4 ms·

But colpabar doesn't want to put any videos online, so why should they?

by Chris2048 4y ago

LatteLazy 4y ago
- Chris2048 4y ago
  He could comment anything, including (textual) erotica and it wouldn't be child porn so how does it relate to this topic? Sounds like a slippery slope argument that if we can cp, all speech is next? Is it possible cp is categorically worse than offensive text?
- colpabar 4y ago
  Why are you being so disingenuous? I have not argued that porn is immoral or should be banned or whatever anywhere. I don't like that pornhub operated for so long without requiring any sort of verification, and I think they should be held accountable.
  - LatteLazy 4y ago
    There are 2 problems you have: 1. You have shown no reason why PornHub, or Porn are special cases 2. You have missed the simple fact that you're playing whack-a-mole and there is fundamentally no difference between Pornhub, Youtube, Facebook, Reddit or HN. If you let people upload without checking it manually, you do it for everything, porn or text or executables, it's all just bits. If you don't, that's fine but kiss goodbye to 99% of content including all of HN. Those are your options. I think too many people look at this and "feel" there should be a better solution. But there isn't. And feeling there should be and demanding one aren't actually ways to get one. Sorry if this is blunt, but this debate has been had and had and had again...
    - Chris2048 4y ago
      > there is fundamentally no difference between Pornhub, Youtube, Facebook, Reddit or HN Some of those host videos, and are therefore capable of hosting cp. If HN is not fundamentally different PH, then cp is not fundamentally different to any offensive test - which I disagree with. > you do it for everything Why? It's all just bits, but there are much greater limits on how many a video-host will store versus a forum. > this debate has been had then state the hidden assumption - why you must treat text the same as video.

But colpabar doesn't want to put any videos online, so why should they?

LatteLazy 4y ago

Chris2048 4y ago
He could comment anything, including (textual) erotica and it wouldn't be child porn so how does it relate to this topic? Sounds like a slippery slope argument that if we can cp, all speech is next? Is it possible cp is categorically worse than offensive text?
colpabar 4y ago
Why are you being so disingenuous? I have not argued that porn is immoral or should be banned or whatever anywhere. I don't like that pornhub operated for so long without requiring any sort of verification, and I think they should be held accountable.
- LatteLazy 4y ago
  There are 2 problems you have: 1. You have shown no reason why PornHub, or Porn are special cases 2. You have missed the simple fact that you're playing whack-a-mole and there is fundamentally no difference between Pornhub, Youtube, Facebook, Reddit or HN. If you let people upload without checking it manually, you do it for everything, porn or text or executables, it's all just bits. If you don't, that's fine but kiss goodbye to 99% of content including all of HN. Those are your options. I think too many people look at this and "feel" there should be a better solution. But there isn't. And feeling there should be and demanding one aren't actually ways to get one. Sorry if this is blunt, but this debate has been had and had and had again...
  - Chris2048 4y ago
    > there is fundamentally no difference between Pornhub, Youtube, Facebook, Reddit or HN Some of those host videos, and are therefore capable of hosting cp. If HN is not fundamentally different PH, then cp is not fundamentally different to any offensive test - which I disagree with. > you do it for everything Why? It's all just bits, but there are much greater limits on how many a video-host will store versus a forum. > this debate has been had then state the hidden assumption - why you must treat text the same as video.