There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

Kiernian ,

For those wondering about the upswing here:

If the age verification movement goes unchecked, it’s possible that you could be forced to tie your government ID to much of your online activity, Gillmor says. Some civil rights groups fear it could usher in a new era of state and corporate surveillance that would transform our online behaviour.

“This is the canary in the coalmine, it isn’t just about porn,” says Evan Greer, director of Fight for the Future, a digital rights advocacy group. Greer says age verification laws are a thinly veiled ploy to impose censorship across the web. A host of campaigners warn that these measures could be used to limit access not just to pornography, but to art, literature and basic facts about sex education and LGBTQ+ life.

cupcakezealot ,
@cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

it’s not a war on porn; it’s a war on lgbtq people and content. the people pushing for these bills have straight up said that.

BreadstickNinja ,

It’s a war on both, but especially on LGBTQ people. The fundamentalists are anti-porn in the same way that they are anti-sex in other ways, like opposing sex education.

But it is absolutely part of their strategy to define anything LGBTQ-related as sexual or pornographic, and therefore to criminalize any public visibility of LGBTQ people.

Persen ,

It’s a war on any free speech, they don’t like. They could just add more restrictions for certain people.

Kolanaki ,
@Kolanaki@yiffit.net avatar

“If they removed porn from the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called ‘bringbacktheporn.com.’”

ICastFist ,
@ICastFist@programming.dev avatar

No doubt this is all BigVPN’s fault!

/s

boatsnhos931 ,

MAKE PENIS AND VAGINA ILLEGAL!!!

SidewaysHighways ,

MAKE POINTY FOODS ILLEGAL

(I think it was “penis shaped” in the original version)

snooggums ,
@snooggums@midwest.social avatar

Armpit and foot fetishists are clearly behind this ban!

paddirn ,

From my cold, dead, lubricated hands!

BlackLaZoR ,
@BlackLaZoR@kbin.run avatar

Papers please: for millions of Americans, accessing online pornography now requires a government ID

And I imagine everyone wants a picture of your ID. Which is horrible on so many levels...

Petter1 ,

Luckily we have lemmynsfw.com 🥳

kokesh ,
@kokesh@lemmy.world avatar

If I was a teenager, I would find a way.

TonyTonyChopper ,
@TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz avatar

probably just need a VPN. Or a website not hosted in the US lol

otp ,

PornHub is run by a Canadian company, and the guy looking to be our next PM wants to do the same ID thing. So that might be out too, lol

thorbot ,

Don’t care I just generate my own anyway

JadenSmith ,

How could American politicians be so against pornography, when so many keep getting caught with prostitutes?

Typical. Rules for thee I guess.

radivojevic ,

And kids

PineRune ,

They’re against pornography, not prostitutes. There’s a difference, I guess.

NegativeInf ,

They are also against prostitutes. Sex work is work! Criminalizing it only serves to endanger those who are most at risk.

macrocephalic ,

And yet they love the man you cheated on his wife with a porn star.

admin ,
@admin@lemmy.my-box.dev avatar

I suppose that’s one way to generalize an entire country.

macrocephalic ,

Just the people who are enacting these laws

Evotech ,

Doublethink is a core tenant

subignition ,
@subignition@fedia.io avatar

Tenet

grue ,

And that tenet lives in their heads rent-free.

ICastFist ,
@ICastFist@programming.dev avatar

That filthy dirty freeloading communist tenant tenet!

simplejack ,
@simplejack@lemmy.world avatar

They pander to the Christian nationalists for their votes. They just want power, they don’t actually hold those values.

Cuttlefish1111 ,

Neither do Christians, it’s the Billionaires. Need to maximize reproduction of the slaves.

Virkkunen ,
@Virkkunen@fedia.io avatar

There's probably a name for this just like the "author's barely disguised fetish". Usually when you see politicians campaigning this hard on topics like those, it's probably because they themselves are doing it

sp3tr4l ,

Because we live in a ravenous corrupt oligarchy barely able to keep the appearance of a functioning democracy.

rottingleaf ,

Pornography and prostitution are different.

One is information, allowing you to dream (maybe of stupid things), another is in the physical world.

I don’t want to think a lot of these parallels, but I’ve noticed that people close to actual government bureaucracies are in general very sceptical of imagined things against physical.

Among other things, consuming pornography doesn’t make you feel powerful, while a prostitute is a real human working for you.

Also 30s’ propaganda had traits clearly aimed at, eh, sexually dissatisfied youth.

So maybe it’s just about feeling their own power, and maybe it’s about returning that device of affecting minds. I dunno

StaySquared ,

You just answered it… ban pornography. It doesn’t ban prostitution.

uriel238 ,
@uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

It’s entirely about loyalty and institutionalized stratification. Laws are meant to constrain those outside the party, while those within the party are given a lot of latitude.

LodeMike ,

a survey of 1,000 young people concluded that pornography can normalise sexual violence and harmful attitudes among children.

That’s irrelevant. This argument assumes that age verification laws will reduce children’s consumption of porn. The war on drugs has shown us that prohibition of this kind of stuff doesn’t reduce anything and only ever males it woese. All that will happen is children (and adults) will now go to worse/less moderated websites which will on average have more CSAM and other real sexual abuse.

GoofSchmoofer ,
@GoofSchmoofer@lemmy.world avatar

True. But the people advocating for these laws don’t want to deal with nuance and compromise on what it would take to have a society where you educate people on sex in a healthy and positive way. These prohibitionists see the world as either bad or good - nothing in between. Good (how ever they decide to define it) must win no compromises, and the weapon that they use is unfounded fear of the bad and it works.

And the reason fear works is because it is easy and visceral and reality’s complexity doesn’t work for media’s need for sound bites.

rottingleaf ,

I think the part about IDs is what’s important. They are not against porn, it’s just a good excuse to account for another part of your activities. Which may be used to classify you or even blackmail you, but I think knowing your preferences is enough. It may allow secret services to predict whom you may like or may not.

Naturally it will allow to track you.

There are many factors affecting energy spent on doing something.

I personally think that this timeline is fucking bullshit and we got there by always choosing the lesser evil, so libertarian (you may make it left-libertarian, I genuinely don’t care about left-right division because it’s mostly traditional and imaginary) revolutions in all the civilized countries are long overdue.

Not even libertarian, maybe the Empire at War: Forces of Corruption game was onto something. Maybe the left-right and libertarian-statist distinctions are obsolete for our time just like Roman optimates-populares distinction. Maybe we need some new line, formalist-naturalist (as in formal law versus natural law) or something. Where the former part would be existing political mechanisms and the latter part would be saying “no” to fools, thieves and bandits.

skaffi ,

If you were a teenager, back when online porn were all pay sites, and so you were using Kazaa/Limewire instead, then you know.

collapse_already ,

That’s not Jenna. That’s a snuff film.

Lightor ,

The word “can” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. A lot of things “can” have negative effects.

tal , (edited )
@tal@lemmy.today avatar

How the American war on porn could change the way you use the internet

looks slightly annoyed

I’m not particularly enthusiastic about such state laws, but the UK spent the last several years having committed to mandate age verification itself prior to eventually abandoning it, and I didn’t see Voice of America trying to get people in the US riled up about British law.

en.wikipedia.org/…/Proposed_UK_Internet_age_verif…

With the passing of the Digital Economy Act 2017, the United Kingdom became the first country to pass a law containing a legal mandate on the provision of an Internet age verification system.

And if I recall, they had some follow-up effort, which I assume is what is briefly referenced in the article.

looks

Yeah.

…org.uk/…/guidance-service-providers-pornographic…

Implementing the Online Safety Act: Protecting children from online pornography

This is the second of four major consultations that Ofcom, as the appointed online safety regulator, will publish as part of our work to establish the new regulations under the Online Safety Act (2023).

Currently, services publishing pornographic content online do not have sufficient measures in place to prevent children from accessing this content. Many grant children access to pornographic content without age checks, or by relying on checks that only require the user to confirm that they are over the age of 18.

The Online Safety Act is clear that service providers publishing pornographic content online must implement age assurance which is highly effective at correctly determining whether or not a user is a child to prevent children from normally encountering their online pornographic content.

MicrowavedTea ,

Let alone Spain has already implemented a system for this which is part of a bigger EU effort. politico.eu/…/spain-builds-porn-passport-to-stop-…

Sadly, I don’t think this is going away.

captain_aggravated ,
@captain_aggravated@sh.itjust.works avatar

I didn’t see Voice of America trying to get people in the US riled up about British law.

Good. They’re not supposed to.

The purpose of the VoA is to broadcast American news and perspectives to the rest of the world. Their programming is not intended for Americans and for most of its history the VoA was prohibited by law from intentionally broadcasting directly to American citizens. A lot of Americans aren’t even aware the VoA exists because of this. This prohibition was eased somewhat in 2013 to make putting VoA content online easier and to allow Americans access to VoA content if we want it. ie I as an American citizen am allowed to hear what the VoA says but they’re still not supposed to talk to me on purpose.

If you do hear the Voice of America trying to get people in the US riled up about anything, be sure to let us know so that we can make the responsible individuals be in trouble.

hendrik ,

"Could" is the important word here. In other contries, we long have laws making age verification mandatory. It's just that it's a popup asking "Are you over 18?" And you can click whatever you want. Also the companies are in different jurisdictions, don't comply with local law while the internet spans the globe. I don't see any substantial difference here.

forrgott ,

The difference is, I think, just how much of the content or there is hosted in America. If they succeed in forcing local companies to follow some new draconian measure, it’ll likely have a disproportionately high effect on non-US traffic.

hendrik ,

Sure. I think people from the US can see what our privacy regulations did to the internet. For example with the cookie consent banners. And disclosing somewhere what personal info gets shared with whom. Up until now the USA hasn't really made an effort to regulate the tech giants. Maybe that's going to change with certain topics like porn. It's definitely going to have an impact on the world. I mean lots of tech companies are located in the US. Pornhub though is from Canada as far as I know. And the second biggest porn site XVideos is based in the Czech Republic. So I'm curious how US law is supposed to be enforced here.

forrgott ,

Huh, didn’t realize that. I understand a lot of the physical servers for those kinda companies are in the upper Midwest, but I never thought about where thire HQ is at; you make some excellent points.

There is definitely a fight brewing over who has final say in regards to what happens on the Internet. Gonna be interesting seeing how this plays out.

hendrik ,

For sure. That's going to be interesting. I mean at first the internet was for academics, students and smart people. Then it was the wild west. Now it's long become integral part of society and everybody is on the internet. I think as of now it's mainly big companies who "own" the place. My issue with that is mainly that they do with our personal info as they please. And their business tactics. Like Spotify ripping off artists, YouTube not really caring about the creators and their well-being. Everything is about ads and commercialized to the extreme. And the internet wasn't always like this. But all of that is a slightly different story.

In the end, we have to apply our laws also to the online world. We can't have that be a separate space. But laws are for single countries and have borders. The internet doesn't. I sometimes see people wanting to introduce borders into the internet and make it more national. I think that'd break everything. The internet is supposed to connect us. And our world is globalized.

But we're also not making an effort in the first place. Gambling, porn and all that unwelcome stuff is just hosted abroad. Doesn't matter if 100% of the customers are somewhere, the company is just allowed to be ran from some small island and then it's fine. We could just ban that in my opinion. I'm not a big fan of DNS blocking or messing with internet traffic, so we'd have to come up with a good technical solution. And I think the USA, the EU and Canada would be able to agree on some consensus regarding the protection of minors and that'd spread and affect most of the world.

Or we just go for their money. You can't circumvent and run one of the largest online platforms without money. If all American and European comanies wouldn't be allowed to advertise there, that'd solve the issue pretty quick. And we already had that. I think Visa or some other payment provider said they'd have to cease service if they continue not doing anything against revenge porn and exploitation and copyright infringement. That lead to all major porn platforms making account verification for the actresses mandatory and removing lots of amateur stuff and pirated videos. So that definitely works.

shortwavesurfer ,

In a world where Monero exists, there is no way to stop the flow of money.

hendrik ,

Yeah, we'll have to see about that. In reality even paying with regular money is to cumbersome for people. They rather watch ads.
Let alone starting with crypto, installing software, getting a wallet, money exchanged, ... The majority of people isn't going to do that just to watch porn.

So in theory this might be an idea to circumvent that. In practice, it's never going to happen. At least as I see it. Or are there any successful companies who rely on Monero to have their goods payed? And I don't mean like 0.5% of their turnover, but a substancial amount.

verdantbanana ,
@verdantbanana@lemmy.world avatar

Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great.

If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUspLVStPbk

iiGxC ,

Royce dupont on the truth about god and porn: www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeeR38i2QqY

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •