232
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 99 points 3 months ago

I'm fairly sure if they took porn off the internet, there'd only be one website left, and it'd be called "Bring Back the Porn!"

[-] itsgroundhogdayagain@lemmy.ml 67 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)
[-] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 90 points 3 months ago

All these states are Small Government Freedom states!

[-] IllNess@infosec.pub 66 points 3 months ago

Also the "Think about the children!" states but force birth on minors, don't give healthcare or food to kids, and vote in pedophiles.

[-] GrindingGears@lemmy.ca 10 points 3 months ago

Cons just care about the kid until they are born. Not one second longer than that.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] lowleveldata@programming.dev 71 points 3 months ago

VPN business must be so hot right now

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 62 points 3 months ago

Unfortunately they'll go after that next.

I'm legitimately surprised at the number of pro-government control comments in this thread, though. We are truly doomed because of the people in the back.

[-] TehPers@beehaw.org 51 points 3 months ago

I find it funny that the same people who are against government regulations and giving more power to the state are the ones voting for this. They also seem to be so poorly informed that they think it'll stop anyone from watching this content lol.

[-] circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 37 points 3 months ago

Yeah, well that's the thing: they like the idea of being against government regulations, but if it is presented to them as a moral issue, they eat it up.

Case in point: a comment in this thread loosely trying to pose PH's response as being against states' rights -- in this case, due to the states tacitly regulating morality. I'm sure if the issue was e.g. raising state taxes, all of a sudden states' rights wouldn't matter.

The right wing learned a while ago that if you can pose anything as morality, there is a whole class of people that will simply lick the boot.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Buttons@programming.dev 12 points 3 months ago

There's also websites hosted in countries that don't care about US law. We can access those even without a VPN, for now...

[-] Sir_Kevin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 3 months ago

In addition, the porn business is hot right now! So many people just got cut off and are now paying for content.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] along_the_road@beehaw.org 64 points 3 months ago

Over the past year, Pornhub had to make the difficult decision to block access to users in numerous American states due to newly passed Age Verification laws (Texas, Utah, Arkansas, Virginia, Montana, North Carolina, Mississippi). In July 2024, we will unfortunately be blocking several more states who are introducing similar laws. (Indiana, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky and Nebraska.)

[-] BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca 45 points 3 months ago

Brought to you by NordVPN

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 27 points 3 months ago

Pornhub should buy a VPN service. Just cut out the middle man.

[-] Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca 71 points 3 months ago

The middle-man provides plausible deniability in this case. PornHub can genuinely say they don't see connections from age-verification states atm. That stops being true if they host the VPN, making them aware of actual client locations.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 40 points 3 months ago

That's basically the idea behind these laws.

Conservatives want to make porn illegal, which isn't easy under traditional means, so they're taking the "Putin" approach as I put it, make viewing porn hard, unattractive or even dangerous and make delivering porn to people hard, unattractive and dangerous.

Requiring an ID from the government to view porn means the government can tell who is watching what. If one of those people happens to run for office or get a little too campaigny, their porn history can be named and shamed.

And porn providers know this, and know that will drive people away from their sites, and on top of this implementing this will likely be bureaucratic and likely expensive, so they'll stop serving an area.

And when this is applied to non porn sites that have porn like Reddit or twitter or Tumblr, well guess what's going to happen, those sites will ban porn from their site.

It's basically banning porn by making it impossible to get porn in a way that doesn't end up with you getting blackmailed. Children have nothing to do with it.

[-] Wahots@pawb.social 11 points 3 months ago

*human porn.

Google can't even block yiff with safe search, lol. AI has incredible difficulty with evaluating furry porn. Which means that Mitch McConnell is going to live out his final days looking at anthropomorphic hyenas that could benchpress a fridge and have 11 inches of freedom, lmao.

Generations of southerners and people in the central US are going to be looking at considerable amounts of yiff if conservatives have their way.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] probableprotogen@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago

"Land of the Free" my ass

[-] danhab99@programming.dev 12 points 3 months ago

TBH I kinda agree with the states here.. I started watching porn waaayyyy too early and it's fucking me up.. without a doubt.. I shouldn't have seen all the things I looked for and now I gotta put up with it.

But I also agree with PornHubs decision. There is no way to verify age without exposing your identity. There isn't even a way to trust a 3rd party to verify someone's age.

There really isn't a middle ground, the only way to protect kinds (like little me) is to block the porn. But websites go on and offline every few minutes, VPNs and Tor are free and hard to blacklist.

How do we censor internet porn?? ¯⁠\⁠(⁠°⁠_⁠o⁠)⁠/⁠¯

[-] tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 107 points 3 months ago

How about less "control everyone else" and more "control your own damn kids".

My daughter didn't get unsupervised access until she proved responsible enough to trust. I want to say around 13.

Just because "I grew up with it unsupervised and it ruined me" doesn't immediately equal "everyone will have this experience". Sorry your parents didn't understand what you were doing. Sorry you saw stuff that bothered you. Don't punish everyone else for it.

I'm far from a helicopter parent... Instead, my kid has come to me for help in resolving uncomfortable or problematic interactions. We've always been clear and honest about why we've asked her to avoid certain things. Even when it made us uncomfortable. Especially then.

She's 20 now. Most cheerful kid I've ever met. No idea how that happened directly, but I know I can trust her.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 84 points 3 months ago

the only way to protect kinds (like little me) is to block the porn.

This is false.

Parents have a number of options available to them that do no need to involve the state.

[-] IllNess@infosec.pub 53 points 3 months ago

Imagine parents actually parenting instead of blaming everyone else but themselves?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TexMexBazooka@lemm.ee 62 points 3 months ago

Parental controls exists, and it’s on the parent to use them. Easier now than ever before.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 59 points 3 months ago

There is no "middle ground". The solution is to talk about sex. Early and when it's prompted aka when children start asking questions.

Stop treating sex as if it's something holy, special, taboo, and assigning a bunch of value to it. Trying to shield children from it is precisely the wrong thing to do. It's exactly the same with this fairy tale bullshit about relationships, marriage, and kids. Media makes it seem like the epitome of existence, that there's nothing greater than finding that one special person, and that there's only one special person forever and ever, and that it has to be of the opposite sex in order to procreate.

The more you hype something up, and that includes trying to hide it, the more it tantalizes people.

Again, answer questions honestly and truthfully that pertain to sex, attraction, relationships, and so on. Teach how to tell the real from the fake. Normalize knowledge and understanding of intimacy. It'll make for much healthier children and even healthier adults.

Education is the silver bullet.

Anti Commercial-AI license

[-] TheFinn@discuss.tchncs.de 27 points 3 months ago

The issue here, I'm sorry to say, is that your parents dropped the ball. They were the ones responsible for your health and the safety of your environment.

[-] azalty@jlai.lu 10 points 3 months ago

You’ll never be able to properly block it

You can just go to Reddit instead. Same thing.

[-] Zagorath@aussie.zone 8 points 3 months ago

There isn't even a way to trust a 3rd party to verify someone's age.

It depends what you mean by this. If you mean in terms of a way to trust that the third party is doing its job correctly, that's as simple as using the government itself to do the verification after seeing some proof of age.

If you mean in terms of privacy, you can't protect the privacy of the fact that someone got verified, but you can protect the privacy of their browsing after the fact. It's a neat cryptographic trick called blind signatures. The end result is a token that the user holds which they can hand over to websites that tells the website "a trusted third party has verified I'm over 18" but would not have to reveal any more information about them than that. But even if the government was that trusted third party, and they asked the websites to hand over all their logs, the government would still not be able to trace your views back to you, because the token you hold is one they never saw.

This is, in my opinion, still a bad idea. I am in no way advocating for this policy. There's still the mere fact that you have to go up to someone and basically register yourself as a porn viewer, which is fucked up. Maybe if these tokens were used in other ways, like instead of showing your licence at bars, it could be less bad (though there are other practical reasons I don't think that would work) because the tokens could be less directly associated with porn. But it's still an unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. Not to mention the cost that adding all this would put on the government—or, if they charge for these tokens, the people using it—for what actual gain, exactly?

I'm merely pointing out that from a purely technical perspective, this is quite different from when governments request back doors into chat encryption. This actually can be done. It just shouldn't, for non-technical reasons.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2024
232 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37554 readers
205 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS