At one time, when I accidentally hit the “not 18” button in the age check prompt upon entering e621, it would lead to Google as designed. While it is a good idea to redirect minors to a search engine, I suggest that the redirect should be one to a search engine that actually respects its users’ privacy, like Brave. With pedophilia being prevalent in high society, government entities, and big tech, it’s difficult to trust the safety of children with Google considering its history of privacy violations.

Absolutely wild idea, but what's stopping them from simply going back to Google?

thegreatwolfgang said:
Absolutely wild idea, but what's stopping them from simply going back to Google?

Unfortunately, nothing can stop them from making such a personal choice. However, the suggested redirect perhaps can be used to introduce a better alternative. It’s better to plant a seed than to force one’s opinion or truth upon another.

Please never recommend Brave to anyone. The browser side has a long history of engaging in malware-like behavior, including directly stealing donations that it claimed were going to content creators, maliciously modifying URLs to insert referral codes, and installing a VPN on users' machines without their knowledge or consent, among other serious breaches of user trust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)#Controversies - this is in top of its founder, Brendan Eich, donating $1,000 to Proposition 8 (a bill to ban gay marriage) and spreading medical misinformation about COVID-19.

Use trusted private search engines such as Startpage (it's the Tor default for good reason) or DuckDuckGo as a distant second (mostly for the convenience of Bang tags over privacy).

What on earth are you talking about? Why would we dump people off to some backwater search engine when they came on from the main highway that is google?
Besides, privacy is dead and google isn't the only culprit.

rainbow_dash said:
What on earth are you talking about? Why would we dump people off to some backwater search engine when they came on from the main highway that is google?
Besides, privacy is dead and google isn't the only culprit.

thinking about it, it is a little weird to boot people out to a search engine in general. not sure if there's really a much better option, though...

rainbow_dash said:
What on earth are you talking about? Why would we dump people off to some backwater search engine when they came on from the main highway that is google?
Besides, privacy is dead and google isn't the only culprit.

I understand why many would be skeptical of Brave or DuckDuckGo. However, if privacy is dead, then why are we fighting a bill that would force e621 to implement an age verification system, which by itself is a privacy violation and a prime opportunity for identity theft?

dba_afish said:
thinking about it, it is a little weird to boot people out to a search engine in general. not sure if there's really a much better option, though...

Reject Google, return to Bing

(In all seriousness though, Bing is the most accessible search engine worldwide as far as I can tell.)

song said:
…spreading medical misinformation about COVID-19.

While I don’t agree with the official claims of COVID, this is a different debate to discuss but outside e621.

song said:
Use trusted private search engines such as Startpage (it's the Tor default for good reason) or DuckDuckGo as a distant second (mostly for the convenience of Bang tags over privacy).

These are also good. Yes, even the !Bang feature works with Brave! Overall, Startpage may be our best bet so far.

thegreatwolfgang said:
Reject Google, return to Bing

(In all seriousness though, Bing is the most accessible search engine worldwide as far as I can tell.)

As far as privacy is concerned, Microsoft is just as bad as Google.

Google should get broken up by the FTC for introducing that fucking AI generated summary feature

Am I the only person who finds DDG/Bing (same engine) extremely imprecise? I often like to search for very specific phrases and quotes, sometimes even deliberately misspelled, and while Google can more/less parse them, other engines, especially Bing, either completely ignore the phrase or show irrelevant results for similar/ballpark terms. 🙄

couldn't there be a javascript that goes back to the prior page upon clicking the button

send them somewhere like this instead

Yeah, sure. I agree with retargeting it elsewhere, but perhaps not Brave as per Song's comments. It's a niche thing, but in this case there's really no reason to link to Google specifically. "But but but privacy is already dead" is only making the problem worse. If e621 is going to indirectly endorse something by sending users there, there's no reason it should be big tech. If the children desire Google so much they'll know their own way back.

Of course we're always going to have links to Twitter/X, Facebook and other morally bankrupt services as post sources, but those actually serve a function. The website minors get sent to could be literally anywhere as long as it's not here.

bitez said:
couldn't there be a javascript that goes back to the prior page upon clicking the button

That would work in the cases where users have been referred from somewhere, but not if they've came to the website directly. Returning them to the page they came from could be problematic in itself, since a webpage that contains e621 links is also likely not a place children should be directed to.

Funny enough logging in always redirects you to the posts page instead of whichever page you were currently on.

wwwwwwwww said:
send them somewhere like this instead

Aye.

It’s surprisingly difficult to find resources for kids that is both engaging and relevant to the topic.
Although I did find Amaze ORG’s YouTube channel after 2 hours.
We even have (had?) one of their videos featured on the site. Not sure if it got taken down or if the source wasn’t linked.

just send them to about:blank or something.

dba_afish said:
just send them to about:blank or something.

Or maybe it could just, forcibly close the e621 tab via JavaScript. That feels like the most neutral option.
Using about:blank could potentially confuse some users.

And also, sending users straight to /posts page after login doesn't feel right.

abecedeef said:
Or maybe it could just, forcibly close the e621 tab via JavaScript. That feels like the most neutral option.
Using about:blank could potentially confuse some users.

And also, sending users straight to /posts page after login doesn't feel right.

can only be called under certain conditions:

MDN: Window: close() method
This method can only be called on windows that were opened by a script using the Window.open() method, or on top-level windows that have a single history entry

In all cases except explicitly visiting the site via pasting a link, manually typing the url, or being opened by an application outside of the browser (e.g. Discord) this would fail

I suggest minesweeper.

I do agree that "I'm not 18" should not go to google.com, but either go to previous page, close the tab or open blank page.
Alternatively could be e926, however that website is also 18+.

mairo said:
I do agree that "I'm not 18" should not go to google.com, but either go to previous page, close the tab or open blank page.
Alternatively could be e926, however that website is also 18+.

Yeah, just backing out seems like the best option & iirc used by the few other 18 sites I run into.

Regarding e926, that’s how you get a FurAffinity situation where they allow ages 13+.

No one wants to have the dildo company host a website for minors.

Privacy is dead, unfortunately; Google and Microsoft simply finished nailing the coffin shut. And also...there's no such thing as a private conversation...how many times have the "big carrier" companies been caught sharing personal information?

Or maybe just like, "about:blank"?

Edit, someone beat me to it, damn.

indigohowl said:
Privacy is dead, unfortunately; Google and Microsoft simply finished nailing the coffin shut.

Only as dead as you put in the effort to exercise your rights and avoid detection.

Thing is, by choosing to “opt-out,” you may as well be purchasing a vanity license plate as it’s unusual for someone to be opting out.
It’s the same concept as a do-not-call list attracting more callers.

But every little bit counts. No stretch of the internet is safe but you can always make it safer for yourself and those around you.

indigohowl said:
And also...there's no such thing as a private conversation...how many times have the "big carrier" companies been caught sharing personal information?

*cough* cloudflare

It’s best to assume everyone you interact with doesn’t have the best intention in mind. Basic internet safety even, as I’ve linked previously in this thread.

Particularly why people stick to free open source software. If several (thousand) independent users can verify something is safe, it’s probably safe.

aversioncapacitor said:
*cough* cloudflare

Is it conspiracy posting time already?

song said:
Please never recommend Brave to anyone. The browser side has a long history of engaging in malware-like behavior, including directly stealing donations that it claimed were going to content creators, maliciously modifying URLs to insert referral codes, and installing a VPN on users' machines without their knowledge or consent, among other serious breaches of user trust: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brave_(web_browser)#Controversies - this is in top of its founder, Brendan Eich, donating $1,000 to Proposition 8 (a bill to ban gay marriage) and spreading medical misinformation about COVID-19.

Use trusted private search engines such as Startpage (it's the Tor default for good reason) or DuckDuckGo as a distant second (mostly for the convenience of Bang tags over privacy).

I will die on the hill that Brave Browser is a worse privacy offender than Chrome or Edge, specifically because it pretends to be private while slurping up as much user info as everyone else, AND does even worse behaviours, as you evidenced

Just use Firefox with the "gib us data" toggles disabled and install uBlock origin

I see that this thread has become much more polarizing than intended. This wasn’t supposed to be a political debate let alone a heated one, yet here we are.

Many of you made good points regarding different redirects. As far as search engines are concerned, so as to not ruffle any political feathers, Startpage would be our best bet.

rokuenluuka said:
I see that this thread has become much more polarizing than intended. This wasn’t supposed to be a political debate let alone a heated one, yet here we are.

Many of you made good points regarding different redirects. As far as search engines are concerned, so as to not ruffle any political feathers, Startpage would be our best bet.

There's no political debate happening here? What are you talking about?

Baidu, why not?

regsmutt said:
There's no political debate happening here? What are you talking about?

It's right up there with a black male saying he can't be racist because he's black...and yes, I've heard that recently in real life.

Because for some people, everything is political. Or religious. Or about money. Or...you get the idea.

regsmutt said:
There's no political debate happening here? What are you talking about?

Political arguments regarding COVID and Brave founder’s history were brought up. I won’t delve any more into that so as to not cause any further upheaval here.

man, we're really out here in the timeline where believing in the efficacy of disease prevention measures could be considered a political take.

dba_afish said:
man, we're really out here in the timeline where believing in the efficacy of disease prevention measures could be considered a political take.

Sad but true…

rokuenluuka said:
I see that this thread has become much more polarizing than intended. This wasn’t supposed to be a political debate let alone a heated one, yet here we are.

Many of you made good points regarding different redirects. As far as search engines are concerned, so as to not ruffle any political feathers, Startpage would be our best bet.

It became a political debate the second you starting spewing Covid conspiracy theories, and suggested linking users to a browser with a horrible human rights stance, as Song pointed out.

No, I really mean it when I say privacy is dead. There's no clawing it back, no "every little bit helps". None of us like it, but we live in big tech now. Sending users back to it is the simplest and most applicable place they'd be. They don't need to use it; they can go anywhere they want after that. But we aren't sending them to niche browsers with bad reps or e926.