It is widely recognized that communications technologies such as the Internet work best when their contents are not censored (
Wikiquote - John Gilmer - "censorship as damage") from individual citizens by a third party. However, it is also widely understood that these same communications networks can create opportunities for malicious people to harm others (
Wikipedia - Online predators).
In the lifetime of the Internet, a significant proportion of legislative attempts to diminish malicious behavior online have used the justification that there exists many "sexual predators" who use telecommunications to find and ultimately enact non-consensual sexual activities with young children. This has become more succinctly discussed by politicians as "child pornography."
While everyone seems to agree that national governments play an important role in protecting its citizens from sexual crimes, no one has been able to agree on what appropriate actions are to best realize this goal.
asked by Meitar
Alternative proposals, that emerged from last endorsing round
The different proposals do not represent the best proposals, nor the more popular.
Strictly speaking they are the pareto front of the set of proposals.
You can think of it as the smallest set of proposals such that every participant is represented.
Proposal
Online predation is an over-reported, over-hyped phenomenon.
The core solution comes not from governments, but from parents. Parents who allow children to surf the net unrestricted are bad parents. The damage that a kid can do by having unrestricted access to the internet is unbounded. There
is no difference between letting children loose on unrestricted
internet and letting them loose on the streets. Would anyone
not blame a parent for letting a young child roam city streets alone? Then what is different about letting them roam the internet?
This is not to marginalise the issue of adults using the internet to
trick children into abusive situations. Governments should prosecute people who prey
on children, regardless of the mechanism used.
Also children should keep be anonymous on the internet. Children
should be taught this in school.
So by being under the vigil eye of the parents at home, and anonymous in their online transactions, how could they be in danger?
Endorsed by:
vilfredo PhilippeS Generation 3: Phase: Writing New Proposals
What should you do now? Write new proposals. How?
You can insert brand new ideas;
rewrite previous ideas (maybe trying to explain them better);
recover old ideas from the history of the question;
try to write a proposal that represent an acceptable compromise between different winning proposals. If you do this well, the new proposal will be endorsed by both the proponent of the first and of the second proposal, and you will have effectively joined those proposals.
Number of authors of new proposals: 0
Number of proposals written so far: 1
Propose an answer
Note: Proposals can be of any length and may include an abstract of up to 500 characters in length if you wish. When proposals are listed at the voting stage the abstract will be displayed if one exists, otherwise the full proposal will be displayed. For proposals longer than 1000 characters the abstract is mandatory.
Time since first proposal on this generation: 137 days, 16 hours and 22 minutes.
NOTE: 3 days 12 hours must have passed between the first proposal and the moment when the questioner can move the question on.
View History of The Question. Here you can see who voted for what, what proposals were eliminated. You can recover past proposals that you think should not be lost. Maybe explaining them better.
