Parents are increasingly rethinking what it means to create an online footprint their child can’t actively consent to.
Here’s a non-paywalled link to an article published in the Washington Post a few days ago. It’s great to see this kind of thing getting some mainstream attention. Young children have not made an informed decision about whether they want their photos posted online.
You must log in or register to comment.
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don’t promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
- 0 users online
- 57 users / day
- 383 users / week
- 1.5K users / month
- 5.7K users / 6 months
- 1 subscriber
- 3.12K Posts
- 78K Comments
- Modlog
Non free software pretending to be foss. It pisses me off and it can’t possibly be better than third party clients.
https://gitlab.futo.org/videostreaming/grayjay it is a paid program that is why it is not allowed to fork from it atleast without approval .Altough you can use it without paying
Exactly, it is not Foss
I mean it is not foss ,but more open than the youtube client app
That’s bad comparison. Why use something that harms your freedom when you could use something that protects it? Grayjay is up there with Nord VPN and other services shilled by Youtubers.