3 ms·

Collecting personally identifiable logs of all the people browsing explicit images. What could go wrong.

• gjsman-1000 4y ago
  Historically, pornography always fell under US law as obscenity, meaning that it was actually not protected by the First Amendment. The Miller Test for obscenity, arguably, still considers pornography to be obscene and therefore not legally protected, but is unenforceable because of how widespread pornography is and how widely accepted it has become. From a legal perspective, I think the case for requiring age verification, or actually even banning or criminalizing pornographic distribution or use, is very strong from previous case law - and it would only take a SCOTUS ruling to bring it back. We can argue about whether that is good or bad for society - but, legally speaking, the US seems to be in the clear to control pornography (or, criminalize it) however it likes. The First Amendment is not an obstruction.
  • anonymouskimmer 4y ago
    The last sentence of the article makes me wonder if this is more Google making a data grab, or more Google trying to get out in front of government requirements (see, we can self regulate, no need for additional regulations). > "Google turned on SafeSearch as its default for under-18 users in August 2021, having been pressured by Congress to better protect children across its services, including search and YouTube."
    • LorenPechtel 4y ago
      Yeah, I think this is trying to head off government stupidity. Governments tend to have little concept of what is feasible and don't care if their puritan crusade has privacy holes you can drive a 747 through.