If this is about protecting children then the blocking software should be open source, it should be possible to disable it with admin permissions and parents should be given several different possible lists of inappropriate domains they can subscribe to (prepared by volunteers, NGOs, civil society groups etc). Basically this should work like adblock.
But of course that’s not what this is about - the government is the only one allowed to have a “little list”: https://youtu.be/eQ3SWFy57dw?
It should be the government to may school parents to be able to protect the kids better or at least schools should school the kids to protect yourself in the 21 century. There is technically no way to automate this.
Kids in the age of 9 are able to hack already in cases… they are way smarter as there parents or the borders ISP or the government will put in the technology they are grew up with.
From what i can see all this affords to start a programm to protect children or customers on the net are mainly start from politicians to “Do Something” and ends with crappy ineffective solutions that only create new problems and disturb … freedom indeed.
Kids and customers need to get the knowledge to protect themself.
In reallity the free internet is already compromized and no longer a free place for most people on the planet not even in the free countries.
But it is still possible and will be that as long as do not stop questioning!
Why even mention kids seriously, since it’s clearly not about kids at all? 
The only way to protect your kids is to love them, trust them and teach them well, while protecting them from government and other less prevalent crooks…
The main concern of the french government was people scammed by phishing sites, the other problem was porn sites which make no effort to check the age of their visitor.
Anyway, all this sh!t will touch all EU countries, since they will have to apply this directive :
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32022R2065
An interesting blog post from Mozilla :
Thank you, a sensible and helpful analysis of the issue, unlike some of the posts in this topic… 
anyway i go closing this, second time it go into a very offending direction.
repopened, but everyone stop offending others because they have opinion.
Be open minded keep it civil we are grown ups and this is not a sandbox.
Again, it would be nice if they offered funding for civil society groups to to create transparent blacklists (and on the plus side, we might not have to rely on Google safe browsing alone). Ideally there would be an element of crowdsourcing (if I encounter a malicious site, I can flag it). Also adults should have the right to decide whether they want turn the blocking feature on or not.
Like many politicians, the french president and his government have no technical/scientific knowledge and it shows.
Translation from usine-digitale.fr
The government intends to “secure the digital space”, in the broad sense. Even very wide. The bill presented this Wednesday, May 10 in the Council of Ministers, “aimed at securing and regulating the digital space”, aggregates measures already announced and creates new ones in a catch-all text, intended to fight both against online attacks, scams targeting consumers, disinformation, content accessible to minors and anti-competitive practices in the field of the cloud.
Measures already announced
The creation of the “anti-scam filter”, Emmanuel Macron’s campaign promise, is integrated into the bill. This device must allow Internet users, on desktop or mobile computers, to be alerted when they are about to visit a malicious site. For this, the various administrative authorities, as well as the reports of Internet users, will feed a shared database that will serve as a blacklist.
Web browsers will be used, as well as telecom operators to block sites at the DNS server level. Discussions are still ongoing regarding compensation for Internet service providers for filtering (as they had obtained after a long struggle in the fight against piracy).
Another measure already mentioned, the blocking by Arcom of pornographic sites that will not set up a robust system of verification of the age of users. The government had announced in March an experiment with a system of verification in “double anonymity”, which consists of going through a trusted third party to act as an intermediary between the pornographic site and the identity verification provider, in order to preserve the anonymity of users. A solution that satisfied the CNIL, but remember that there is still no official technical reference for adult sites, to allow them to ensure that they are in compliance.
In any case, the bill provides for blocking, delisting and fines against sites that do not apply the future repository, as well as a fine of 250,000 euros and a maximum prison sentence of one year for hosts who do not remove content deemed problematic in less than 24 hours.
The new measures
The new measures include the temporary ban from social networks targeting people convicted of cyber-harassment and incitement to hatred online, for any reason. This penalty, pronounced by a judge, will be six months and one year in the event of a repeat offence. Social networks that do not apply them will be liable to a fine of 75,000 euros. Jean-Noël Barrot explains that he wants to "put an end to the feeling of impunity" enjoyed by the perpetrators of cyber-harassment, behavior that particularly affects women on the Internet.
The government will also take advantage of this bill to regulate online games based on the blockchain, with a view to protecting minors, on the one hand, and strengthening the fight against money laundering on the other hand, he explained.
Data portability in the cloud
Unrelated to the rest of the articles of this bill, but in the spirit of protecting companies, the text introduces the regulation of costs related to migration between cloud providers. The government wants to introduce some kind of right to data portability in the cloud, and to do so intends to prohibit “transfer fees”, a practice of hyperscalers consisting of charging a high price for the transfer of data from one service to another. Migration costs, corresponding to technical operations related to this portability, will be regulated. The Minister Delegate for Digital Transition wishes to "put an end to the law of the strongest".
Finally, the bill is aimed at local authorities by creating a single database to list the activity of furnished tourist accommodation, in order to help them enforce the limitation to 120 nights per year for AirBnb-type rentals. It also introduces the administrative blocking of websites contributing to disinformation, when content has been banned from distribution (such as those of RT France and Sputnik).
Yes, why can’t people share their blacklists and pick and choose themselves which ones to use? Oh, but that would give people freedom, can’t have that. It would also make it difficult to abuse the system, can’t have that either.
But I don’t find that nearly as absurd as this: in the current year, we are still using DNS! We are unable to match a domain name to an IP address without relying on some centralised server that can be abused? Why can’t we just share our “phonebooks”? We have blockchain technology that would make this easily achievable. But that would take away power from ISPs and governments, can’t have that.
If the system was set up fairly, we could all share our DNS data, which would include blacklists. And we could do this in a decentralised way, where nobody could abuse the system for nefarious purposes (be they political or not). And we could pick and choose and have complete control over our own browsers.
But then. . . How will you police it?
I mean, cause we know if you black list websites. . . Obviously no one will figure out how to get to them. Cause you know. . . Something like a VPN doesn’t exist.
Obviously this is sarcasm.
A VPN would not help you with a domain blocking list in your browser. However, since browsers are open source, I’m sure there will be forks of browsers without those lists or an option to edit it.
However, an average normie user doesn’t know about that, and probably doesn’t even care, and that’s more than enough to cause some websites (those who are not politically compatible with the current regime, for example) to lose reach over wide audiences, thus creating unfair and biased “democracy”.
I run a server in the cloud with wireguard and StevenBlack adware + malware blocker which all my Internet data flow through for all my devices.
However, an average user wouldn’t likely know how to do this.
I think the bottom line is most browsers and sites will not get onboard with this. They are not going to deliberately undermine themselves to make Goggles happy.