421
Court Rules in Pornhub’s Favor: Age-Verification Law Violates First Amendment (variety.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
41 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/2168303

Archived version: https://archive.ph/1rtQu
Archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20230901022438/https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/pornhubs-texas-age-verification-law-violates-first-amendment-ruling-1235709902/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 24 points 3 years ago* (3 children)

The whole internet censorship doesn't make any sense to begin with. We already have decades of free online porn and everyone is fine. Why would we try to limit porn usage online now? It's a cry for regulations from overprotective nannies. These blocks don't work anyways as it just needs one single kid with access to porn and they'll share it with the others. To believe we can control that is crazy.

No tool in the world will block new sites emerging not yet added to the filter or people from installing an uncensored browser.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [+] 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)
    [deleted]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago*

    Before Internet video porn, kids were finding their dads' Playboys and VHS tapes.

    And before that, people living in cabins or caves had sex in full view of their children because there was nowhere else to do it.

    Children seeing adults bang is not even remotely new, and nothing overly bad ever came of it. The only reason anyone is concerned with this is because their screwed-up religion taught them to be afraid of sex, and that is not an adequate justification for compromising innocent adults' privacy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I wish regulators good luck trying to regulate bittorrent and other peer to peer software. Not to even talk about what can be found with just installing the tor browser

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago* (1 child)

    They'll make it inconvenient to use anything but their DRM protected browser and DRM protected and certified OS. It's going to be like with android, where rooting your phone makes it impossible for most banks to do online banking. I personally stopped rooting my phone as I'm not fortunate enough to own two and carry two with me. Eventually they'll get you.

    And guess what Google and Microsoft currently work on with the new web technologies, exactly what described above.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    My bank app works fine with rooting last I checked. These days I just run a custom rom with gapps. The thing is that nothing Google and Microsoft do will matter in this case as there will always be websites that don't use it. Especially when talking about Piracy and websites running on tor or i2p. Even if illegal, new options will show up

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    I agree with your main points, but I don't think that just because something has been the status quo it doesn't deserve scrutiny. There are those out there who feel that this is an issue. For them, the best time to explore it is now. At this point it's futile, but I think it's important that we re-evaluate our laws and policies when there's a group asking for it. We just need to make sure the people making the decisions at the end of the day are competent...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    This group has been demanding the censorship of porn, consequences be damned, for decades now. They have failed thus far, and the sky has not fallen as a result, so it's pretty clear that it's safe for society and the courts to continue to dismiss their irrational hysteria.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Personally I believe that there should be at least some attempt to protect kids from seeing adult content online. Ideally of course it'd be parental responsibility, but having some sort of system in place would be good. I think the tech around porn as it currently exists is deeply harmful, both for children and for women. I'm not against porn as a thing, but like.... come on, we can't just be spreading around videos without any sort of filters and removing it from the control of the people featured in the video.

    There's not a good technical solution for these problems just yet it seems. I think the idea of age verification on-device, and then sending an 18+ or minor flag to apps/sites/etc. would be a good solution. We already click on a "I'm 18+" button, and this is functionally the equivalent but having age verification going on completely offline. Yes, people could bypass that with technical knowhow, but the point isn't to stop adults, it's to largely prevent kids from seeing this stuff.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    It should be up to the parents. If they give a shit then they should deal with it. If they don't then whatever. It shouldn't be up to the government to decide and regulate it because they're going to do a poor job creating the rules, and probably some conservatives are going to have things blocked that aren't porn and are helpful to some kid's sexual education because they're regressive.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago

    some conservatives are going to have things blocked that aren’t porn and are helpful to some kid’s sexual education because they’re regressive.

    That sounds like the real motivation for this nonsense: not to protect kids from harm, but to protect their parents from the responsibility of properly educating them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    as people say for hate speech laws: "if you aren't wanting to show children anything sexual, then there shouldn't be a problem. what do you wish to show kids that you think may be considered sexual?"

    naturally gov overreach is a concern even for speech but that doesn't stop people from trying to regulate speech.

    I think ultimately though with the system in place mentioned, it wouldn't completely block access to educational materials as parents could easily show that stuff to their kids if they so choose.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent