Religious zealots shouldn't be dictating what I watch, read or do.
Pornhub Sues Texas Over Age Verification Law
Submitted 1 year ago by psychothumbs@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
https://www.vice.com/en/article/pkazpy/pornhub-sues-texas-over-age-verification-law
Comments
stephfinitely@artemis.camp 1 year ago
altima_neo@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
Especially when they’re watching this stuff too
poshKibosh@sh.itjust.works 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.
TheRedSpade@lemmy.world 1 year ago
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.
Or, I don’t know, talk to your kid?
echodot@feddit.uk 1 year ago
Oh absolutely but that’s a parent’s decision. They might decide to be a crap parent and do the minimum amount of effort possible but if they’re going to do that then they should be the ones to install the blocker not the government.
I remember when they tried to introduce a similar law in the UK and absolutely nothing ended up happening because it’s utterly unworkable.
iopq@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Can’t you just use a VPN to get past a content block? Sounds exactly like a project a 14 year old me would research
Speculater@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Teaching the youth to protect their Internet identity feels like a win.
ladananton450@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Perhaps, but most of the good ones are paid, and I would try to set up some way to monitor the internet traffic if I really wanted to go that far.
some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 1 year ago
Nah, it’s easier if I have the state do it for me while inconveniencing everyone else. /s
Techmaster@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Like the average person has a clue how to configure a content blocker. LOL
SorteKanin@feddit.dk 1 year 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.
stappern@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Or you know,talk to poor bastards
qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works 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?
psychothumbs@lemmy.world 1 year 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 1 year 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).
qwamqwamqwam@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Exactly. Malicious compliance, while reminding people exactly why they shouldn’t be so quick to give up their anonymity on the internet.
WarmSoda@lemm.ee 1 year ago
They’d make themselves exempt without a second thought.
flipht@kbin.social 1 year ago
I see what you're saying about it not being good for democracy...we shouldn't have politicians making decisions based on their personal use, and trying to avoid scrutiny of that use...but at the same time, we have that anyway. Honestly, at this point, burn it all down. Make the entire apparatus of government so transparent that the shitheels currently in office can't justify staying on. Make it to where the only people who can function in elected positions are political monks.
gpzarquon@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
I mean, we already know Ted Cruz likes incest porn.
Uranium3006@kbin.social 1 year ago
I strongly support this and would activly do it if I had the means
Speculater@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Get them and Grindr to do a collab.
wheresmypillow@lemmy.one 1 year 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.
ShakyPerception@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I am pretty sure these laws have nothing to do with “protecting children”
EighthLayer@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s the same rhetoric that the UK government are using to get a backdoor on messaging apps with E2EE.
Khotetsu@lib.lgbt 1 year ago
Yeah, anytime you see somebody making the “think of the children!” argument, look at what the possible end goal could be with that removed. Protecting kids is a favorite smokescreen because kids can’t speak up for themselves in these cases.
psychothumbs@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yeah I think that’s the proper route. Parents who want to restrict what their children see need to take responsibility for doing so and not try to make the government do it for them at the expense of everyone else’s privacy.
Eggyhead@artemis.camp 1 year ago
I’m of the opinion that protecting children has little to do with the actual intended purpose of laws such as these.
knobbysideup@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Make a kid safe tld that requires whatever government certification. Done. Now parents, if they choose, can filter all but the kidsafe tld.
Whether companies choose to certify and publish there is something those who want this type of thing should provide incentives for.
jantin@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Creating a parallel internet for children is a very intriguing idea
afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Not all heros wear capes
sinless@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
Or any clothes for that matter
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Some wear strap ons
AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 1 year ago
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…
sebinspace@lemmy.world 1 year 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 1 year 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.
Wahots@pawb.social 1 year ago
I want kids. But I need government programs like Universal Healthcare, real paternity leave rights, and maybe even extreme stuff like subsidized surrogacy to make that happen. My family in Japan has that. My SO in Canada has that. Why can’t we have that here in the US?
Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Porn hub should make a VPN and offer it for free to people in texas They could call it VaginaPenisNards
jannis@feddit.de 1 year ago
yeather@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
Guess a state with a big enough user base finally tried this horse shit lol.
BonesOfTheMoon@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Republican states really want everyone to be as miserable as possible.
800XL@lemmy.world 1 year 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.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 1 year ago
From reading about the law it sounds like they are trying to take a page from CA’s overreaching prop 65 law that effectively labels everything as a potential carcinogen. Based on the data the main beneficiary of this are a handful of law firms. I wouldn’t be surprised if this law is backed by a few law firms who smell easy money.
fne8w2ah@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The irony of this lol 🤣
diggit@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
Let them go back to jerking off to the underwear catalogue then.
primbin@lemmy.one 1 year ago
I’m pretty disturbed by the attitude of lot of the comments on this thread. While this law is probably not going in the right direction, this knee jerk reaction of calling any regulation of porn “puritanical” and an infringement of your rights is crazy to me. I feel like access to internet porn is not a fundamental human right, and it’s not puritanical to maybe want to prevent kids from being unwittingly exposed to a shitload of porn at a young age.
IdleSheep@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 year ago
Regulations that require you to expose your personal data for no benefit are all those things and more.
Educating children about sex so they can consume porn in a healthy manner (because spoiler alert: these laws do nothing to stop them watching it) is 100 times more productive and positive than invading the privacy of law abiding adults. But that would actually require time and money which none of these law makers want.
primbin@lemmy.one 1 year ago
I’m all for educating children about sex, and I’m also sympathetic to the plight of data privacy.
However, I also feel like the internet right now is a pretty bad place for minors. Like, there’s so much porn and other harmful content that’s so easily accessible, to the point that it’s easy to find yourself stumbling into it on complete accident. And with the speed that the internet evolves, it seems pretty unreasonable to me to just kinda expect parents just to be able to fully keep up with it.
I don’t think I support this law in particular, but I also don’t know what could possibly be done to any real effect.
stappern@lemmy.one 1 year ago
But they will watch it anyway? How about you give these kids some education about it instead?
primbin@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Of course kids would still try to access porn, there’s always ways around walls on the internet. Just like how banning guns wouldn’t prevent everyone from accessing guns, and banning sale of alcohol to minors doesn’t make minors stop getting drunk.
In that sense, I do suspect that if there were more boundaries to accessing porn, children would watch it less, and would maybe be less likely to be exposed to it without their consent.
DariBro@lemmy.world 1 year ago
[deleted]LexiconBexicon@lemmynsfw.com 1 year 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
primbin@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Do you have any evidence for that? I find it hard to believe that there wasn’t any CSAM on there considering that there was the whole expose, you know, the one that forced them to delete the majority of their videos, because the site didn’t have any way to verify whether they were CSAM or not.
stappern@lemmy.one 1 year ago
So you mean like any other industry?
Sabata11792@kbin.social 1 year ago
Has any site actually tried implement this bullshit?
ThrowawayInTheYear23@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Here in Lousy-ana, pornhub has a popup a id verification page.
AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I think the mormon cult state has that too.
pjhenry1216@kbin.social 1 year ago
I thought they just blocked it in Louisiana and just had some sort of video telling you to call your rep to fix it. I'm too lazy to find a VPN endpoint in Louisiana to confirm though. So the article I read may be out of date.
xc2215x@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Many states have been doing this.
mojo@lemm.ee 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.
Master@lemmy.world 1 year ago
and then those same people who want it banned close their curtains and start watching it.
mojo@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Like all these child protecting puritans who end up being pedophiles and sex traffickers lol
Techmaster@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Ban curtains!
theneverfox@pawb.social 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
xc2215x@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Christian conservatives want it banned for sure.
Buelldozer@lemmy.today 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.
mojo@lemm.ee 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.
MindSkipperBro12@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Coomers crying fascism because kids can’t jerk off to sexually trafficked women.😐
ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world 1 year ago
If you think these bills will do anything to stop teens from accessing porn or women from being trafficked, I have a bridge to sell you. And if you think Republicans actually care about the health and well-being of vulnerable women, I have an even more luxurious bridge to sell you.
LexiconBexicon@lemmynsfw.com 1 year ago
When we started opening up about sexuality, sexual assaults tanked. It also tanked when we started teaching sex ed to kids
mojo@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Think you meant to sign up on lemmygrad.ml
Jaysyn@kbin.social 1 year ago
LOL, you went with a strawman & personal attack because you know your actual argument is garbage.