Ask HN: Instead of intrusive age-check why can't we have "two internet"?

2 points by kreco 40 days ago | 4 comments

Let's say I'm a parent with some kids, they each have a smartphone and SIM cards, and so they can connect to the internet.

Why cannot the internet/phone provider place them on an "alternative" network with alternative defaults, like kid-friendly DNS and what not? Since the age of the customer is likely to be known at the subscription time.

At home, you would need two connections, one "normal" and one kid-friendly, with another default DNS. You can select which one is the default that would be picked up by the Ethernet cable. Then you just need two wifi network, exactly as you can have "guest access".

Am I being too naive or would this solve like 99% of the problems at very low complexity cost?

rolph 40 days ago |

a major part of the problem space, is the web, experienced via the browser is not the internet.

escape the browser space, and you will experience the actual internet, a place where no one is supposed to be, a "Darknet" an illegitimate place that is not commercialized, where you have to make your own choices.

theandrewbailey 40 days ago |

Both connections would use the same "kid unfriendly" internet. You could set DNS servers, but each client can use another DNS server. You'd need a completely separate network (and connection) in order for it to be foolproof.

kreco 40 days ago | |

The DNS was mostly an example, I'm very ignorant regarding the network stack, but I would naively believe that the administrator of the internet router would have the ability to filter a lot of content without the client to be able to bypass it.

Like at work there are some website I cannot visit, and I'm not sure I can change DNS to change that (but maybe I can, I've never tried).

diavelguru 40 days ago |

Interesting idea. Would need new laws enacted and government oversight which I'm not sure how people feel about that especially for minors. Maybe there will come a time where all people (in the US or otherwise) have some form of government document that uniquely identifies them (a trusted identity platform not just an ID) though there is and will be lots of pushback. A simple search revealed this: "The implementation of universal government ID systems, particularly digital IDs, is frequently criticized as a key component of a dystopian surveillance state. Critics warn that such systems can lead to mass surveillance, restriction of freedom of movement, and control over personal, financial, and medical lives." So take it for what you will. Can we do this? Yes. Will we is another matter.