• 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year 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
      3
      ·
      1 year 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
        1
        ·
        1 year 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.

      • 👁️👄👁️@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year 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
        0
        ·
        1 year 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.

      • whileloop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year 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.

        • PunnyName@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year 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.

        • Brainsploosh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year 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.

        • SpaceCadet@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year 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
            1
            ·
            1 year 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
              ·
              1 year 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
                8 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.

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

        • Sylver@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year 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
            ·
            1 year 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
              ·
              8 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
            ·
            1 year 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
              ·
              1 year 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
              ·
              1 year 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
                ·
                1 year 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.

        • Obsession@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year 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
            1
            ·
            1 year 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
              ·
              1 year 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
            8 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
          ·
          1 year 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.

          • pjhenry1216@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year 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
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year 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. A state rep for Austin fought prescription drug companies and against putting the 10 Commandments in classrooms. Does that sound Christofascist to you? Because he voted for the bill. 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.

              • phillaholic@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Even if they aren’t Christian, there is a stream rolling effect on “protect the kids” bills where going against it is going to get you thrown out of office. That’s the kind of political climate we are in unfortunately.

        • brygphilomena@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year 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
            0
            ·
            1 year 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
              ·
              1 year 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
                8 months ago

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

    • theneverfox@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year 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

    • Master@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

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

    • Wahots@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year 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
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year 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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year 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.

  • yeather@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

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

  • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year 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
      2
      ·
      1 year 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
        1
        ·
        1 year 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.

    • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      When my wife insisted I put a porn blocker on the internet, I did some simple DNS tinkering, then told my son not to let his mother catch him bypassing the “blocker” I put on.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        When I was growing up we had the ultimate porn blocker.

        Dial up internet was far too slow to load more than about half an image per hour.

      • LuckyCat@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        This blows my mind. Why not just push back on your wife for being ridiculous? I say this as a woman with two boys who has been married for 10 years.

    • Achird@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year 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.

      Edit: with all the downvotes my comment might be misunderstood (or might not) - I am talking here about parents (or whoever is in charge of their own network) making use of something like a pi-hole or nextdns to put a bit of controls on the internet - useful for blocking spam, adverts, scams and yes, explicitly or graphic sites which may not be appropriate if there are young children who could end up on the internet at home. This isn’t a replacement for proper supervision and parenting but it seems sensible.

      Hell I’d advise anyone to put decent controls on their network as it makes a world of difference browsing when you are properly blocking adverts trackers scam sites (or whatever else you don’t want on your connection)

      I am not advocating for these controls to be in the hands of the government or for websites to collect private personal data. Just that there is nothing wrong with parents (or anyone who is charge of their network/internet) to apply filters they deem appropriate

      (Or the downvotes may have not misunderstood me at all and disagree that home network filters shouldn’t ever be used. In which case fair but enough we on that point)

      (Or the downvotes could be just cause of my poorly written comment regardless of the point it was trying to make one way or another)

      • Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year 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
          1
          ·
          1 year 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.

  • qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year 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?

  • poshKibosh@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year 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.

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

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