As a platform owner I’m dreading the future. People only talk about agriculture on mine, but I’m afraid I’ll run into these silly, expensive requirements just as well.
What's not going to help is focusing on the suffering of pornographers, when porn is being used as a pretense in order to monitor and restrict communication in general. Most people don't care about the suffering of pornographers. Even the consumers of porn: enough has been made already, it can be copied and preserved forever with no quality loss, we're on the verge of being able to magic it up with AI to match our personal scripts, nobody needs more.
Focusing on how it makes pornographers almost as poor as average workers is almost an advertisement for internet censorship; I may have to call my rape a "grape," but at least a pornographer will have a bad day.
Being against porn is an issue for the base, politicians don't actually care. When you swallow their arguments whole, you've already lost.
Related video about the need to control AI with a global ID system to control "misinformation and disinformation" as it will be imposable to tell what is real and what is fake.
We are getting hit from all sides. You will be tracked and it will be used against you.
No, it will not.
I live in the UAE, and I appreciate that my children do not have access to pornography or illegal websites, as these are blocked by the service providers.
I don't have proof but I have a felling this is the work of Palantir. After Trump made the announcement that they would be working on solving the ID crisis in America not a month later everywhere all at once started pushing for online IDs.
What amazes me is that this article fails to mention that the slippery slope is already underway. Multiple states have some variation on the "App Store Accountability Act" that requires you present ID just to download apps, including Texas (SB 2420) and Louisiana (HB 570), with several more underway. Then there's the various acts that try to regulate social media by demanding you present ID to be able to post (or else gimp your site to fit one of the carve-outs they have which conveniently ensures that users cannot engage in public posting of any kind towards one another) such as Texas's HB 186 (from 2024).
Put simply: You've all been asleep at the switch while the US-side Internet has been systematically under attack by pornscolds trying to implement Chinese-style censorship, this article's author included.
This advocates a:
( ) technical
(*) legislative
( ) market-based
( ) vigilante
...solution to control explicit or controversial content online. It won’t work. Here’s why:
Why it fails:
(*) Can be bypassed with basic tools (VPNs, mirrors, alt accounts)
(*) Users and creators won’t tolerate the restrictions
(*) Requires unrealistic global cooperation
(*) Censors legitimate content (art, education, etc.)
(*) Lawmakers don’t understand the tech they’re regulating
(*) Platforms may quietly ignore or undermine it
(*) Trolls and bots will weaponize it
What you didn’t consider:
(*) Jurisdiction conflicts across countries
(*) Encrypted and decentralized content sharing
(*) Abuse of takedown/reporting systems
(*) Privacy and free expression concerns
(*) Content filters are always one step behind
And finally:
(*) Sorry, it just doesn’t work.
( ) This idea causes more harm than good.
( ) You're solving a symptom, not the problem
This issue raises one of those odd dynamics where people concerned with the welfare of humanity brush against the people arguing for the longevity of public infrastructure. And against them both are the string-pulling hands who have an advantage if either interest prevails.
Or maybe it’s not that odd and this is a common conflict.
I stand on the side of those indifferent to the material consequences of this censorship on pure moral grounds.
And the funny thing is that there are people who seek to mean well and who find the material trade-off intolerable for their own reasons.
Society as a whole is kept in quite the quagmire by the string of these aforementioned hands, ain’t they?
Stupid question: is there a reason they did not mandate every ISP in the UK to allow the blocking of porn as an opt-in feature? (and make it the default for mobile subscribers under 18yo)
29 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 37.5 ms ] threadThe flood of AI content, social media, and confused articles is destroying the internet.
The only time politicians ever see children is when they can use them as a soapbox to push an agenda.
Focusing on how it makes pornographers almost as poor as average workers is almost an advertisement for internet censorship; I may have to call my rape a "grape," but at least a pornographer will have a bad day.
Being against porn is an issue for the base, politicians don't actually care. When you swallow their arguments whole, you've already lost.
We are getting hit from all sides. You will be tracked and it will be used against you.
https://youtu.be/-gGLvg0n-uY
This should be adopted by many other countries
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn438z3ejxyo
No matter how many $x's you conquer, there's always another $x around the corner.
Put simply: You've all been asleep at the switch while the US-side Internet has been systematically under attack by pornscolds trying to implement Chinese-style censorship, this article's author included.
Or maybe it’s not that odd and this is a common conflict.
I stand on the side of those indifferent to the material consequences of this censorship on pure moral grounds.
And the funny thing is that there are people who seek to mean well and who find the material trade-off intolerable for their own reasons.
Society as a whole is kept in quite the quagmire by the string of these aforementioned hands, ain’t they?
Take a look at the Australian age verification law. Mainstream websites aren't even collateral damage, they are explicitly the target.