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.

synae ,
@synae@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

laughs in californian

Corkyskog ,

Hahaha… why? You don’t think they wouldn’t pass a national ban if they could muster the votes?

synae ,
@synae@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

first, I think it is easily challenged on first amendment grounds

second, I’m not an idiot and I know how to pirate shit

third, if things continue to accelerate towards disaster I believe CA is the least shitty place to enjoy a normal life (that happens to include porn, for me)

barsquid ,

They would. “States’ rights” is bullshit that they start with only when they fail to regulate at the national level. Every time.

werefreeatlast ,

Yeah, we have to stop it! Literally pussy, tits and cocks power the Internet use. I wouldn’t use it if it was just reading shit.

MehBlah ,

Not Americans in the sense I see it. Flag pissing regressives is what they are. A minority that gerrymanders their way into power and pushes their childish backward thinking on the real Americans. May the rot in their closets from which they only emerge every four years to crash grinder.

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.

sugar_in_your_tea ,

Yup, and this is exactly why I plan to use a VPN once my state starts enforcing this law. There’s no way I’m going to show ID to any website unless they absolutely need it. There are very few websites where that’s necessary, so I’ll just use a VPN to a neighboring state (or even to Canada) instead of complying with that nonsense.

I already have to worry about identity theft, I don’t want to make that even easier…

toynbee ,

I don’t think there’s any website where it is necessary, excluding ones that adhere to unjustified laws.

sugar_in_your_tea ,

I’ve had to submit it for remote work authorization, travel on a cruise line (not required, but strongly recommended), and to prove my identify for a web host when their automated check failed (that was the fastest way). So yeah, pretty rare, but still a thing.

KillingTimeItself ,

i’ve been toying with the idea of hosting deep web porn front ends. Not sure how legal it would be. But morally, you’d be on pretty good grounds.

I mean what 13 year old is using tor browser lmao.

Mediocre_Bard ,

I’m going to link my ID and look up the most mind blowingly vile, while remaining legal, porn. If they want to talk to me about it, then I am going to make them describe each video before I “remember” what I saw, after which point I will refuse to acknowledge it as porn.

Sure, it’s dumb, but it’s fun dumb.

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.

KillingTimeItself ,

and also a war on porn, the war on porn is the secondary knock on effect of hating queer 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 ,

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

sugar_in_your_tea ,

PornHub is already unavailable in my state because they refuse to comply (at least last I checked), but it’s totally available in the datacenter in the next state over. :)

thorbot ,

Don’t care I just generate my own anyway

mightyfoolish ,

A system that needs ID verification to access a site is a problem. What if it’s used for other websites as well?

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.

samus12345 ,
@samus12345@lemmy.world avatar

Bind, not protect, protect, but not bind.

Drusas ,

The politicians who are against it are the vast minority, they're just extremely vocal and irritating.

masquenox ,

when so many keep getting caught with prostitutes sex workers?

FTFY. If you’ve ever worked for a living, you’re a prostitute - just like the rest of us.

KillingTimeItself ,

because they’re conservative, and that’s a thing cons do for some reason. google “i know it when i see it” to get some history on how batshit insane it gets.

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.

sugar_in_your_tea ,

That was never a thing. I grew up in the 90s and I could easily find free porn websites. My main limitation was dial-up internet, not knowing where to find it…

Lightor ,

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

sentientity ,

Pretty sure the normalization of sexual violence and harmful attitudes came from the adults in my life. If parents and teachers adequately teach kids to identify those things and know that they are unequivocally wrong, then teens who see unhealthy stuff in porn will notice and be critical of it. Probably indignant, too, since no one is more justice focused than a teen who has just learned something about the world.

The issue is backward ideas about relationships being reinforced by adults, either through active misogyny or just never talking about it. This argument boils my blood because the porn itself is not the problem. Awful attitudes about relationships and women start very early and they often come directly from parents themselves.

LodeMike ,

Interesting. Maybe it’s projection about the porn THEY watch?

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.

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