-
11 votes
-
Internet hacking is about to get much worse - We can no longer leave online security to the market
22 votes -
Why are African governments criminalising online speech? Because they fear it.
8 votes -
Living with Slenderman
7 votes -
The Internet Archive fixes nine million broken links on Wikipedia
16 votes -
Parents: have your kids been affected by age-inappropriate content?
I was having a conversation with one of my coworkers who mentioned that her child showed a fascination with scary, Halloween-type stuff starting around age 6. She and her husband had a hard time...
I was having a conversation with one of my coworkers who mentioned that her child showed a fascination with scary, Halloween-type stuff starting around age 6. She and her husband had a hard time with whether they should let him enjoy it or limit it. They weren't sure whether to let him read scary books or watch spooky stuff on YouTube, particularly because it's the type of content that can very easily be age-inappropriate--especially for a 6 year old. Nevertheless, it was relatively easy for them to keep it to stuff like Jack-o-Lanterns and black cats since he was so young.
The boy is now older but has retained his interest, and the parents are still struggling with decisions about allowable content, especially because he is starting to age into books and movies that deal with much darker stuff, particularly ideas about death/violence.
I'm not a parent, but I am a teacher, and I have to admit that I'm uncomfortable with some of the stuff my students are exposed to. Over the years I've heard students as young as twelve discuss horror movies like the Saw series or The Human Centipede. I've had middle school students bring books like Gone Girl and 50 Shades of Gray to class. On one hand, I think kids are resilient, and I think a lot of the more difficult or disturbing stuff doesn't quite land for them because they don't really have a context into which to put it yet. I also believe that fictional media is a mostly safe way for us to explore troubling or disturbing ideas.
On the other hand, I think the internet has caused our children to grow up a lot faster than they used to, as they are exposed to mature content (whether intentionally or accidentally) from a very early age. When I was growing up the worst I could do was check out a slightly-risqué book from the school library and hope my parents never found it in my backpack. Now kids are watching violent (often real-world) and pornographic content starting as young as elementary school. Nothing can make your heart sink quite like sixth graders talking excitedly over lunch about a video of a real person getting crushed to death.
What I genuinely don't know is if this has any negative developmental effect. Am I just clutching my pearls here? I'd love to hear some parents talk about how they've handled the decision of what's right for their kids and whether they've had fallout from their kids consuming content that's not appropriate for them.
26 votes -
How to build a low-tech website
31 votes -
Encrypting SNI: Fixing one of the core internet bugs
8 votes -
Discussion: Internet Piracy: ISPs tracking every your move
Sorry for the minor clickbait title Let's talk about ISPs in USA. In my personal opinion, they do so much "bad" things to their clients, as opposed to, most noticeably, Europe (I guess it's...
Sorry for the minor clickbait title
Let's talk about ISPs in USA. In my personal opinion, they do so much "bad" things to their clients, as opposed to, most noticeably, Europe (I guess it's because, (at least in my country, IDK about another European states) much bigger competition, even in village with 500 people, there are about 3-4 ISPs, but there are even more of them in bigger cities). They throttle websites (even before they destroyed Net Neutrality), they track that you use your network too much and throttle you because of it ("they may send you a warning for excessive internet usage and throttle your bandwidth for awhile.").
Now, they track that you download/upload too much and/or pirate movies and can throttle your account, downgrade your account, or completely refuse to provide you any service.
Why? Why are they allowed to do this? Why they can track users and throttle them just because they download too much (I've read article about it, downloading too much, ISPs slowing down internet for few hours, link soon) or they suspect you of pirating. How they dare intercept your packets, read them and throttle you because of this? Why is it wildly accepted as completely normal behaviour?
And I could continue on things like them publicly buying votes to remove Net Neutrality from the way, and so on.
I honestly do not know why so much people are OK with this. Could we start a discussion on this?
Throttling because of piracy sources: 1 2 3 4
Pre-NetNeutrality-End websites throttling: 1 229 votes -
Introducing the Cloudflare Onion Service
12 votes -
The European Union versus the Internet
12 votes -
Internet taxes are sweeping sub-Saharan Africa — and silencing citizens
9 votes -
The Bullshit Web
61 votes -
Controversial Copyright Directive approved by EU Parliament
27 votes -
Tomorrow, the EU will vote on the future of the internet (again)
10 votes -
Why are newspaper websites so horrible?
23 votes -
Google AMP can go to hell
7 votes -
YouTube, Netflix videos found to be slowed by wireless carriers
20 votes -
China officially bans ABC website, claims internet is 'fully open'
9 votes -
DOOM: The fake outrage
25 votes -
California lawmakers pass nation’s toughest net neutrality law
14 votes -
Logged off: Meet the teens who refuse to use social media
39 votes -
We can't fix the internet (because we conflate social media with the entire internet)
13 votes -
How to design for the modern web
41 votes -
Here's why your static website needs HTTPS
30 votes -
How does the internet work?
9 votes -
There should be ‘consequences’ for platforms that don’t remove people like Alex Jones, US Senator Ron Wyden says
12 votes -
An ISP based in Texas has complained to a judge that the music industry to trying to turn internet providers into the "copyright police"
16 votes -
Mozilla files arguments against the US Federal Communications Commission – latest step in fight to save net neutrality
14 votes -
404 Riddles: An Internet Riddle
17 votes -
Notpron: the hardest riddle available on the internet
9 votes -
Deplatforming works
10 votes -
China's rebel generation and the rise of 'hot words'
8 votes -
Rising sea levels could knock out the Internet in 15 years
18 votes -
The internet trolls have won. Sorry, there’s not much you can do
21 votes -
It’s not about money: we asked catfish why they trick people online
7 votes -
How the shared family computer protected us from our worst selves
11 votes -
Censorship 2.0: Shadowy forces controlling online conversations
9 votes -
El Paquete, Cuba's answer to digital content distribution
7 votes -
A generation grows up in China without Facebook, Google, or Twitter
7 votes -
Internet publication of 3D printing files about guns: Facts and what's at stake
7 votes -
"Don't Be Evil, Unless It's Worth Untold New Riches": Whistleblower Reveals Google Plan to Launch Censored Search Engine in China
22 votes -
Does anybody actually revisit url/page that bookmarked?
I myself is a pinboard user since 2011 and have since bookmarked 4 274 links. But I find it funny that I never visit those URL or page ever again. When I bookmark something I thought it was useful...
I myself is a pinboard user since 2011 and have since bookmarked 4 274 links. But I find it funny that I never visit those URL or page ever again.
When I bookmark something I thought it was useful or important. But often it turns out not the case.
Am I the only one? What do you guys do with thousands of stuff you bookmarked?
17 votes -
Just an observation, Google Search is ready for replacement.
We're obviously being denied the benefits of so called advances in algorithmic search, as evidenced by the poor showing of Google Itself in unusual searches. For example, if you search images for...
We're obviously being denied the benefits of so called advances in algorithmic search, as evidenced by the poor showing of Google Itself in unusual searches. For example, if you search images for "runners wearing green hats -shamrock -st. -patrick" Guess how many runners wearing green hats you get?
So search is hard? I think it's more likely that Google and everyone else is more interested in selling you a hat than helping you find a picture of a runner in a green hat.
16 votes -
On the engineer's responsibility in protecting privacy (Paul Baran, RAND, 1968)
10 votes -
How to block ads like a pro
34 votes -
Truth, disrupted
8 votes -
Reddit reinvents the chat room with subreddit chat
31 votes -
On the future computer era modification of the American character and the role of the engineer, or, a little caution in the haste to number (1968)
7 votes -
Despite Chrome’s pending “mark of shame,” three major news sites aren’t HTTPS
18 votes