Some ally'all don't appreciate how devastating the "BONG HITS FOR JESUS" case was, and it shows.
(Some ally'all *do* understand, tho, and that shows too.)
Some ally'all don't appreciate how devastating the "BONG HITS FOR JESUS" case was, and it shows.
(Some ally'all *do* understand, tho, and that shows too.)
This might sound like a shitpost, but I promise you it's not. In 2007, the Supreme Court held 5–4 that children do not have First Amendment rights, in that a school is legally allowed to censor their speech *even when said children are not at school*.
There's something truly toxic and fucked up about the idea that children aren't independent people whom we owe a responsibility to, but are effectively a kind of property that can be controlled and coerced.
That view, enshrined in the incredibly fucked up framing of "parents' rights," is the same view that runs through KOSA, the UK's new censorship regime, YouTube's new "AI" filter, and so many other things.
I barely even have words for what a fucked up idea it is that parents have *rights* and not *responsibilities* where their children are concerned. It shouldn't have to be a radical statement to declare that *children are people*, but it is indeed quite radical, even amongst supposed "progressives."
Let me say it again, then: children are people.
Privacy is an essential part of the web. This document provides definitions for privacy and related concepts that are applicable worldwide as well as a set of privacy principles that should guide the development of the web as a trustworthy platform. People using the web would benefit from a stronger relationship between technology and policy, and this document is written to work with both.