Any time a bill claims to be about protecting children, 10/10 times it’s actually hiding something more sinister that has nothing to do with that. I don’t trust this.
The Crypto Wars have never ended. Governments dream of a world without public access to encryption and privacy. And many government attacks on encryption are done “for the children”.
You’d be right in this case too. It’s extremely sketchy, it’s pretty much absolute censorship power with only an informal promise that it won’t be used for anything nefarious (but a refusal to actually codify anything preventing that). “Harmful content” is left very conveniently vague.
Can you elaborate on that claim? I couldn’t find anything substantial in the article.