You know what, I like this, as long as the filter can be fully disabled, legally. Not sure why "always on" tracking is needed, it can be local-first. A dynamic, content-based (filter video tags, image tags, not by DNS) porn or suggestive content filter would be handy.
People are saying you could just turn it off. I don't see that as the point. I would keep it on, because I want less porn. The same reason I want the government to nudge me to use a seatbelt, because as an irrational human, I can be too short-sighted to look over my long-term interests. The same applies to porn: Porn can harm me in the long-term by rewiring my brain in a bad way, but gives me short-term ecstasy.
It's a preactivated, effective filter for erotic content. It helps people who want to avoid porn avoid it.
I see it not as "government restricts porn" but "government nudges people to avoid porn, provides switch to turn off."
The reason this is dangerous is because the next step after blocking by default is asking why people want an exception. Before you know it, we're living in 1984 and we have no freedoms at all.
People are saying you could just turn it off. I don't see that as the point. I would keep it on, because I want less porn. The same reason I want the government to nudge me to use a seatbelt, because as an irrational human, I can be too short-sighted to look over my long-term interests. The same applies to porn: Porn can harm me in the long-term by rewiring my brain in a bad way, but gives me short-term ecstasy.
It's a preactivated, effective filter for erotic content. It helps people who want to avoid porn avoid it.
I see it not as "government restricts porn" but "government nudges people to avoid porn, provides switch to turn off."