• 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Jesus, at this point over half the country will ban porn because of religious extremists who hate freedom. Fascism and anti free speech.

    • qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Age verification for pornography has something like a 70% approval rating. It’s not a religious extremism issue, it’s a “normies don’t want or care about their freedoms issue”.

      • psychothumbs@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        ·
        11 months ago

        I think there’s a lot of vague support for keeping porn away from children that evaporates in the context of the actual issue at hand where porn sites are being mandated to collect and store the IDs of every visitor.

      • phillaholic@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        The concept is not terrible, the implementation is. Passing this law with no secure way of proving identity is where it’s clearly just a Christo-fascist power move.

        • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          11 months ago

          I think there is a lot more to this that a secure way or protecting children.

          It’s the base idea that I have to prove who I am online at all. That I cannot lie. Lieing should be a fundamental right. Not identifying yourself should be a fundamental right. Giving a false name should be a fundamental right.

          • phillaholic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I get that too, but we wouldn’t want people buying alcohol or fire arms anonymously. Imo access to pornography should be like access to R-Rated movies or Parental Advisory music. Guidelines set either by the industries or government, but policed by parents.

            • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              You don’t want people buying alcohol anonymously? Im totally for it.

              You’ve hit the nail on the head while at the same time missing everything. Parents should be policing their children and what they do on computers. It’s not like there is a spectrum between pg porn and x rated porn. The websites themselves are already the R rating.

              • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                things like Ecchi and stripteases exist, but its too mild for PornHub. Soo… I’m not really making a point.

          • phillaholic@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            I get that too, but we wouldn’t want people buying alcohol or fire arms anonymously. Imo access to pornography should be like access to R-Rated movies or Parental Advisory music. Guidelines set either by the industries or government, but policed by parents.

        • Obsession@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          The only implementation I would support is one where the asking website doesn’t know your ID, and the verifying website doesn’t know what you’re trying to visit. Essentially just asking for a one-time use token that verified your age, and providing that token to the website you’re trying to visit.

          Edit for a bit more detail: User authenticates to ID website, which provides them a token with age verification (true/false) and a short (10 minute?) TTL. This token is encrypted by the ID website. User then provides this token to the asking website (eg: pornhub). Pornhub then sends the token back to the ID website to decrypt it. All pornhub knows about you is whether or not you’re of age, and the verifying website never knows what the token is for.

          • NecroSocial@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            There would be too much value in tracking that token for such a scheme to stay secure. Governments or shady corporations or illegal black markets or all of the above would be all over keeping tabs on what sites are visited by which tokens and matching them to identities.

            • Obsession@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              The whole point is that the token itself doesn’t have any personal info attached to it, only a yes/no and expiry time.

              I’ll even one up my original suggestion - it uses standard public/private key encryption, where the government issues a simple json token with a yes/no Boolean and a TTL. The public key that can decrypt the tokens is public. Pornhub then decrypts the token and verifies the boolean and expiry date, all without talking to the government at all.

          • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            that’s amazing, I would love to see this implemented, problem is nobody wants to set it up, they want the data. I think they enjoy the discomfort hoping people will stop. If the system was setup and used despite all the pressure, the short TTL may create the risk of traffic correlation attacks, especially for the smaller, less traffic sites. this is something that can likely be fixed.

        • TwilightVulpine@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          The way the US is going, with anti-LGBT laws popping up all over the place, I have less trust for the government collecting that information than the sketchy porn sites themselves.

        • Sylver@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          I think a law verifying your age over the internet inherently breaks the idea of a free internet, of which we are already seeing degradation of by Google and DRM/web integrity anyways.

          • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I think a law verifying your age over the internet inherently breaks the idea of a free internet

            That was broken decades ago.

            • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              today couldn’t have happened if yesterday’s degradation didn’t occur. it’s been slowly breaking for a while now.

          • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t see how it doesn’t violate free speech. Imagine needing the government’s permission to talk to someone?

            Edit: forgot a word

            • Sylver@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I agree. Even internet security protocols are at risk, and the dinosaurs responsible for writing laws don’t understand basic encryption let alone the idea that it is 100% a needed concept in a free, fair, and just society.

            • phillaholic@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              There are already age limitations that are constitutional. You can’t run for office, buy alcohol, drive a car etc.

              • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                That’s not speech. You can age limit things, but not on speech. Beyond that, the limitations on speech have to meet certain conditions where it’s in the publics best interest and doesn’t put too much burden on the public.

          • FaceDeer@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            That just means that almost every politician on both “sides” are pushing a Christo-fascist power move.

            The Democratic party is only better than the Republicans on this in relative terms. As a non-American looking in, both of them are right-wing parties that bow to religious interests. It’s just that one of them is waaaay off to the right wing, out in the reeds of loonieville, whereas the other has kept at least within spitting distance of center most of the time.

          • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Not sure where stating that means there’s any difficulty in understanding anything. That’s such a naive perspective to take. No one is claiming a Texas state senator that is a Democrat is the same as a Democrat in a deep blue state. It’s all relative and only fools or liars would claim otherwise.

            • qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              No, not “no one is claiming that”, because I am claiming that. Contrary to your apparent belief, large swathes of urban Texas are little different politically from a blue city anywhere else in the country. The state senator for Austin was censured for wearing a “pussy” hat during a public meeting. Does that sound Christofascist to you? Close to 40% of the State legislature are Democrats and the majority of them approved this bill. Acting like a representative for Austin and a representative for rural Texas are both Christofascists because they come from the same state is actively counterproductive to gaining a better understanding of the situation. If you’re tilting at windmills and blaming imaginary enemies you’re going to miss the real forces that are driving these decisions.

      • whileloop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s kinda tragic too. I do agree with the sentiment behind age verification, it is in the kids’ best interest that they not be using porn at that age. But there’s really no way to effectively enforce this without violating basic rights. There is no good solution. Given that dilemma, all we can do is try to better prepare parents to deal with this in their home.

        • SpaceCadet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Is it really that bad if kids see a bit of porn? Like really? I grew up before the internet, but even in my day porn mags and VHS tapes got passed around when I was a teenager. Kids are always going to be curious.

          Even so on the internet there are much worse things than porn that are harmful for the development of children. There are various groups of questionable morality like incels, or other mysogynistic groups, alt right stuff like neonazis, christofascists, climate deniers, … If I had children, I would be much more concerned about them falling into one of those ideological traps than them seeing some titties. Hell, even TikTok is probably more harmful for giving them a dopamine addiction and an increasingly short attention span.

          So to me, it seems a bit weird to single out porn. It feels like a convenient scapegoat for parents who don’t want to spend time raising their kids and paying attention to what they are looking at on the internet.

          • threadloose@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t have kids either, but my siblings and friends do, and kids today aren’t just seeing a little porn. It’s not like Playboys in the woods or a single 2 MB image downloaded for hours on dial-up. It’s pretty violent sexual activities in video, like strangling or surprise anal sex. Even twenty years ago, my first sexual partners had moves they picked up from porn, but they weren’t violent. Talking to young women today, the moves their partners are picking up and have been normalized by porn tend to be violent. Like, I never had a friend in college tell me that her boyfriend slapped her during sex and called her a dirty whore while she cried, but that seems to be a pretty common experience today.

            The issue is that even older teens don’t have the life experience to contextualize what they see in porn and separate it from how you act in real life. If you’re into slapping people, that’s fine, but you’ve got to talk to your partner about it before you do to. If you’re getting your sex education from porn, then you don’t get the people skills part that’s important for successful relationships in real life.

            This study touches on a lot of what I’m mentioning here, and they found a correlation between violence in teen relationships and porn viewing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6751001/

            So, yeah. I don’t know what the solution is. I don’t think it’s sending a copy of your ID to a porn site, which seems incredibly risky for other reasons. I think sex and relationship education would help a lot, but that only connects with the kids who listen. Obviously there’s a parenting component there, but I don’t know how many parents are mentally health enough to have those conversations honestly. 🙃 Probably not the ones who wrote this bill.

            • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              I don’t really know what the answer is either, but you’re right. The extremes we see in porn today are very concerning. The things you listed shouldn’t be in main stream porn and need consent and open conversation outside of sex before adults who understand what they are doing actually do them. I find it crazy that it’s made its way into mainstream videos and blame the idea of things having to be ever crazier, ever more extreme to get attention.

              But blocking teenagers off from porn, or trying to, won’t help anything. I think we need to be open, honest, and have real sex education. I also think these things are why some sex ed now includes actually how to have sex rather than the physical components. But that serves to give the prudish more ammo of how sex education is porn itself even when meant to be purely educational and combat these extremes people are seeing. There’s so much nuance to the issue that I think a lot of people get bogged down on one part or on their own preconceptions.

              • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Talking to young women today, the moves their partners are picking up and have been normalized by porn tend to be violent.

                the other thing it does is gives people trauma.

        • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
          cake
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          The simple “Are you over 18? Yes/No” prompt worked just fine. If a kid lies and presses yes, who fucking cares lol. They’re not seeing it on accident at that point. We need to stop this puritan society, kids are going to explore this stuff. They always have and they always will.

        • Brainsploosh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          How is it in their best interest not to consume porn?

          I would have guessed that’s where the religious oppression was targeted, whatwith being overly obsessed about peoples’ sexualities.

        • PunnyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          At what age? 6? Sure.

          16? 13? Less likely that it’s “in their best interest”, because they’re now dealing with those physical and psychological changes that are very much in line with the content of porn.

          Just like TV, movies, video games, books, and other forms of fantasy / entertainment, parents need to be involved, have earnest communication with, and provide education for, their kids about the porn they will be consuming.

          But “porn is icky”, so they won’t.

      • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        11 months ago

        “Are you over 18: Yes/No”

        Think nobody is arguing against that. I’d rather not give 1000 different private companies my government ID who get hacked all the time. The same people passing these laws had nude magazines growing up too.

      • umami_wasabi@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        70% approval rating but what’s the base? If it only surveyed 10 people and 7 say yes, it is 70% but means nothing.

      • mountainCalledMonkey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        Genuinely curious where you’re getting these numbers. I can’t seem to find any formal public opinion polls on the enacted or proposed bills

        • qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          There was a Politico article about this last week:

          https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/08/08/age-law-online-porn-00110148

          The public is also on her side. “You poll this, it’s like an 85-15 issue,” explained Jon Schweppe, the policy director for the socially conservative think tank American Principles Project. Age-verification for porn is not his think tank’s only priority, but when they poll it against other priorities in swing states, age-verification blows the rest out of the water, with 77 percent in support and 15 percent opposed.

          Here’s a Pew survey suggesting that the majority of Americans consider porn harmful:

          A large 70%-majority of Americans reject the idea that “nude pictures and X-rated videos on the internet provide harmless entertainment for those who enjoy it”; only 27% agree; in general, opinions about pornography have become slightly more conservative over the past 20 years. Currently 41% agree that “nude magazines and X-rated movies provide harmless entertainment for those who enjoy it,” while 53% disagree. The number saying such material is harmless has fluctuated, declining from 48% in 1987 to 41% in 1990 and then varying by no more than four percentage points thereafter. The pattern is more mixed for other values related to freedom of expression.

          Note that trends in this space are getting more conservative, rather than less. This tracks with my experience with Gen Z.

          Admittedly, I have not seen any polling about specific legislation. It hasn’t been long since these bills were passed, and I don’t know if it’s a priority for pollsters. But if nothing else, just look through the thread. Lemmy leans way further left that the general public, and even here most people’s problems with it are about execution rather than intent.

          • dragonflyteaparty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I do think it’s worth noting that they specifically polled swing states. It’s a bit different imo to address political stances in specifically swing states and to use that to judge the beliefs of society overall. I think it’s also worth noting exactly how they phrased the questions. These answers also make me think that these aren’t really swing states at all. I’m appalled by them.

            • Women’s Sports: 56 percent supported (33 percent opposed) laws to protect women’s sports at the K-12 and collegiate levels.

            • Sex Changes for Minors: 56 percent supported (31 percent opposed) laws banning puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and physical sex change surgeries for children.

            • Sexual Topics in Schools: 60 percent supported (34 percent opposed) laws banning instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity from kindergarten through third grade.

            • Parental Notification: 59 percent supported (30 percent opposed) laws requiring schools to notify parents if their child identifies in class as transgender.

            • Age Verification for Porn: 77 percent supported (15 percent opposed) laws requiring age verification for accessing online pornography. Reining in Big Tech: 50 percent supported (36 percent opposed) laws preventing censorship of political speech by Big Tech.

            https://americanprinciplesproject.org/media/new-app-poll-swing-state-voters-strongly-oppose-transgender-agenda/

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      Oh, don’t forget kosa, it has bipartisan support

      They want to hold sites responsible for children accessing NSFW content on them. Which means ID of some kind

      It would also apply to user posted content

    • Wahots@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      The only porn left will be yiff, because sites struggle to classify it as porn (it even makes it past google’s filters). And a new generation of furries will be born. Their ban will be their undoing, lmao.

      “The elder scrolls told of their return. The defeat was merely a delay.”

    • Buelldozer@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      I doubt it could be actually banned. The US had this fight decades ago and Porn was given 1A protections. If they could ban it they would but they can’t so they are doing the next best thing by making it inconvenient and uncomfortable for people to get to.

      • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        The problem though is that all those things we fought for before and being rolled back. You could have said the same about abortion, but then we regressed because of religious extremists.

    • Master@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      and then those same people who want it banned close their curtains and start watching it.

  • poshKibosh@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    11 months ago

    Even if there was some secure, hardened way of verifying people’s ages without handing over PII to random websites, these age verification laws are still utterly ridiculous.

    It’s not the government’s job to parent your kids on the internet. If you don’t want your kids visiting specific websites or viewing specific content, you take 15 minutes out of your goddamn day to do your job as a parent, and set up a content blocker on your home network.

      • SorteKanin@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not sure why you’re being downvoted, you’re right. The average parent has no idea how to block their kids from visiting pornhub. I don’t think that’s an excuse to make age verification required. Parents should educate themselves on this stuff.

    • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Nah, it’s easier if I have the state do it for me while inconveniencing everyone else. /s

  • qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    11 months ago

    The sicko in me hopes they spend the next two weeks linking every policymaker in the state to their pornography habits and just dump the whole dataset online. Yeah, it would probably counterproductive and not great for democracy but I wouldn’t it be the sickest burn of all time?

    • psychothumbs@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      11 months ago

      Ironically it would be so much easier to do that if they actually implemented the law they’re suing over, which demands they record the ID of everyone who uses the site.

      • orclev@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        11 months ago

        Hmm, the article is a little confusing, but it sounds like they’re mostly just complaining about the age verification, not really suing over that specifically. The real sticking point, and the one they actually stand a good chance of winning in court is about the warning they’re being required to display that’s both libelous and factually false. Texas for better or worse is within their rights to require age verification, even the very odious version of it being proposed that would require collecting state IDs, so it’s unlikely that they would actually win if that was their only issue with the law. Fortunately Texas (and others) massively overstepped by trying to slap a health and safety warning a la cigarette packages onto porn sites since they let a bunch of nutty politicians write the text of the message rather than actual medical professionals (probably because they couldn’t find any respectable medical professional that would endorse their wacky notions).

        • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Not really. It does kind of tread on the first amendment. Like, imagine I wasn’t allowed to say something to you because the government doesn’t allow me to. What does that sound like? Like, you can’t put barriers on free speech.

          • Stuka@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            This is a 5th grade understanding of the 1st amendment. Good job, now let’s work on the adult one.

      • qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Exactly. Malicious compliance, while reminding people exactly why they shouldn’t be so quick to give up their anonymity on the internet.

        • iopq@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          How do you expect them to do this… without verifying who they are?

          • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I’m not a member of the house or Senate so I don’t know what they can do. But I’m sure they can have as many open doors as they’re like.

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    11 months ago

    My parents had a porn blocker, and all it made me do was learn enough about computers to circumvent it. Even if they put age verification in front of every porn site in the world there’s still torrents and chat rooms and forums all over where you can find it, and kids will find it. Next thing they’ll mandate is putting toothpaste back in the tube.

    • Muddobbers@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      Not only will they find it, they’ll end up going to the sketchier sites that don’t do the age verification because they’re not well known enough and not following the laws and they’ll likely get something infected on the computer/network or worse.

      • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Not only will they find it, they’ll end up going to the sketchier sites that don’t do the age verification because they’re not well known enough and not following the laws and they’ll likely get something infected on the computer/network or worse.

        It’s like that time we declared a war on drugs and then there were no drugs. Wait, actually that led to a massive black market and tons of violence.

        Point being, you’re not gonna stop it. You’re just gonna make it less safe.

    • Achird@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      I just think of it as a safety net to prevent (or at least reduce the risk) of young children accidently stumbling upon something nasty or graphic that they didn’t mean to.

      This should also be done by proper parenting and supervision but as technology and internet devices are friggin everywhere I don’t think it’s a bad idea for parents to also have some decent filters on their internet connection.

      Doesn’t stop someone who even knows half way what they are doing, but by that point hopeful parents will have talked and educated their children about things before there’s a concern about intention seeking stuff out.

      • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Porn sites have had “Confirm you are over 18” since the dial up days. That’s about as much of a safety net as I think is necessary or practicable.

        • Achird@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          A decent filter on a network (think pi-hole and next dns and the like) helps block adverts, trackers, scam sites, shady pop ups as well as bog standard porn sites etc

          Internet is full of things that it’s easy to accidentally stumble on that you wouldn’t want a young kid to see and I think it’s a reasonable step to have some basic levels of controls on your own network

          The onus is on the parents to manage internet access in a way the feel best and shouldn’t be forced or assumed. definitely not to porn sites (or any other site!) to collect entirely unnecessary personal data which would inevitably get leaked.

          • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            I totally agree and I put in a good faith effort to block that stuff from my kids’ devices using a pihole and what’s available on their phones. But I remember being their age and getting away with things because I figured out the workarounds.

            At the very least it’ll teach them a little about networking and computers which will serve them well in their careers.

        • misterundercoat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Instead of the age confirmation dialog, they should implement an age-captcha, like “identify these musical artists” or “click on all the squares with physical storage media.”

      • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        What happens when the data in this “safety net” is breached and tons of peoples IDs get leaked? So safe.

  • wheresmypillow@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    11 months ago

    I think a lot of these states are going about this wrong. We should be helping parents restrict access for their children rather than trying to verify identities of adults who likely want to remain anonymous.

    • Eggyhead@artemis.camp
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m of the opinion that protecting children has little to do with the actual intended purpose of laws such as these.

    • BoofStroke@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Make a kid safe tld that requires whatever government certification. Done. Now parents, if they choose, can filter all but the kidsafe tld. Trying to instead blacklist is never going to work.

      Whether companies choose to certify and publish there is something those who want this type of thing should provide incentives for.

  • yeather@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    11 months ago

    Guess a state with a big enough user base finally tried this horse shit lol.

  • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    “You show me some lazy prick who’s laying around all day watching game shows and stroking his penis and I’ll show you someone who’s not causing any fucking trouble”

    -George Carlin

    Republicans really believe shit like this and banning abortion will be successful at restoring the nuclear family… at gunpoint.

    What it will really do is increase sexual assault, suicide, violence in general…

    Of course that will be everyone else’s fault for not submitting to their attempts at coercion correctly. Republicans insist on personal responsibility, exclusively for their many enemies and explicitly not for themselves.

    The funniest bit is, they are the reason for the death of the nuclear family and the reason it won’t be restored. If you give the owner class all the money out of the asses of the working citizens that would have kids, herp derp they won’t have kids.

    If they really wanted the “traditional American family” to come back, they need only restore tax levels to pre-reagan levels, and actually enforce them. Instead they’d rather threaten everyone for masturbating instead of making new wage slaves they can’t afford to raise so Republicans can also get that dopamine hit of schadenfreude by calling them irresponsible.

    • sebinspace@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      11 months ago

      You want to restore the nuclear family? Make it financially viable for us to have one.

      One of the main reasons I don’t have children is because it’s too goddamn expensive.

      Also I’m sterile. But there’s nothing anyone can do about that.

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Fertility issues are also massively on the rise, probably just another side effect of all the pollution we let oligarchs inflict for private profit.

        And Nero Bezos counted while humanity burned.

  • Polar@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    America is such garbage lol. You guys should really focus on the important stuff.

  • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Porn hub should make a VPN and offer it for free to people in texas They could call it VaginaPenisNards

    • 800XL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      If everyone is miserable and all vices are banned, there will be nowhere else to turn to but religion and that’s exactly what they want. Religion is authoritarian by default and the main message of it is comply or else which fits right into the Republican’s plan for us all.

    • Arobanyan@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      There was no CP on there, it’s the go-to excuse conservatives use whenever they don’t like something they think is “degenerate”, you’ve seen them do it to trans people recently. It’s the same old BS song and dance I remember from the 1990’s with right-wing conservatives whining about DOOM being too violent for children and GTA being a bad influence on kids, it’s literally the same argument