It won’t thought. See the war on drugs.
Comment on Pornhub blocks North Carolina and Montana as porn regulation spreads
platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 10 months agoI think it’s fine that they are making it a bit harder for kids. Overexposure to this can cause issues in mental health and the brain. So yeha, this won’t stop anybody for accessing porn if they really want it but it will prevent overexposure.
Daft_ish@lemmy.world 10 months ago
pandacoder@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I mean I honestly think if they really wanted to “protect the children” they’d actually make COPPA enforcement a lot more strict (and also add in under 18 limitations), though I suspect that would be significantly harder.
There are a lot of places where you can get exposure to “bad” stuff as a child that are arguably more dangerous long term.
platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Are we talking about the internet? I honestly feel the internet is just too wild for children. I’d even create legislation for phones and computers to have mandatory internet security features for minors. I grew up looking at things like Rotten and Liveleaks with friends at school. Without noticing, watching people die in gory ways was my main internet activity at 15, and it was pretty hard to stop that habit. I honestly wish I didn’t have access to that content at that age, I was pretty fucked up for a couple of years.
pandacoder@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Yes.
A bunch of states including NC are just blocking porn to protect the children but it’s literally the laziest solution with some of the smallest impact.
Twitch, Discord, and Roblox are far more accessible and arguably more dangerous in terms of short term consequences than porn because they are primarily social interaction platforms.
I’ve never seen Rotten or Liveleaks (at first I thought you meant Rotten Tomatoes that’s how unaware I am), but they could probably use similar regulation.
It’s not even that I think porn regulation is inherently bad, but the implementation is garbage and the claim to protect the children is extremely weak.
Social content sites are dangerous because of the opportunity for predators to easily encounter minors (especially age restriction breaking ones under 13), and violent content sites are, well, violent? They should be a higher priority but they evidently aren’t.
platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Yeha, I’m not defending the implementation but the idea. I honestly think children shouldn’t be exposed to certain things. The reality is that the internet is flooded with porn and it’s basically impossible to achieve, but maybe this is just the beginning of something more organized.