3 ms·

I think what they wanted was proof of age. Which isn’t wholly unreasonable. The problem is doing it in a way that protects privacy. These debates happened in th

I think what they wanted was proof of age. Which isn’t wholly unreasonable. The problem is doing it in a way that protects privacy. These debates happened in the 90s too. Every porn site had an age verification or warning that you had to electronically assert you were age of majority plus. I wish we could all agree that, this is important and we shouldn’t be allowing minors to watch pornography. The porn sites don’t want to be liable to verify age so they pull these stunts blocking a whole state that wants verification. There must be a reasonable and non political way to protect minors. Cigarette machines aren’t around anymore due to age verification (and people quitting smoking). Why are we so against real age verification ? I’m 110% pro anonymous internet viewing and privacy protection. But perhaps when we want to view pornography we should be okay with some form of verification. This kind of leads me to a moral Vision quest 1. It’s not the governments or anyone else’s business what I do on the internet. 2. Except my significant other, if I have to hide pornography viewing from my partner then I’m doing something wrong morally 3. More important than my ability to jack off to clown porn is the innocence of my children to not be completely corrupted by such porn at age 6 4. Privacy is important, it is not my employer or any marketing agencies business than my SO and myself wear wigs and green makeup when we fuck 5. How hard is a pro privacy age verification system? Leisure suite Larry conquers that in 1985

whelp_24 3y ago
There's not a privacy preserving way because children are smart. I don't think we should enable more surveillance for the flimsy "think of the children " argument.
- 082349872349872 3y ago
  Speaking of "think of the children", I have a conspiracy theory that the PMRC[0] was less about Dee Snider and Cyndi Lauper and more about creating a labelling regime that could ensure english-lyric Eurodisco[1] tunes wouldn't get any US distribution. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resource_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resource_Center [1] eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Boys_Blue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Boys_Blue
willcipriano 3y ago
They dont want to validate age beacuse a lot of their best ad viewers aren't of age.
- 3ef4e38b 3y ago
  > a lot of their best ad viewers aren't of age. Citation needed.
nunez 3y ago
From Texas HB 1181[0]: > (b) A commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material on an Internet website or a third party that performs age verification under this chapter shall require an individual to: > (1) provide digital identification; or > (2) comply with a commercial age verification system that verifies age using: > (A) government-issued identification; or > (B) a commercially reasonable method that relies > on public or private transactional data to verify the age of an > individual. The issue is that: - Asking porn sites (whose traffic is mostly nonpaying lurkers subsidized by very horny whales paying for EVERYTHING) to scan licenses, is technically non-trivial and extremely anti-privacy, and - Leaving (B) undefined means means exposure to way more lawsuits Reducing this law to "proof of age" misses a big part of what these govs are really trying to achieve (tar-and-feathering people who privately enjoy spicy entertainment) So given the ubiquity of VPN services that users can use to actually privately enjoy the world's oldest form of entertainment, it is easier for Mindgeek et. al. to IP block and create an even bigger problem for these governments to deal with (introducing a semi-private communication channel to people who didn't know this was an option). [0] https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/html/HB01181H.htm https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/html/HB01181H...
kurikuri 3y ago
The big difference between using an ID to buy alcohol and using your ID to access a site is data retention. I can get a drink by showing my ID, the person serving me doesn’t need to keep my information to keep an auditable record. Without an accountable third party auditing solution (some sort of accredited lab situation), I wouldn’t trust a website to take my ID and not save/redistribute that information for other purposes. What is the result of this sort of regulation though? Now the sites which don’t operate in the US will simply skirt the regulation. What is Texas going to do, sue xHamster? Why would they bother to comply? Does Texas now start limiting the type of traffic allowed through the infrastructure within the state?
- paulddraper 3y ago
  Nothing requires that they keep your info, any more than a bar or strip club is required to.
  - 3ef4e38b 3y ago
    Nothing enforces that they don't keep the info or sell it to third parties. Maybe they disclose it in a privacy policy. Maybe they say they don't, but do it anyway. It would be very hard to prove the negative in this case.

whelp_24 3y ago

There's not a privacy preserving way because children are smart. I don't think we should enable more surveillance for the flimsy "think of the children " argument.

082349872349872 3y ago
Speaking of "think of the children", I have a conspiracy theory that the PMRC[0] was less about Dee Snider and Cyndi Lauper and more about creating a labelling regime that could ensure english-lyric Eurodisco[1] tunes wouldn't get any US distribution. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resource_Center https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parents_Music_Resource_Center [1] eg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Boys_Blue https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Boys_Blue

willcipriano 3y ago

They dont want to validate age beacuse a lot of their best ad viewers aren't of age.

3ef4e38b 3y ago
> a lot of their best ad viewers aren't of age. Citation needed.

nunez 3y ago

From Texas HB 1181[0]: > (b) A commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material on an Internet website or a third party that performs age verification under this chapter shall require an individual to: > (1) provide digital identification; or > (2) comply with a commercial age verification system that verifies age using: > (A) government-issued identification; or > (B) a commercially reasonable method that relies > on public or private transactional data to verify the age of an > individual. The issue is that: - Asking porn sites (whose traffic is mostly nonpaying lurkers subsidized by very horny whales paying for EVERYTHING) to scan licenses, is technically non-trivial and extremely anti-privacy, and - Leaving (B) undefined means means exposure to way more lawsuits Reducing this law to "proof of age" misses a big part of what these govs are really trying to achieve (tar-and-feathering people who privately enjoy spicy entertainment) So given the ubiquity of VPN services that users can use to actually privately enjoy the world's oldest form of entertainment, it is easier for Mindgeek et. al. to IP block and create an even bigger problem for these governments to deal with (introducing a semi-private communication channel to people who didn't know this was an option). [0] https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/html/HB01181H.htm https://capitol.texas.gov/tlodocs/88R/billtext/html/HB01181H...

kurikuri 3y ago

The big difference between using an ID to buy alcohol and using your ID to access a site is data retention. I can get a drink by showing my ID, the person serving me doesn’t need to keep my information to keep an auditable record. Without an accountable third party auditing solution (some sort of accredited lab situation), I wouldn’t trust a website to take my ID and not save/redistribute that information for other purposes. What is the result of this sort of regulation though? Now the sites which don’t operate in the US will simply skirt the regulation. What is Texas going to do, sue xHamster? Why would they bother to comply? Does Texas now start limiting the type of traffic allowed through the infrastructure within the state?

paulddraper 3y ago
Nothing requires that they keep your info, any more than a bar or strip club is required to.
- 3ef4e38b 3y ago
  Nothing enforces that they don't keep the info or sell it to third parties. Maybe they disclose it in a privacy policy. Maybe they say they don't, but do it anyway. It would be very hard to prove the negative in this case.