only transmit text messages without significant delay. I understand your position in generell but the network limit sound very extreme --- ## Post 94 by @Man — 2026-02-08T20:00:39Z I grew up without a mobile phone. When I was given one as a teenager it was explicitly for emergencies. Looking back my parents were too focused on that aspect. My children will be free to send messages as often as they like. But they don’t need unlimited bandwidth for doom scrolling. If I provide them with a smartphone it will function like a dumb phone plus offline maps in case they get lost and eventually email once they need it. --- ## Post 95 by @Archer — 2026-02-09T03:21:15Z > [@ZenByte](#): > > I’d rather we return to parents parenting their kids instead of the government. > > Parental controls have existed even in the 90s. For interest: Are their any effective open source parental control apps for Android/Linux? --- ## Post 96 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-10T00:44:37Z > [@Archer](#): > > For interest: Are their any effective open source parental control apps for Android/Linux? [GNOME 50 will Support Bedtime & Daily Screen Time Parental Controls | UbuntuHandbook](https://ubuntuhandbook.org/index.php/2026/01/gnome-50-will-support-bedtime-daily-screen-time-parental-controls/) (I just heard about that on the Linux & Open Source News podcast.) --- ## Post 97 by @Archer — 2026-02-10T01:24:37Z Thanks for linking this. Will it be possible to give the child sudo privileges to let it fully use the system with the only restriction that it can’t tamper with parental control (+ all restriction’s enforced by the parental control app) ? And will it be possible to set more then one blocked time, for example one for bedtime and one for homework time? --- ## Post 98 by @anon0179693 — 2026-02-11T09:59:32Z If you give it sudo privilege for your child it might actually backfire as they may figure out how to bypass the parental control at the end of the day sudo is essentially escalating root privileges, so the child account has to be a standard user. However if you do rely on Flatpak or Snap while it is a standard user, I say it is effective. In my experience with trying to create a standard user for my user to use my pc as a guest, when you do say install an app in flatpak (I do use KDE Discover doe), the admin password actually gets prompted which that would be say a parent administrator account though I do hate that flatpak apps follow accross users I guess, not sure that’s resolvable --- ## Post 99 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-02-11T11:59:47Z I’m not sure. I personally don’t use parental controls. --- ## Post 100 by @lyricism — 2026-02-11T21:20:07Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > I do hate that flatpak apps follow accross users I guess, not sure that’s resolvable `flatpak install --user`? Should also bypass the admin password prompt you mentioned --- ## Post 101 by @Throwaway — 2026-02-11T23:44:36Z And what about when your kid is hanging out with other kids? At someone else house? On the school bus, or walking home after school? You can’t control other kids’ screens. Or tell other parents how they should parent. Yes, educate your kids about bad places to avoid. But we all know what it’s like to be told not to look at something. And how poorly effective that is unless your child is a mindless robot completely immune to peer pressure. Do you even have kids? My guess is a big No. --- ## Post 102 by @lyricism — 2026-02-11T23:58:43Z > [@Throwaway](#): > > And what about when your kid is hanging out with other kids? At someone else house? On the school bus, or walking home after school? I don’t see why mere exposure to anything through friends is a problem. That’s called growing up. The problem is when they find harmful stuff on their own in isolation and don’t have a social outlet for learning how to respond to it in a healthy way. Kids have always brought nude magazines onto the bus to show their friends, gory movies to sleepovers, etc. > [@Throwaway](#): > > Do you even have kids? My guess is a big No. Who cares? I’m right --- ## Post 103 by @Man — 2026-02-12T00:06:46Z > [@lyricism](#): > > The problem is when they find harmful stuff on their own in isolation and don’t have a social outlet for learning how to respond to it in a healthy way. I’ve witnessed this first hand. A classmate was laughing at a snuff video. He got instant karma. --- ## Post 104 by @ThePrivacyDad — 2026-03-01T11:49:43Z Great article, relevant to this discussion: > **[On Parenting & Age Verification](https://ghost.thenewoil.org/on-parenting-age-verification/)** > > Lately, a disturbing number of countries have decided that so-called "age verification" is the best way to protect children from the dangers of the internet, specifically by forcing all minors under a certain age (usually 15 or 16) off of social... --- ## Post 105 by @win11.shading291 — 2026-03-05T04:30:47Z Great article! It addresses pretty much every point in this thread and I agree with most of it. To me though, this: > Long-time readers know that I am deeply in favor of improving the overall level of tech literacy in society. I am very much on board with teaching parents what tools are out there to help them better raise their kids in today’s increasingly complex and integrated digital world (more on that in a moment). And obviously, parents who actually _are_ negligent should be held accountable. Is not related to this: > But again, to beat a dead horse, the numbers show that most parents are making an honest, good faith effort. Most parents are making a good faith effort and do want the best for their kids, but it doesn’t mean parents are trying to improve their tech literacy. Again, most people don’t know the concept of an IP address. > When it comes to the cracks in digital parenting efforts that kids slip through, I believe that in most cases, the overwhelming majority of blame needs to be placed squarely on the shoulders of tech companies. Tech education could be argued as the biggest issue here. Everybody is to “blame”. Society and our government (therefore all of us), parents, big techs, etc. > We don’t expect parents to be doctors and chemists to vet the safety of a cough medicine for their children, or biologists to pick safe food from the supermarket. We have laws requiring generally-available, over-the-counter products to be safe for most people when used as intended. Social media algorithms, however, are functioning exactly as intended when users “doomscroll.” It’s the digital equivalent of selling poison over the counter. So why then are we unrealistically expecting parents to be sysadmins to keep their kids safe online? This is demonstrably false. If your friend thinks everything you buy at the grocery is safe to eat, they’re wrong. Quick examples (but there are SO MANY): processed food, or just [plain red meat is linked with cancer](https://health.clevelandclinic.org/link-red-meat-cancer-need-know). Therefore the whole argument falls apart. Because you kind of are expected to check these things out. Because society mostly won’t do it for you. Kind of depressing though.I know it’s heavy. I’m tired too :sweat_smile::joy: This: > work full-time, in addition to cooking, commuting, errands, and trying to raise their kids across a variety of contexts like school, in-person activities, general safety and wellbeing, and more. should normally be enough. Yet, here we are. TL;DR, we’re all to blame, including parents and big techs. We live in a society afterall :melting_face: --- ## Post 106 by @Archer — 2026-03-11T00:57:32Z > [@anon0179693](#): > > If you give it sudo privilege for your child it might actually backfire as they may figure out how to bypass the parental control > at the end of the day sudo is essentially escalating root privileges, so the child account has to be a standard user. > > However if you do rely on Flatpak or Snap while it is a standard user, I say it is effective. In my experience with trying to create a standard user for my user to use my pc as a guest, when you do say install an app in flatpak (I do use KDE Discover doe), the admin password actually gets prompted which that would be say a parent administrator account > though I do hate that flatpak apps follow accross users I guess, not sure that’s resolvable I think flatpak installs work without sudo privileges. And since I prefer Flatpak anyway this should work out