this post was submitted on 11 Jan 2025
300 points (98.1% liked)

News

23837 readers
3236 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Several U.S. states have enacted laws requiring pornography sites, such as PornHub, to implement age verification to prevent minors' access, prompting the site’s parent company, Aylo, to block access in affected states.

Proponents argue these laws protect children, while critics highlight privacy risks, inefficiencies, and potential censorship.

These measures reflect growing social conservatism, with some advocates aiming to restrict adult content broadly.

While privacy-focused age verification methods exist, regulatory clarity is lacking.

Critics warn these laws may suppress responsible platforms, favoring unregulated alternatives, and escalate broader culture wars around sexuality and LGBTQ+ rights.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 40 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

they keep saying its about trans people but then they keep blocking porn so i don't know what it is. i think christians and conservatives are stupid as fuck

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 67 points 3 days ago

Right. "Protecting children". Meanwhile, lowering the age range for child workers...

"No beating off! You need to save your energy for the night shift."

https://clockify.me/learn/business-management/minimum-working-age-by-state/

https://www.google.com/search?q=+child+workers+over+night

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 days ago

"While privacy-focused age verification methods exist, regulatory clarity is lacking."

It's not lacking clarity. Privacy-focused age verification is simply not wanted by big tech and politically (because money from big tech) as they wouldn't be able to collect and make money with building profiles of what you do online.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

There's no reliable way to verify age without extensive face verification with liveliness checks. A child can easily upload a parent's or some other adult's id card photo to get 'verified'. Also nothing stops kids to explore porn corners of social media (including lemmy) and thousands of porn sites operated not by the Big Porn. Porn is fundamental to internet.

Edit: I purposefully omitted vpn, that being the most trivial solution.

That's all besides the point however.

If a young kid is motivated by highschool seniors to watch porn, it is s parenting issue. If some adult encourages some child to watch porn as a grooming technique that's a much more serious case of child abuse. If a teenager is porn addict and doesn't do anything else, it is a major mental health concern, not a porn concern itself.

It is kind of accepted fact that many late teenagers are familiar with porn and explore it like any other sexual aspects of their life. Whether that's harmful is upto debate but teenagers/adults do many things harmful everyday and banning everything with law isn't realistic either. It is not end of the world if a teenager has sex or watches a porn movie. Children have greater dangers in general where they get abused by their relatives, teachers and even by their own parents and are continuously attempted to be programmed not to critically think by the religions.

[–] [email protected] 54 points 3 days ago (4 children)

"it's for the children" is always a red flag

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

Depends on the context. After WW2 a lot of great things were done in favour of future generations, or the children of that time.

In these times hate is being used to divide us while at the same time it's socially and morally unacceptable to justify certain views, thus they look for pseudo reasons to mask their true reasons, in this case -for the children". Unfortunately we're also entering a time where the psuedo reasons start becoming obsolete as hate mongering is being accepted.

So i gotta disagree on the always, but it's true for these times.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 days ago

classic fascist tactic. there's a reason half of the 14 words is about children

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 3 days ago (1 children)

At the core of the debate is a genuinely thorny technical and legal question: how to verify someone’s age over the internet without exposing them to cyber theft or government surveillance.

Age verification providers are adamant that this is possible.

I agree that it is possible if you can guarantee absolutely zero corruption in the system. Which you cannot.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

Proving, in a safe, privacy-friendly way, that you're able to provide to some third-party website credentials proving that you're an adult, is very easily doable. Most countries decided against the good version of it, but it is doable.

It does not, however, prove anything regarding the actual user in front of the computer. Let's remind people that we live in a world where kids have access to their parent's CC and regularly abuse it online. I doubt "more technical stuff" will prevent them from getting their hand on whatever certificate/token/thingamajig would be used for age check.

Unless we consider "good practice and proper communication", or, parenting, to be a key point in this. In which case, there's no need to do any technical implementation at all in the first place.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 3 days ago

They're compiling a list and they'll find a way to use it against you. Anyone who thinks the age-verification services won't share their data with the states is naive. Use a VPN and only pay using an anonymous prepaid card, and if that doesn't work, pirate the content.

While privacy-focused age verification methods exist

What might those be, and have they been reviewed by anyone with actual knowledge of security?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I think they mean the other way around....

"That is because all those states have passed laws requiring porn websites to verify that their users are under-18"

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

It would be kind of funny to make a kids only website (NOT porn) and have it fail to load if you enter an ID

[–] [email protected] 60 points 4 days ago (5 children)

Fascists view sexuality as a threat to their movements.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 3 days ago

They view it as another tool to oppress us. They know it's not a threat to them. The only threat to them is organized resistance.

[–] [email protected] 34 points 3 days ago

Fascists view knowledge as a threat. They use sexuality as another means of segregation.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 days ago

Wasn't really a pornhub guy, think xvideos does the suggestions better and overall I'm more into pics as far as that goes but pissing off my home state gets brownie points off of me anyway.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Theofascism and control. Growing the power of the state to dictate what is “acceptable“ and what is “unacceptable“.

Just remember this: everything Republicans/fascists do is designed to hurt everyone but themselves in order to squeeze for more power. If you even doubt this for a second, you are complicit. An enabler. A collaborator.

You’re just as guilty as they are.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›