3 ms·
I understand this could be abused, but it's up to us to make sure it isn't Exactly, by protesting and fighting laws like this. What exactly do you want people
by Goronmon 1y ago
I understand this could be abused, but it's up to us to make sure it isn't
Exactly, by protesting and fighting laws like this.
What exactly do you want people to "make sure of" with the law in place? If someone is concerned about this law, what specific action should they be taking in the name of "diligence"?
- thinkingtoilet 1y agoHaving a law saying children shouldn't view pornography isn't abuse. It's common sense. Just like saying a 12 year old can't legally buy weed. Is that a slippery slope? Should 12 year olds be able to buy weed? If not, why is that not a slippery slope and this is? What needs to be kept in check is the scope. Let's say they try to age restrict sites that are subversive, but not obscene. That's what I'm talking about.
- Goronmon 1y agoHaving a law saying children shouldn't view pornography isn't abuse. "Children shouldn't view pornography" is fine as an overall goal. A law that suggest the content providers track the faces and passport details of all users is a ridiculous way to fail to prevent that however. It is however a great way to have an readily accessible log of exactly which citizens are viewing content the government finds questionable.
- thinkingtoilet 1y agoWith ISP data, the government already knows all the porn we're watching in great detail. Which brings up a better point, if you're worried about tracking, chop down the tree, don't pick off a leaf.