6 ms·
For those who think this is just a Utah peculiarity, it's not. There have been attempts in Europe: - https://www.wired.co.uk/article/uk-porn-ban-digital-econo
by deet 3y ago
For those who think this is just a Utah peculiarity, it's not.
There have been attempts in Europe:
- https://www.wired.co.uk/article/uk-porn-ban-digital-economy-act https://www.wired.co.uk/article/uk-porn-ban-digital-economy-...
- https://www.wired.co.uk/article/germany-porn-laws-age-checks https://www.wired.co.uk/article/germany-porn-laws-age-checks
And its quite related to other pushes for age verification for social media services, as Utah and states like California have proposed:
- https://www.axios.com/2022/09/16/california-law-websites-children-age https://www.axios.com/2022/09/16/california-law-websites-chi...
Governments regardless of political affiliation and motivation seem intent on age verification, and it's easy to see where this could lead to, for better or worse, a less anonymous and more bureaucratically gated internet going forward. Whether that's good or not is the discussion we should be having.
- vlunkr 3y agoIf you’re concerned about privacy and anonymity, two huge strengths of the internet, it’s terrible.
- jfarina 3y agoCalling the internet private and anonymous is wishful thinking. Data is constantly owned, bought and sold.
- amelius 3y agoI wonder if congress has thought about what would happen if the CCP opened their wallet.
- mensetmanusman 3y agoYeah, because the internet was free to access everyone, data became the background currency and advertisers figured out how to de-anonymize everyone years ago. That ship has sailed.
- themitigating 3y agoProposed and enacted are a big difference. A single lawmaker can suggest or put forward a bill for anything. The majority voting to make it law is a huge barrier
- rchaud 3y agoit's aggregated though,because data is only valuable in volume. Showing ID every time you visit a site is significantly more identifiable at the individual level.
- themitigating 3y agoI was only replying to state the huge difference between proposals for a law and one passing. For example when judging a political part.