▲ 983 ▼ This website that threatens anyone who right clicks (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by Emerald@lemmy.world to c/mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world 230 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 14 points 2 years ago (3 children) Huh. Wonder why they stopped the warnings if it was so effective. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 26 points 2 years ago (1 child) Every porn site: "Are you over 18 years of age" 13 year old me: "Yes" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) @WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world did knowingly an intentionally expose a minor to pornography. Mandatory Sex offender registration. /s Mildly infuriating cause those charges did happen. Charge the trafficked minor with a felony to target the traffickers. (My memory might be faulty on the event) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) Isn't it wild that kids can be both perpetrators and victims of the same crime? Like if a teen takes sexually explicit video of themselves and sends it to someone, they can be arrested, tried, and convicted or producing and disseminating child pornography. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) It's not wild. Christian Fascists have always taken the stance: "the slaves will never rebel, and if they do we hit them with a big hammer". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that it's christian nationalism in this case. The state definitely has a strong, compelling interest in preventing the sexual exploitation of children (and hopefully of adults as well). I think that it's more a case that it's really hard to figure out how to deal with material that is 99% exploitative, and 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults. Because--and here's where it gets really uncomfortable for most people--kids are also sexual. They may be more or less aware and interested in sex, and may not understand the mechanics, but that shit is baked into your biology. Gay kids know they're gay at a very young age, and I knew I was straight--although I had no idea what 'straight' and 'gay' even meant by the time I was 7 (!!!). And this was well before the internet. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults the stickiest part of the wicket here is that if you carve out an exception for kids taking pictures of themselves, even if you make it still illegal but make the consequences less about punishment, millions of hideous fuckers will immediately begin probing for a way to manipulate kids into doing it themselves in a manner that doesn't technically break the law. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent [–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago It's more like "we'll continuously hit them with a big hammer to prevent any potential rebellion" permalink fedilink source parent [–] RatBin@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's just an alert() function thrown at you. Whatever it says, it is not enforceable as it is not a contract. But It's annoying permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] havocpants@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago It's a bootstrap modal, not an alert. In Firefox you can just hold shift when right clicking to bypass the js events and show the menu anyway. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Psythik@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago It was/is extremely easy to bypass. All you have to do is disable Javascript, or what 13-year-old me used to back in the day was spam the right-click button and the menu would pop up before the script could stop you. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 26 points 2 years ago (1 child) Every porn site: "Are you over 18 years of age" 13 year old me: "Yes" permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) @WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world did knowingly an intentionally expose a minor to pornography. Mandatory Sex offender registration. /s Mildly infuriating cause those charges did happen. Charge the trafficked minor with a felony to target the traffickers. (My memory might be faulty on the event) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) Isn't it wild that kids can be both perpetrators and victims of the same crime? Like if a teen takes sexually explicit video of themselves and sends it to someone, they can be arrested, tried, and convicted or producing and disseminating child pornography. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) It's not wild. Christian Fascists have always taken the stance: "the slaves will never rebel, and if they do we hit them with a big hammer". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that it's christian nationalism in this case. The state definitely has a strong, compelling interest in preventing the sexual exploitation of children (and hopefully of adults as well). I think that it's more a case that it's really hard to figure out how to deal with material that is 99% exploitative, and 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults. Because--and here's where it gets really uncomfortable for most people--kids are also sexual. They may be more or less aware and interested in sex, and may not understand the mechanics, but that shit is baked into your biology. Gay kids know they're gay at a very young age, and I knew I was straight--although I had no idea what 'straight' and 'gay' even meant by the time I was 7 (!!!). And this was well before the internet. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults the stickiest part of the wicket here is that if you carve out an exception for kids taking pictures of themselves, even if you make it still illegal but make the consequences less about punishment, millions of hideous fuckers will immediately begin probing for a way to manipulate kids into doing it themselves in a manner that doesn't technically break the law. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent [–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago It's more like "we'll continuously hit them with a big hammer to prevent any potential rebellion" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (1 child) @WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world did knowingly an intentionally expose a minor to pornography. Mandatory Sex offender registration. /s Mildly infuriating cause those charges did happen. Charge the trafficked minor with a felony to target the traffickers. (My memory might be faulty on the event) permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) Isn't it wild that kids can be both perpetrators and victims of the same crime? Like if a teen takes sexually explicit video of themselves and sends it to someone, they can be arrested, tried, and convicted or producing and disseminating child pornography. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) It's not wild. Christian Fascists have always taken the stance: "the slaves will never rebel, and if they do we hit them with a big hammer". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that it's christian nationalism in this case. The state definitely has a strong, compelling interest in preventing the sexual exploitation of children (and hopefully of adults as well). I think that it's more a case that it's really hard to figure out how to deal with material that is 99% exploitative, and 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults. Because--and here's where it gets really uncomfortable for most people--kids are also sexual. They may be more or less aware and interested in sex, and may not understand the mechanics, but that shit is baked into your biology. Gay kids know they're gay at a very young age, and I knew I was straight--although I had no idea what 'straight' and 'gay' even meant by the time I was 7 (!!!). And this was well before the internet. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults the stickiest part of the wicket here is that if you carve out an exception for kids taking pictures of themselves, even if you make it still illegal but make the consequences less about punishment, millions of hideous fuckers will immediately begin probing for a way to manipulate kids into doing it themselves in a manner that doesn't technically break the law. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent [–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago It's more like "we'll continuously hit them with a big hammer to prevent any potential rebellion" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 16 points 2 years ago (1 child) Isn't it wild that kids can be both perpetrators and victims of the same crime? Like if a teen takes sexually explicit video of themselves and sends it to someone, they can be arrested, tried, and convicted or producing and disseminating child pornography. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) It's not wild. Christian Fascists have always taken the stance: "the slaves will never rebel, and if they do we hit them with a big hammer". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that it's christian nationalism in this case. The state definitely has a strong, compelling interest in preventing the sexual exploitation of children (and hopefully of adults as well). I think that it's more a case that it's really hard to figure out how to deal with material that is 99% exploitative, and 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults. Because--and here's where it gets really uncomfortable for most people--kids are also sexual. They may be more or less aware and interested in sex, and may not understand the mechanics, but that shit is baked into your biology. Gay kids know they're gay at a very young age, and I knew I was straight--although I had no idea what 'straight' and 'gay' even meant by the time I was 7 (!!!). And this was well before the internet. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults the stickiest part of the wicket here is that if you carve out an exception for kids taking pictures of themselves, even if you make it still illegal but make the consequences less about punishment, millions of hideous fuckers will immediately begin probing for a way to manipulate kids into doing it themselves in a manner that doesn't technically break the law. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent [–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago It's more like "we'll continuously hit them with a big hammer to prevent any potential rebellion" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Bristle1744@lemmy.today 10 points 2 years ago (2 children) It's not wild. Christian Fascists have always taken the stance: "the slaves will never rebel, and if they do we hit them with a big hammer". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that it's christian nationalism in this case. The state definitely has a strong, compelling interest in preventing the sexual exploitation of children (and hopefully of adults as well). I think that it's more a case that it's really hard to figure out how to deal with material that is 99% exploitative, and 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults. Because--and here's where it gets really uncomfortable for most people--kids are also sexual. They may be more or less aware and interested in sex, and may not understand the mechanics, but that shit is baked into your biology. Gay kids know they're gay at a very young age, and I knew I was straight--although I had no idea what 'straight' and 'gay' even meant by the time I was 7 (!!!). And this was well before the internet. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults the stickiest part of the wicket here is that if you carve out an exception for kids taking pictures of themselves, even if you make it still illegal but make the consequences less about punishment, millions of hideous fuckers will immediately begin probing for a way to manipulate kids into doing it themselves in a manner that doesn't technically break the law. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent [–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago It's more like "we'll continuously hit them with a big hammer to prevent any potential rebellion" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago (1 child) I don't think that it's christian nationalism in this case. The state definitely has a strong, compelling interest in preventing the sexual exploitation of children (and hopefully of adults as well). I think that it's more a case that it's really hard to figure out how to deal with material that is 99% exploitative, and 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults. Because--and here's where it gets really uncomfortable for most people--kids are also sexual. They may be more or less aware and interested in sex, and may not understand the mechanics, but that shit is baked into your biology. Gay kids know they're gay at a very young age, and I knew I was straight--although I had no idea what 'straight' and 'gay' even meant by the time I was 7 (!!!). And this was well before the internet. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults the stickiest part of the wicket here is that if you carve out an exception for kids taking pictures of themselves, even if you make it still illegal but make the consequences less about punishment, millions of hideous fuckers will immediately begin probing for a way to manipulate kids into doing it themselves in a manner that doesn't technically break the law. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent
[–] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 6 points 2 years ago (2 children) 1% made willingly by kids, without them being coerced by adults the stickiest part of the wicket here is that if you carve out an exception for kids taking pictures of themselves, even if you make it still illegal but make the consequences less about punishment, millions of hideous fuckers will immediately begin probing for a way to manipulate kids into doing it themselves in a manner that doesn't technically break the law. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent [–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent
[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago ...And then you also have kids that grow up, and realize how fucked up that shit was, and have to deal with years of guilt and shame, while also facing the probability that the images or videos of them are still out there. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago Tell me how punishing children prevents that permalink fedilink source parent
[–] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago It's more like "we'll continuously hit them with a big hammer to prevent any potential rebellion" permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RatBin@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (1 child) It's just an alert() function thrown at you. Whatever it says, it is not enforceable as it is not a contract. But It's annoying permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] havocpants@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago It's a bootstrap modal, not an alert. In Firefox you can just hold shift when right clicking to bypass the js events and show the menu anyway. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] havocpants@lemm.ee 3 points 2 years ago It's a bootstrap modal, not an alert. In Firefox you can just hold shift when right clicking to bypass the js events and show the menu anyway. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago It was/is extremely easy to bypass. All you have to do is disable Javascript, or what 13-year-old me used to back in the day was spam the right-click button and the menu would pop up before the script could stop you. permalink fedilink source parent
