Blocking sites: How to please everyone?

Over the past year there have been dramatic changes in the area of ​​free access to sites, the laws that have been released have both supporters and opponents, inside I propose solutions to the problem that everyone is already tired of - What to do with blocking sites.

Why do I need to block sites?

Blocking is bad, information should be accessible to everyone and everyone - 90% of the IT community there think, but let's put ourselves in different positions and think about what can be changed.

')

Why does the state need it?

1) Limiting unwanted information from the target consumer

2) The restriction of information that may lead to consequences - incitement between national discord, etc.

3) Reducing the number of drug addicts - the elimination of the general availability of information about drugs and methods of their acquisition

Why do we need copyright holders?

1) Getting more money due to the blocking of your content and withdrawal from public access

Why do parents need it?

1) Protecting children from unwanted information

What do providers need?

1) The ability to shift responsibility from yourself to the side that really should bear it

Why do people with higher education and / or a stable psyche need this?

- No need at all

And what do we have in the end?

It turns out that the main reasonable (at least slightly) from a legal point of view, the requirements are only for the right holders.



The requirements of the state and parents are psychological.



Let's continue the reasoning, as you know, now there are a huge number of TV shows, movies and games in the Horror style, which, if used by people with an unstable or fragile psyche, can lead to bad consequences, but no one takes them away, but all because there is a gradation by age, it is believed that if a person has reached 18+ or 21+, then he is already quite able to think reasonably and assess the situation.



And let's transfer this scheme to the Internet, which would benefit everyone, the State, Parents, Users, Rights Holders and Providers.

And what should be done?

From the list above, we realized that the mandatory list of locks - only a list of copyright holders, all the rest - only protect the fragile inner world of the subject.



As a result, it is necessary that when connecting to the Internet from the provider, the user was turned on by default to filter everything that is being filtered now, that is, all current registries.



But when entering a blocked site, the user received reports that by calling the provider, by identifying himself, he could disable the filters for his Internet connection and that he understood that the responsibility to filter content for him and the children would now be carried out by anyone available to him. method.

Why will everyone be doing well?

Why does the state need it?

At 60% -80%, voluntary blocking of unwanted content will continue to work, so the state does not lose control.

Why do providers need it?

If the user has the state filter enabled and he has found prohibited content that he considers unacceptable - the provider suggests discussing it with the state authorities and registries.



If the user has disabled state. the filter and he saw invalid content, the provider suggests including state. filter or set your own if the user is not satisfied with the official.

Why do we need copyright holders?

Their law does not concern - everything suits them.

Why do parents need it?

A parent can either leave the state blocking by giving the state the opportunity to moderate content, and also choose another filter service provider, with an expanded selection of groups and options for blocking.

Why do people with higher education and / or a stable psyche need this?

People will be able to refuse the state blocking of sites.



My personal views on what to do with the right holders are described just below, so that the wolves would be fed and the sheep intact.