UK porn bill: Throwing our privacy out with the bathwater(plsignore.com)
plsignore.com
UK porn bill: Throwing our privacy out with the bathwater
https://plsignore.com/digital-economy/
19 comments
> I suspect a horny 16 year old can figure that one out
To be fair, I think that's a really high bar. Never underestimate the ingenuity of horny teens.
To be fair, I think that's a really high bar. Never underestimate the ingenuity of horny teens.
Those who fail to learn from Dilbert are doomed to repeat it
"Making sure the children in our society do not regularly stumble upon damaging material while browsing the internet, is something we can all get behind."
Well I can't. Most boys get their first exposure to pornography at maybe 10-12? It's natural and doesn't cause any problems. It's crazy that sex is so vilified in our society. And I don't think anyone even understands why.
Well I can't. Most boys get their first exposure to pornography at maybe 10-12? It's natural and doesn't cause any problems. It's crazy that sex is so vilified in our society. And I don't think anyone even understands why.
We're not talking about peeking at the underwear section any more. How about teenage boys looking at incredibly violent porn with the women presented as enjoying it.
I mean, a lot of women do enjoy it. Human sexually is incredibly diverse. There's not one shred of empirical evidence that shows that looking at sexual material is damaging or affects life outcomes in any way, shape, or form. And honestly, people don't really seem to care. They just have this puritanical morality for others, while at the same time engaging in these behaviors in private. It's total bullshit.
How common is that and how much harm does it cause? What’s the cost of that damage? What’s the cost to prevent it?
Perhaps we could launch a billion dollar program to protect children against drop bears [0]. Would that have the same impact? Perhaps. I think teenage boys have similar risk from drop bears as from incredibly violent porn with the women presented as enjoying it (or actually enjoying it).
If we get into this space then just watching prime time tv had violence and must be causing lots of harm.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_bear
Perhaps we could launch a billion dollar program to protect children against drop bears [0]. Would that have the same impact? Perhaps. I think teenage boys have similar risk from drop bears as from incredibly violent porn with the women presented as enjoying it (or actually enjoying it).
If we get into this space then just watching prime time tv had violence and must be causing lots of harm.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drop_bear
In 30 years, this law will look as silly as the censorship of Clockwork Orange and the likes.
In the meantime, somebody will make money in VPN services.
In the meantime, somebody will make money in VPN services.
The more sinister thing is that many ISPs seem to basically shadow ban VPN websites e.g. you don't even get a Christianity bait message like pr0n site or 4chan(...)
I wonder what's the incentive there. I know ISPs in the UK have to block certain sites (involved in copyright infringement) but as far as I know no VPN services are included in there.
What do they gain by banning VPNs considering they already comply with the law by blocking direct access to forbidden websites?
What do they gain by banning VPNs considering they already comply with the law by blocking direct access to forbidden websites?
I understand why you would require only adults to produce porn. Child porn is exploitative and destructive and one of then worst things in digital spaces.
But what is the reasoning behind limiting porn consumption to adults. This seems like an odd restriction that is taking away agency from children and families.
The age limit and type of porn varies significantly among parents that I know. None restrict porn of their 17 year olds. Everyone has a story of blocking their 10 year old.
The sheet cost of checking everyone’s id on a big section of the Internet seems to dwarf any expected benefit. It would be cheaper to hand out free pihole devices for every parent in the UK that just black holes porn and give an 800# for parents to get tech support.
In my country some places passed laws requiring grocery stores to check everyone’s id for alcohol purchases. It adds 10-30 seconds to every grocery trip and every incentive in a while causes a frustration. A friend’s 80 year old mother was denied being able to buy cooking wine because she didn’t have her id. It is so frustrating and an example of how society could improve, even in a small way, lives of citizens.
But what is the reasoning behind limiting porn consumption to adults. This seems like an odd restriction that is taking away agency from children and families.
The age limit and type of porn varies significantly among parents that I know. None restrict porn of their 17 year olds. Everyone has a story of blocking their 10 year old.
The sheet cost of checking everyone’s id on a big section of the Internet seems to dwarf any expected benefit. It would be cheaper to hand out free pihole devices for every parent in the UK that just black holes porn and give an 800# for parents to get tech support.
In my country some places passed laws requiring grocery stores to check everyone’s id for alcohol purchases. It adds 10-30 seconds to every grocery trip and every incentive in a while causes a frustration. A friend’s 80 year old mother was denied being able to buy cooking wine because she didn’t have her id. It is so frustrating and an example of how society could improve, even in a small way, lives of citizens.
People have a hard time suspending believe when watching porn.
Interesting that the article mentions GDPR, and then launches into behaviours that are forbidden by GDPR
> But how could it be cheaper? well here is where it starts to get interesting. The second professional could, for example, employ a cheaper way to get your ID sent to them, maybe it gets sent via a third party. Another way to cut costs is advertising, they could get your consent to use your drinking habits for marketing purposes. Now we can just replace “shopkeeper” with “online porn publisher”.
> But how could it be cheaper? well here is where it starts to get interesting. The second professional could, for example, employ a cheaper way to get your ID sent to them, maybe it gets sent via a third party. Another way to cut costs is advertising, they could get your consent to use your drinking habits for marketing purposes. Now we can just replace “shopkeeper” with “online porn publisher”.
oh sure it'll filter po.rnhub.con but reddit.com/r/nsfw nope. I suspect a horny 16 year old can figure that one out
Also...the whole "type your credit card number into this sketchy looking barebones site" tactic for verification just screams amateur hour