Pixiv Blocks Adult Content, but Only for US and UK Users(404media.co)
404media.co
Pixiv Blocks Adult Content, but Only for US and UK Users
https://www.404media.co/pixiv-manga-site-blocks-adult-content-but-only-for-us-and-uk-users/
77 comments
I appreciate Pixiv letting users set their preferred region and actually respecting that setting, unlike Twitter which ignores the user's "country" setting and do all ad targeting using GeoIP instead.
It's especially nice given that a fair number of Japanese websites are aggressive about blocking foreign registrations even to the extent of blacklisting known VPN nodes. First thing I did upon reading this headline was confirming that my actually-created-in-Japan account hadn't ever had its location setting autoupdated by geoip.
It may not be enough in the future. The problem is every little incremental change like “giving in” to block content by region ends up welcoming the next incremental step in that direction. Other countries and regions may now apply the same pressure on Pixiv. Some might call this the slippery slope fallacy but it’s exactly how most political battles play out.
In terms of geographies - one thing I read about recently is how various “online safety czars” from countries are coordinating in groups that may soon have the power to implement global content restrictions (censorship) that respect each other’s local requests on a global scale. See this article:
https://public.substack.com/p/cia-recruit-is-pursuing-global...
> At the World Economic Forum, Inman Grant said she had launched a global censorship body called “the Global Online Safety Regulators Network” to unify governments around censorship “So that we could have a form to help us coordinate, build capacity and do just that.
In terms of geographies - one thing I read about recently is how various “online safety czars” from countries are coordinating in groups that may soon have the power to implement global content restrictions (censorship) that respect each other’s local requests on a global scale. See this article:
https://public.substack.com/p/cia-recruit-is-pursuing-global...
> At the World Economic Forum, Inman Grant said she had launched a global censorship body called “the Global Online Safety Regulators Network” to unify governments around censorship “So that we could have a form to help us coordinate, build capacity and do just that.
>In terms of geographies - one thing I read about recently is how various “online safety czars” from countries are coordinating in groups that may soon have the power to implement global content restrictions (censorship) that respect each other’s local requests on a global scale.
Thankfully, this dystopian wet dream is unlikely to go far. Censorship "Czars" cannot legally disregard the laws and constitutions of their respective countries. In the US, we have the First Amendment, and no politician or bureaucrat has the authority to censor speech generally.
Thankfully, this dystopian wet dream is unlikely to go far. Censorship "Czars" cannot legally disregard the laws and constitutions of their respective countries. In the US, we have the First Amendment, and no politician or bureaucrat has the authority to censor speech generally.
>In the US, we have the First Amendment, and no politician or bureaucrat has the authority to censor speech generally.
But businesses do.
You're about fifty years out of date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Mountain_Mandate
Christian nationalists long ago figured out they were losing the censorship battle with the postal service and governmnt...they long ago shifted to influencing every aspect of society, and one of those is business - and by that they mean financial systems.
That's why people in the porn industry keep losing their bank accounts.
It's also why the app stores and a number of websites are so strict about adult content; pressure from credit card companies.
> there are seven aspects of society that believers seek to influence: family, religion, education, media, arts & entertainment, business, and government.
But businesses do.
You're about fifty years out of date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Mountain_Mandate
Christian nationalists long ago figured out they were losing the censorship battle with the postal service and governmnt...they long ago shifted to influencing every aspect of society, and one of those is business - and by that they mean financial systems.
That's why people in the porn industry keep losing their bank accounts.
It's also why the app stores and a number of websites are so strict about adult content; pressure from credit card companies.
> there are seven aspects of society that believers seek to influence: family, religion, education, media, arts & entertainment, business, and government.
It isn't just coming from "Christian Nationalists", hard 'progressive' rags have also been on a puritan streak in recent years when it relates to conventional attractiveness (especially in anime and adjacent circles). As a current ongoing matter there are all the hit pieces and whining from games journalists on how Stellar Blade's character designs are for "porn addicts".
It’s also worth noting that pornography is illegal in Islamic countries, and even illegal in avowedly atheist countries like China (guess what else the firewall blocks).
>But businesses do.
There is a common misunderstanding that the government can simply ask businesses to do stuff and it's still strictly business. It's not.
>Christian nationalists long ago figured out they were losing the censorship battle with the postal service and governmnt...they long ago shifted to influencing every aspect of society, and one of those is business - and by that they mean financial systems.
Blaming the overwhelming push for censorship in the 2020s on Christians is at best misguided. They are likely to be censored themselves.
>> there are seven aspects of society that believers seek to influence: family, religion, education, media, arts & entertainment, business, and government.
This describes a lot of groups. You're quoting it like the Christians are some kind of menace, but they are the least concerning of all current threats to freedom in my book. I'm an atheist, as well.
There is a common misunderstanding that the government can simply ask businesses to do stuff and it's still strictly business. It's not.
>Christian nationalists long ago figured out they were losing the censorship battle with the postal service and governmnt...they long ago shifted to influencing every aspect of society, and one of those is business - and by that they mean financial systems.
Blaming the overwhelming push for censorship in the 2020s on Christians is at best misguided. They are likely to be censored themselves.
>> there are seven aspects of society that believers seek to influence: family, religion, education, media, arts & entertainment, business, and government.
This describes a lot of groups. You're quoting it like the Christians are some kind of menace, but they are the least concerning of all current threats to freedom in my book. I'm an atheist, as well.
WEF, NWO. They aren't even trying to hide it anymore. Those who point out the obvious truth will of course be labeled "conspiracy theorists".
1969-07-20 might be a more memorable date to some people here.
1941-12-07 could be suitable for a Japanese site.
1941-12-07 could be suitable for a Japanese site.
I'm making a snarky allusion to the default date for a blank date field
The default date is 1970-01-01. What does being a day older accomplish?
For those in the western hemisphere, local time zone adjustment means that midnight on 1970-01-01 GMT becomes some time in the afternoon or evening of the day before.
[deleted]
I could see this being really bad for the site. A lot of Japanese illustrators were already treating it as an afterthought compared to X/Twitter, and if the new terms actively make Pixiv worse for artists in the rest of the world then its importance could decline even further.
The change of making it harder or shutting off access just pushes people to reroute their behavior, moving large segments of the market into non-transparent (and non-taxable) crypto, further expanding the use of VPNs, and decentralizing the means of publishing and posting materials.
The side effects of prohibitions are about as predictable as these moral crusades.
The side effects of prohibitions are about as predictable as these moral crusades.
People have said for decades that governments can't control Internet content because people will help each other circumvent the restrictions by technical means. I've found that very inspiring and have personally tried to join in.
But I notice (maybe especially on this day of the TikTok ban) that lots of people at least sometimes sympathize with the idea that the governments have good reasons to restrict information. And not that many people anywhere have ever used censorship circumvention technologies.
So you might say "the more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers" or something, but the cultural will and momentum to work around Internet-balkanizing measures is ... not that massive and not that universal.
I don't mean to say that people working around geographic blocking doesn't happen ... it does to some noticeable extent at least for licensed streaming, for gambling, and for porn. But I guess significant majorities typically say "oh well!" and accept restrictions as the new normal.
But I notice (maybe especially on this day of the TikTok ban) that lots of people at least sometimes sympathize with the idea that the governments have good reasons to restrict information. And not that many people anywhere have ever used censorship circumvention technologies.
So you might say "the more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers" or something, but the cultural will and momentum to work around Internet-balkanizing measures is ... not that massive and not that universal.
I don't mean to say that people working around geographic blocking doesn't happen ... it does to some noticeable extent at least for licensed streaming, for gambling, and for porn. But I guess significant majorities typically say "oh well!" and accept restrictions as the new normal.
Well it's certainly at the whims of a network-effect, that's part of the reason alcohol prohibition was so insanely ineffective. There was more people who wanted alcohol than the ban could possibly handle.
I'd posit that indoor smoking bans wouldn't have been effective whatsoever if they were implemented in the 1970's rather than the 2000s, just for the simple fact that 40% of the population were smokers compared to around 20% when those bans came into effect. Additionally, the impact to smokers was that you needed to go outside to smoke, which is a pretty reasonable behavioral modification.
There's probably some really solid sociology based studies around where this prohibition effectiveness essentially falls apart.
I'd posit that indoor smoking bans wouldn't have been effective whatsoever if they were implemented in the 1970's rather than the 2000s, just for the simple fact that 40% of the population were smokers compared to around 20% when those bans came into effect. Additionally, the impact to smokers was that you needed to go outside to smoke, which is a pretty reasonable behavioral modification.
There's probably some really solid sociology based studies around where this prohibition effectiveness essentially falls apart.
Yeah, the TikTok ban isn't about restricting content for US users, it's about restricting the data vacuum that is the PRC. TikTok has already been banned for Govmnt employees for years. And, for good reason.
Sometimes, we have to remind ourselves that our government is not the bad guy. The bad guys are the bad guys; and those bad guys aren't often bad to their own kind.
Sometimes, we have to remind ourselves that our government is not the bad guy. The bad guys are the bad guys; and those bad guys aren't often bad to their own kind.
It's pretty obvious the tiktok ban was due to the Israel-Palestine conflict and thus is about restricting US users. It literally got passed in the same bill as Israel funding too.
I actually hadn't heard this theory until I read it on Wikipedia about an hour before your reply. I don't think the "same bill as Israel funding" is enough to make this obvious without other context, though: after all, that same bill includes military funding for Taiwan and Ukraine, too, and combining them was largely a parliamentary tactic to make it harder for legislators to oppose portions of the combined bill, not an acknowledgement that they all dealt with exactly the same subject.
(You might still be right, I just don't think it's "pretty obvious".)
(You might still be right, I just don't think it's "pretty obvious".)
Same bill as Israel funding is not my argument, it's just something to note. If you dig into this, you will find lots of public statements or comments made by ADL and related organizations about tiktok's influence on gen z opinions of the conflict, since tiktok doesn't ban pro palestine content or videos of civilian killings by IDF like all of the other big social networks do. Couple of weeks later, the ban is introduced and few weeks later the bill is passed. This is as pretty obvious as it can possibly be.
No. The Tiktok ban is because the PRC is using it to track US (and other country's') citizens. This is fundamentally no different than what Facebook has been doing for years, but China doesn't have a free market, so every piece of data is available to the PRC intelligence.
This should not be a surprise, but you folks are idiots who think only The Big Bad United States are (somehow) the only ones interested in spying.
This should not be a surprise, but you folks are idiots who think only The Big Bad United States are (somehow) the only ones interested in spying.
> A lot of Japanese illustrators were already treating it as an afterthought compared to X/Twitter
Citation needed.
Most Japanese illustrators do not care about the US/EU, and many of them even hate gaijins. If you haven't noticed, anti-Americanism is very strong on the Japanese internet.
Citation needed.
Most Japanese illustrators do not care about the US/EU, and many of them even hate gaijins. If you haven't noticed, anti-Americanism is very strong on the Japanese internet.
Not sure what you're on about, it has nothing to do with being anti-American or not. Twitter is where everyone in Japanese creative industries posts about their work (unlike the West that didn't change when Musk bought the site), it's where the Japanese audience is, and it doesn't hurt that the global audience is there too.
But sure, if you want examples of this trend try searching Pixiv by title for stuff like "twitterまとめ" [1], " or "Xまとめ" [2], meaning a usually monthly compilation of illustrations that were posted to Twitter first. And that doesn't even get into the artists that stopped using Pixiv completely because they got bored of it or their account was banned.
[1] https://www.pixiv.net/en/tags/twitterまとめ/artworks?mode=safe&... (apparently these links don't capture the fact that it's a title search and not a tag search, you have to be logged in and set it manually)
[2] https://www.pixiv.net/en/tags/Xまとめ/artworks?mode=safe&s_mode...
But sure, if you want examples of this trend try searching Pixiv by title for stuff like "twitterまとめ" [1], " or "Xまとめ" [2], meaning a usually monthly compilation of illustrations that were posted to Twitter first. And that doesn't even get into the artists that stopped using Pixiv completely because they got bored of it or their account was banned.
[1] https://www.pixiv.net/en/tags/twitterまとめ/artworks?mode=safe&... (apparently these links don't capture the fact that it's a title search and not a tag search, you have to be logged in and set it manually)
[2] https://www.pixiv.net/en/tags/Xまとめ/artworks?mode=safe&s_mode...
Well, they still multipost on Twitter, but AFAICT it's getting unpopular these days. Tough I agree that Pixiv is not as popular as its old days too.
By "anti-Americanism", I'm insisting that a good number of Japanese anime artists see the ban as a beneficial feature, not a disadvantage. They would see this as an automated "Sorry, Japanese Only" filter.
By "anti-Americanism", I'm insisting that a good number of Japanese anime artists see the ban as a beneficial feature, not a disadvantage. They would see this as an automated "Sorry, Japanese Only" filter.
I think the anti-Americanism among artists only relates to not wanting to deal with hypocritical American policies on nudity and their tendency to impose their views on everyone.
They're very likely perfectly fine with Americans and foreigners in general seeing and sharing work without trying to change the culture of the site (which is fair and something more communities need to start expecting, there's an increasingly popular idea that various hobbies have been ruined by uninvested "tourists" that come into the community, force it to change to accomodate them, then leave after the original audience has been alienated).
They're very likely perfectly fine with Americans and foreigners in general seeing and sharing work without trying to change the culture of the site (which is fair and something more communities need to start expecting, there's an increasingly popular idea that various hobbies have been ruined by uninvested "tourists" that come into the community, force it to change to accomodate them, then leave after the original audience has been alienated).
I don't know. Maybe I've spent too much time on the worst part of the Japanese internet. Not about Pixiv, but the kicking out of Dlsite by Mastercard caused so much anger among them.
The social divide is getting really worrying these days.
The social divide is getting really worrying these days.
That's actually exactly the incident I was thinking of, my interpretation of the reaction to it was everyone being frustrated at American companies forcing their beliefs on everyone again, rather than being happy that American consumers were having it harder. It could also just be that my little circle is a niche within a niche though.
unpopular these days
Compared to what? Line, or do you have something else in mind?
Compared to what? Line, or do you have something else in mind?
I don't think there's an outstandingly popular one. Multiposting to get as many audiences as possible is norm these days. Sites like DMM, Fantia or Skeb are strong, but I don't think any of them get the particular traction.
Besides, LINE is extremely unpopular among otaku in Japan (yes, racism).
Besides, LINE is extremely unpopular among otaku in Japan (yes, racism).
This is rude, but I think the reason its unpopular is otaku often have no friends. Even then, I have found plenty of open chats with otaku. There is exactly one person I know who refuses to use LINE for being owned by Naver. I think the most common reason is not having friends. Racism is probably the next reason.
Proprietary and without e2ee is why I refuse to use it.
I think it depends on which slice of the Japanese internet. The こどおじ who discuss politics all day match your description. Other people, not so much. The statement about not caring about US/EU is true, however. I think most of HN is unaware that many Japanese sites take one step further and block all non-Japanese traffic.
Fair enough, but I assume the ben diagram of the anime fans and the こどおじ are largely overlapping.
I think they'll be fine, the main audience is still Japanese, and for now bypassing this is just a matter of changing an account setting (and Pixiv has required an account for NSFW for as long as I have known of it).
Every site I know of in recent memory that has banned adult content, pretty much lost all their users. Not that there aren't a million sites for that kind of content already. They'll just find another site to post their doujins.
What I don't understand is how X hasn't pulled out the hammer like other western sites have. It seems weird to me that a Japanese site who is barely in the public eye would capitulate before X who has been under a lens since musk got on board.
In the recent happenings I saw plenty of illustrators get bounced back to X by moderators of fledgling platforms.
In the recent happenings I saw plenty of illustrators get bounced back to X by moderators of fledgling platforms.
Musk saved X from basically being woke North Korea 2.0 where no debate was possible, and he’s waging his own war against government censorship in countries like Brazil and Australia (heroically and at a loss to himself IMO). I don’t think he will capitulate that easily. Musk is bad on some things (labor rights) but on free speech he’s done a lot of good.
Never forget it's about VISA and MasterCard, vote with your wallet.
I don’t get the recent moral fight against adult content. Not just in terms of illustrations or graphical novels as described here, but also other recent developments like identity verification laws for porn, or laws against AI-generated content (like deepfakes). We all have imaginations. People fantasize about their partner, or celebrities, or someone they are interested in. It’s normal. It’s just thought and expression. So what is wrong with people sharing their real (pornographic) or fake (digital) version of all this? On deepfakes or generative content, I can see it being misleading or defamatory perhaps, but if it is explicitly marked as content that is not real, is it really a bad thing or a problem? I feel like it’s just someone’s thoughts but in shareable form. What makes it different from artistic expression or satire, really? Isn’t ALL of this just the same old moralistic outrage?
One interesting part of this article is where it mentions the Miller Test, and it links to this page about US laws on obscenity - which to me mostly seem to be violations of constitutional rights on free speech and expression:
https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-ceos/citizens-guid...
One interesting part of this article is where it mentions the Miller Test, and it links to this page about US laws on obscenity - which to me mostly seem to be violations of constitutional rights on free speech and expression:
https://www.justice.gov/criminal/criminal-ceos/citizens-guid...
There's been wider awareness of how pornography is harmful to boys especially, and also to men. The drive to restrict pornography from children and relegation of pornography to seedier parts of the internet makes complete sense as a response to this.
It’s unfortunate you are being downvoted. Porn is very harmful indeed. I can’t think of any benefit in it being normalised. Maybe the defence of porn is motivated by the fact that other violent forms of expression have already been normalised. But I don’t see how that takes away from the dangers, access to porn presents for significant numbers of young men.
People who express themselves through the creation of panoramic material can find their efforts using crypto anyway.
People who express themselves through the creation of panoramic material can find their efforts using crypto anyway.
You don't provide any arguments but just grand stand and expect people to magically align with you.
Studies purporting the harms of porn do not replicate, do not hold up to meta analysis, are not validated by ANY real world outcomes (sexual violence, teen pregnancies, etc. are all down, not up, in countries with access to porn) and are propped up by the religions puritans and radical feminists responsible for this renewed worldwide chilling of sexual expression.
Media effects broadly do not exist. The printing press did not cause any of its purported harms, nor did rock and roll, nor MTV. And whatever the next big thing is (VR?) will suffer the same baseless accusations supported by nothing but ideologically-driven cargo cult science.
Media effects broadly do not exist. The printing press did not cause any of its purported harms, nor did rock and roll, nor MTV. And whatever the next big thing is (VR?) will suffer the same baseless accusations supported by nothing but ideologically-driven cargo cult science.
I think the defense of porn is motivated by the fact that they are porn addicts lol.
I didn't want to go there lol
Interesting to see many of the people who cheered this type of thing when people with ideological views that don't align with their own got shut out of the financial system now are upset that similar tactics are being used against them or content they like. They were even warned that this type of thing would end up used against them but they were sure we were in a new age where only one way of thinking would be permitted and that way would be their way. Turns out these tools can be weaponized against those who promoted them coming into existence. Doctor Frankenstein would be amused it still happens.
The difference is that this is self inflicted by pixiv, as neither USA nor the UK has demanded this.
However, you can certainly complain about the obscenity laws these countries have, which you know predates the internet.
However, you can certainly complain about the obscenity laws these countries have, which you know predates the internet.
I feel like most of these efforts are directed at MindGeek with artwork sites being innocent bystanders. If I was conspiratorial, I might wonder if MindGeek wants to keep the narrative focused on victimless artwork instead of their human trafficking.
Heh, most commenters here are way off-base IMO, and IMO the real reason is hinted at in the article. Notably, there are categories of adult content that are illegal in the US and UK, but not in Japan. Based on something that very recently happened to someone I know in the UK, I think it is likely that Pixiv was compelled to hand over information on users who were looking at illegal-in-UK stuff. Perhaps Pixiv has gotten tired of doing that.
The article is incorrect about categories of adult content being illegal in the US. The cited Miller Test has been used to justify bans of real life photography, but the supreme court has allowed first amendment protections for works of art that objectively do not cause harm by their production, which necessarily includes drawings like those on pixiv.
Does anyone know why companies like VISA and Mastercard try to distance themselves from NSFW websites? Is it because there is a large group of people that try to punish these companies when they engage with these companies? If not, why would they try to give up money they would otherwise make easily?
Mostly: unwanted consumer behavior. Refunds and chargebacks are horrific in certain industries, and it's just not worth it to participate.
Long ago, there was also a principled moralist influence among some board members but the financial world has become so large and purely capital-centric that principles have a hard time fighting the wind, no matter whose they are and what position they stand for.
Long ago, there was also a principled moralist influence among some board members but the financial world has become so large and purely capital-centric that principles have a hard time fighting the wind, no matter whose they are and what position they stand for.
I've been thinking all my adult life that, eventually, society has _got_ to get more reasonable about the human body but... there doesn't seem to be any evidence that we're getting anywhere close anytime soon.
I am friends with some artists who do some NSFW content and they feel they are just being strangled off of the internet at this point
Even ones that are just looking for a place to have easy hosting and sharing of images are being pushed off of more and more sites
Even ones that are just looking for a place to have easy hosting and sharing of images are being pushed off of more and more sites
I’m actually quite optimistic about this!
Yes! Push the porn to the “dark web”. Make it a pain in the ass. Ask for ID. Go all out!!
…because… this is how we’ll get a free internet again. This is how we’ll get real encrypted networks. This is how we go back to the good internet - except - it’s going to be harder to remove the bad stuff.
But this is what they’re doing. Strangling themselves with faux-morality and New Puritan complaintism.
So I’ll take the good effect of an internet that isn’t controlled by 6 companies with the bad that some people may say or do things I don’t like.
Yes! Push the porn to the “dark web”. Make it a pain in the ass. Ask for ID. Go all out!!
…because… this is how we’ll get a free internet again. This is how we’ll get real encrypted networks. This is how we go back to the good internet - except - it’s going to be harder to remove the bad stuff.
But this is what they’re doing. Strangling themselves with faux-morality and New Puritan complaintism.
So I’ll take the good effect of an internet that isn’t controlled by 6 companies with the bad that some people may say or do things I don’t like.
Not if the only computing platform you have is a walled-garden smartphone with parental spyware.
The only reason we had a free internet in the first place was because we had free computers. Many people no longer have free computers.
It's not just the App Stores that are at fault here, almost unbeatable screen time[1] protections, limited mobile APIs, battery usage optimizations and carrier-grade NATs also matter here.
Hosting video is extremely expensive. Either you fund it with ads, which is hard for porn, with subscriptions, which is impossible because of Visa/Mastercard rules, with cryptocurrencies, which are easy to ban as per above, or you offload the cost to P2P, but smartphones are effectively barred from participating in P2P networks due to the above reasons.
This is also a major driver behind the fall of piracy. Piracy is easy if everybody has an always-on device with a stable internet connection and a good power source. This is no longer the case.
[1] By "Screen Time" I mean Apple's comprehensive suite of tools for device access restrictions, both for owners and children. These restrictions don't just concern screen time, they may also prohibit certain apps (or categories of apps) entirely. The point is not restricted to Apple, similar solutions exist for Android, and they give even more power to the parents due to the system's open nature.
The only reason we had a free internet in the first place was because we had free computers. Many people no longer have free computers.
It's not just the App Stores that are at fault here, almost unbeatable screen time[1] protections, limited mobile APIs, battery usage optimizations and carrier-grade NATs also matter here.
Hosting video is extremely expensive. Either you fund it with ads, which is hard for porn, with subscriptions, which is impossible because of Visa/Mastercard rules, with cryptocurrencies, which are easy to ban as per above, or you offload the cost to P2P, but smartphones are effectively barred from participating in P2P networks due to the above reasons.
This is also a major driver behind the fall of piracy. Piracy is easy if everybody has an always-on device with a stable internet connection and a good power source. This is no longer the case.
[1] By "Screen Time" I mean Apple's comprehensive suite of tools for device access restrictions, both for owners and children. These restrictions don't just concern screen time, they may also prohibit certain apps (or categories of apps) entirely. The point is not restricted to Apple, similar solutions exist for Android, and they give even more power to the parents due to the system's open nature.
i'm typing my reply on a Linux mobile phone (NixOS + SXMO). it's true i don't run p2p stuff on the phone, but most utilities like 'transmission-remote' and NFS mounts, cryptocurrency wallets etc work OOTB such that if you can figure it out on a PC you can figure it out on a phone.
no, not accessible to a layperson. but increasingly accessible to anyone who's comfortable with desktop Linux.
no, not accessible to a layperson. but increasingly accessible to anyone who's comfortable with desktop Linux.
The problem is that "the internet" is still a series of connected physical cables and some entities do in fact control those. They can push off people who are using encryption they don't like or serving content they don't like, if push comes to shove
And for the specific people who are trying to make a living through selling smut, payment providers are making their lives hell
And for the specific people who are trying to make a living through selling smut, payment providers are making their lives hell
there's gotta be millions of USB wifi dongles sitting in cabinets and drawers around the globe. a couple "do-ers" with high chimneys can start backhauling for their neighborhood. Mirror wikipedia, podcasts, music, books, etc. The issue becomes "on demand" video stuff, which i haven't put a lot of effort into figuring out, because if i set something like this up the video would all be programmed for 720p+ and only 360p would be available on demand.
When the power goes out for multiple weeks, it doesn't affect me at all, entertainment wise. in a "oops all censored" future dystopia, i'd make sure my neighbors could access entertainment, even if it's self-serving for mine own self.
When the power goes out for multiple weeks, it doesn't affect me at all, entertainment wise. in a "oops all censored" future dystopia, i'd make sure my neighbors could access entertainment, even if it's self-serving for mine own self.
That sounds nice, but in the short term, many of these sites are causing people to risk losing their source of income. So many sites have had to crack down on NSFW content due to the payment processor cartels threatening to cut them off, and while theoretically they have alternative options for taking payments, in practice they don't, because most people are not going to jump through the hoops of mailing in a cheque or buying crypto just for an NSFW art commission.
To some this might not really feel like much of a loss, but since the payment processors are maliciously vague about where they draw the line, companies often overreact and also threaten artists whose most NSFW art might be a character in swimwear.
To some this might not really feel like much of a loss, but since the payment processors are maliciously vague about where they draw the line, companies often overreact and also threaten artists whose most NSFW art might be a character in swimwear.
…because… this is how we’ll get a free internet again.
X to doubt. You can do this now but it's limited to people with technical skills, and once you have figured out torrent trackers or TOR or whatever it is you're interested in, there isn't that much incentive to radically improve the tooling to make it more consumer friendly. If nothing else having it require some work insulates you from Eternal September. The less work it is, the easier it is for cops and politicians to whip up a moral panic about.
X to doubt. You can do this now but it's limited to people with technical skills, and once you have figured out torrent trackers or TOR or whatever it is you're interested in, there isn't that much incentive to radically improve the tooling to make it more consumer friendly. If nothing else having it require some work insulates you from Eternal September. The less work it is, the easier it is for cops and politicians to whip up a moral panic about.
You're definitely pointing out a real problem, but I will say, back in the day when Netflix didn't exist, even some of my most technically and intellectually challenged friends would figure out stuff that now seems to confuse people who present as above-average in tech literacy. The will to do somrthing, and a social network that shares information count for a lot more than people seem to think.
I agree, in the old days the barrier to access to porn and getting games installed and working inspired a lot of people to get into tech. Maybe when people have to work a little harder to get access to the media they want it will lead to a new generation of tech savvy folks and another wave of innovation.
This is double true for the effort people would put into getting porn.
Define “reasonable.”
Do we treat the human body closer to that of animal? If so, why is cannibalism a crime? Animals rape, why should humans not, if we are just animals?
If we reject that and say that a human has dignity that an animal or a plant does not; why should a dignified creature act as a beast? Who is to say that this dignity cannot extend to the sexual sphere in dress and conduct?
We already accept this. Just because an animal rapes, does not preclude permanently imprisoning a human, solely for violating that dignity. It follows then, what is suitable for animals, is in no way a certain or relevant guide for how humans should behave.
This is not even necessarily a religious point. One of the most-banned pieces of material by the Chinese Firewall is not material that opposes the government - but porn, which is illegal there despite being an avowedly atheist society. Japan was never a Christian society, but their censorship practices for porn are well known.
Do we treat the human body closer to that of animal? If so, why is cannibalism a crime? Animals rape, why should humans not, if we are just animals?
If we reject that and say that a human has dignity that an animal or a plant does not; why should a dignified creature act as a beast? Who is to say that this dignity cannot extend to the sexual sphere in dress and conduct?
We already accept this. Just because an animal rapes, does not preclude permanently imprisoning a human, solely for violating that dignity. It follows then, what is suitable for animals, is in no way a certain or relevant guide for how humans should behave.
This is not even necessarily a religious point. One of the most-banned pieces of material by the Chinese Firewall is not material that opposes the government - but porn, which is illegal there despite being an avowedly atheist society. Japan was never a Christian society, but their censorship practices for porn are well known.
Did you read this section of the article:
> The restrictions include several kinds of content that are illegal in the US, including sexualized depictions of minors and bestiality, as well as non-consensual depictions and deepfakes.
This has nothing to do with being "more reasonable about the human body", as you euphemistically put it.
> The restrictions include several kinds of content that are illegal in the US, including sexualized depictions of minors and bestiality, as well as non-consensual depictions and deepfakes.
This has nothing to do with being "more reasonable about the human body", as you euphemistically put it.
Pornographers are disgusting people hiding behind fake principles.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Is this the same news outlet that got on civit.ai and stabilities case for being "complicit" in unsavory generated pornography? Odd that there's a different slant to this story
there seems to be a really simple workaround unless I'm missing something.
By the way if a website asks me for my date / year of birth it's always 1969 because why the fuck not?
specifically 1969-12-31