8 ms·
Porn censorship is going to destroy the internet
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- aogaili 1y agoMore like porn destroyed a generation. The flood of AI content, social media, and confused articles is destroying the internet.
- puppycodes 1y agoHow did porn destroy a generation? Porn has always been around. It will easily outlast the idiots writing these laws. > The Wheel: 6000 years old > Porn: 42,000 years old (Hohle Fels “Venus”)
- giancarlostoro 1y ago[dead]
- jabedude 1y agoThe steel man is that the vast increase in production and availability of porn has never been higher and has created a generation of porn addicts who have unhealthy ideas about sex and the opposite sex. These unhealthy ideas often manifest as anti-social behaviors which lead to loneliness and depression.
- puppycodes 1y ago"created a generation of porn addicts" Not to be rude but, this is a lazy analysis that is filled with assumptions, moralizing, over identification, and magical thinking. you are falling into a causation coorelation trap
- aogaili 1y ago[dead]
- a4isms 1y agoLong before modern porn, there were laws that a man could not be charged with raping his wife. Society largely looked the other way when a man beat his wife. There was a time when underage women could be trafficked by their parents into marriage against their will. There was a time when a woman who accused a man of rape would basically end up on trial herself while his lawyer dragged out every single romantic or sexual relationship she had in graphic detail so that the jury would believe "she was asking for it." I am under the impression that "unhealthy ideas about sex and the opposite sex" have been with us for a very, very long time. If we observe that porn addicts have such unhealthy ideas, are we confusing correlation with causation?
- fpgaminer 1y agoAt least in the U.S. the equality of women in society (and in law) has slowly risen over the last 100 years. Over that same period the availability of pornographic images has also slowly risen (from magazines, to VHS, to the Internet, to streaming videos, to VR). So if we're looking at correlation, doesn't the data imply that _more_ porn is associated with _more_ rights for women? (Conversely, the vast majority of people calling for and enacting policies for more restrictions on pornography are also rolling back rights for women.)
- brynnwintrs 1y ago[dead]
- diggan 1y agoAs always when it comes to these ("obviously") destructive behaviors, I feel like we don't quite know for sure if the porn addiction comes from people feeling loneliness and depression, rather than the other way around. People tend to jump quickly to the latter theory, but AFAIK there really isn't any consensus that's actually so.
- danaris 1y agoIn this case, we actually know (from some recent studies) that "porn addiction" doesn't actually involve any more usage of porn than a control group—what it does involve is guilt around the usage of porn.
- thinkingtoilet 1y agoI'm not saying unfettered access to an insane amount of porn is healthy, but how does it lead to anti-social behavior. No one is chatting up a person in a cafe then trying to have unprotected anal sex right there in the cafe. I could see it creating unrealistic expectations for men and women, but what's the connection to anti-social behavior?
- rescripting 1y agoA lot of pornography is misogynistic. Not all, but a lot. It depicts women as objects to be used, it normalizes sexual violence and degradation, and it focuses mainly on male pleasure. You watch enough of it and you start to internalize these attitudes.
- Sohcahtoa82 1y agoI've seen women complain about men putting their hands around their necks during sex because the men saw a man do it in porn. It's a rather upsetting trend.
- thinkingtoilet 1y agoNo arguments from me on porn being misogynistic and aimed at men. However, it's not like men weren't creeps before porn was invented (saying this as a man). Look at history and there's endless examples of old men marrying 13 year olds, of sexual assault and harassment, etc... Perhaps I am wrong, but I don't see modern porn doing much in making that any better or worse. In fact, as porn has proliferated over the last 50 years, we have made progress in the things that people say porn degrades. Obviously correlation does not equal causation but it's worth thinking about.
- rescripting 1y agoFair points, but the main difference with the state of 'modern' porn is that its accessible to young men during puberty (and earlier), via the internet. Finding a Playboy magazine in the bushes wont radicalize a 13 year old, but watching BDSM or CNC at an age where you're beginning to form your sexual ideologies can't be healthy.
- mpalmer 1y agoEh, not quite steel. "A generation of" is kind of slippery language, as is "has never been higher". How many people? How much more available is porn vs 10 years ago? You seem to imply many/most born during a certain period are porn addicts, and that they wouldn't have been 10, 15 years ago because porn wasn't as available. Not sure either is arguable.
- TehCorwiz 1y agoThroughout the 20th century we went from drawings of the intimate and obscene to photos, followed by video, then with sound, then delivered by mail, then down the street, and finally right in your pocket. All the while women’s right have been largely improving while actual violent crime has been decreasing. The world population also exploded in almost every corner from hundreds of millions a to billions. Relationships, procreation, gender views, and such also depend heavily on economic outlooks and have tracked that rather than porn in every comparison I can find. I disagree with your assessment that porn causes those things anymore than violent video games cause violence.
- cardanome 1y ago> who have unhealthy ideas about sex and the opposite sex Yeah, we should go back in time to when good men used to regularly beat up and rape their wife just like god wanted. Where anything not cis and hetero was not tolerated. Where relationships where based on dominance and very seldom on love. Nope. As sad as that may be, in terms of having healthy ideas about sex, we are probably at the peak since the neolithic revolutions. Times have never been better, especially in progressive Western nations. For porn to have ruined anything where would need to be something to ruin in the first place. Young men had unhealthy ideas about sex long before porn existed. They probably have a little bit more of a clue now. Don't get me wrong, I am absolutely willing to entertain the idea that porn and especially over consumption of porn is problematic in many aspects. However it is not a major societal issues. And I absolutely abhor the idea of the state censoring porn to enforce personal and specifically sexual morality. There is good reason civilized countries don't do this.
- bigyabai 1y agoYour great-grandpappy (and mine) ruined the world, paying for their peep shows and burlesque dances. The Great Depression, WWII, 9/11 - modern researchers cannot prove that these things would have happened had porn not been invented. Historians weep imagining what human utopias might have been had we never commodified our petty urge to reproduce.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- krapp 1y ago> Porn: 42,000 years old (Hohle Fels “Venus”) This only seems like porn because we live in a culture founded on Judeo-Christian taboos against sex and the female form. I wouldn't assume it was in any way pornographic in its own time and context.
- puppycodes 1y agoSorry but if you think Christians invented objectification you are sorely mistaken. There are 34000 years of other examples to choose from. It's an example to illustrate how long we have been into depecting explicit forms, for pleasure, for art, or otherwise.
- krapp 1y agoI didn't say anything about objectification, I was referring to pornography. Pornography as a concept in Western societies was entirely invented by Christians. The same concept does not exist elsewhere in the same form except where the influence of Western colonizing powers forced it upon native cultures, and I guarantee it did not exist 46,000 years ago when the Venus of Hohle Fels was created.
- puppycodes 1y agoIt's literally just an example of how long we have been horny. Your definition of porn is way more narrow and modern than what i'm talking about. Use a different word for it if you want but explicit imagery that people masterbate too is what I mean. Go off on your liberal arts dissertation though.
- krapp 1y ago[dead]
- aogaili 1y agoPorn was never that accessible at that speed.. there is nothing like it before... you don't know what you are talking about.
- aogaili 1y agoPeople downvoting me, thinking porm was available 10k years ago..are watching porn while commenting.
- normalaccess 1y agoCorrect, and it's to put the genii back in the bottle so to speak. Great video on how AI is being actively used to break the internet. Cause a problem, provide the solution. https://youtu.be/-gGLvg0n-uY?si=KDEVLayU5ToEEmpL https://youtu.be/-gGLvg0n-uY?si=KDEVLayU5ToEEmpL
- sunshine-o 1y agoWhile there is a lot of things that are ugly about porn I really do not believe it is 5% of the problems recent younger generations face today. Porn is just the new TV or video games, the scapegoat hidding the real taboo of our society: Parents are happy to believe the society, the government has to take care of their children. In the 80s they were leaving their children in front of the TV all day long and were blaming the TV programming. Then they bought them video game consoles and games and complained the games were too violent. Now they buy them full HD porn streaming devices with unlimited data and access to the internet to get rid of them and blame porn or tik tok.
- rolph 1y agoconsider a future internet that consists of numerous index torrent links that serve HTML and CSS files
- Jigsy 1y agoWasn't ZeroNet something like this before the developer vanished off the face of the Earth?
- rolph 1y agoyes it was https://github.com/HelloZeroNet https://github.com/HelloZeroNet https://github.com/HelloZeroNet/ZeroNet https://github.com/HelloZeroNet/ZeroNet perhaps it was too good?
- normalaccess 1y agoOur operating systems are being locked down to the point where you will need an online tracked ID in order to log on. Systems like Recall will be used to track user behavior and drive analytics and control mechanisms designed to maximize compliance to the chosen narrative. Check the 2023 keynote for Microsoft's Ignite AI conference. Microsoft plans to move ALL compute into the Azure cloud, meaning that they are planning for a future where even your OS in a cloud server. The GOV's of the world will be on the heels behind the curtain making sure this all passes. The future is sneaker net.
- bigfishrunning 1y agoOnly if your OS is windows... There are plenty of other ones. OSX is much less aggressive, and I honestly can't see something like one of the BSDs getting features like this.
- joquarky 1y agoThe future is VPN drop boxes.
- detritus 1y agoFunny how porn always points the way in tech, one way or another.
- Jigsy 1y agoThis was never about "protecting children." It never is. It's always about censorship and control. The only time politicians ever see children is when they can use them as a soapbox to push an agenda.
- drcongo 1y ago[flagged]
- churchill 1y ago[flagged]
- loloquwowndueo 1y agoThe fact that parent was ambiguous but _you_ immediately thought of Epstein is pretty telling - probably best not to forget.
- bavent 1y agoThey’re quoting what Donald Trump said when asked about him recently
- blueflow 1y agoMan, posting on the internet becomes increasingly difficult without paying attention to whatever Trump is currently doing.
- loloquwowndueo 1y agoOh sorry, I ignore any news about what Trump said. (I know what he’s up to mostly from news about how my government reacts to what he says, but the Epstein stuff doesn’t qualify so I was totally in the dark about that hah)
- bko 1y agoThere are things that are already illegal on the internet. Pirated media is generally illegal, which is meant to protect corporate profits. Most people are okay with such restrictions. But when it's actually about protecting children and forcing these shady companies to enforce their terms of service, it's censorship and control? The ironic thing is many people who decry forcing these companies to verify age, would be fine with such age verification restrictions on Insta or TikTok.
- spiderfarmer 1y agoAs a platform owner I’m dreading the future. People only talk about agriculture on mine, but I’m afraid I’ll run into these silly, expensive requirements just as well.
- grues-dinner 1y agoI mean, if you will peddle that cornography...
- rolph 1y agoyes perhaps if minors somehow learn to cultivate cannabis, or mushrooms, etc. from something on your site, you may have liability ?
- pessimizer 1y agoWhat's not going to help is focusing on the suffering of pornographers, when porn is being used as a pretense in order to monitor and restrict communication in general. Most people don't care about the suffering of pornographers. Even the consumers of porn: enough has been made already, it can be copied and preserved forever with no quality loss, we're on the verge of being able to magic it up with AI to match our personal scripts, nobody needs more. Focusing on how it makes pornographers almost as poor as average workers is almost an advertisement for internet censorship; I may have to call my rape a "grape," but at least a pornographer will have a bad day. Being against porn is an issue for the base, politicians don't actually care. When you swallow their arguments whole, you've already lost.
- bko 1y ago[flagged]
- OutOfHere 1y agoForcing someone to not do something that affects only their personal life is not why I pay taxes. The government has grown to be too intrusive, and it's getting worse, now risking the termination of the internet. As it is, the government doesn't do much real work that actually improves people's lives, and now it wants to make their lives worse by taking away their freedoms.
- bko 1y ago[flagged]
- OutOfHere 1y ago> You're not forcing someone to not do something. That's so obviously false because you're forcing adults to divulge their ID. They do not want to be tracked in this way. > Things change when you actually have children The issue is that this change extends to result in further blocks that have absolutely nothing to do with access to adult content. Already VPNs have been blocked, and this has a 1000x destructive impact. If you care so much about your children, do the parental thing which is to restrict their devices, rather than expecting the world to restrict theirs.
- tzs 1y ago> That's so obviously false because you're forcing adults to divulge their ID. They do not want to be tracked in this way That depends on how age verification is done. If it is "upload a photo of your ID documents" then yes, ID is divulged. If it is done the way Europe will be doing it with the EU Digital Identity wallet your ID is not divulged. All this is divulged to the site is that you are older than their age threshold.
- 1y ago
- normalaccess 1y agoRelated video about the need to control AI with a global ID system to control "misinformation and disinformation" as it will be imposable to tell what is real and what is fake. We are getting hit from all sides. You will be tracked and it will be used against you. https://youtu.be/-gGLvg0n-uY https://youtu.be/-gGLvg0n-uY
- bilbo0s 1y agoIn fairness, you are already tracked. And it will already be used against you. It's just that right now, though everyone is tracked, only a few people get watched. So even today, the algorithm is already picking out the people who should be watched. It's just that currently the government doesn't always do it on the up and up.
- LurkandComment 1y agoPorn is just the excuse to build the infrastructure. Then they expand their scope to censor and control everything they don't want.
- lagadu 1y ago[flagged]
- throwawayoldie 1y ago"One of the most important patterns of conservative message-making is projection. Projection is a psychological notion; it roughly means attacking someone by falsely claiming that they are attacking you. Conservative strategists engage in projection constantly." Source: " What Is Conservatism and What Is Wrong with It?", by Philip E. Agre. (https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/agre/conservatism.html https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/agre/conservatism.html)
- orefalo 1y agoNo, it will not. I live in the UAE, and I appreciate that my children do not have access to pornography or illegal websites, as these are blocked by the service providers. This should be adopted by many other countries
- woodrowbarlow 1y agowould you prefer to implement your own policies for your own household, rather than subscribe to the values endorsed by your service provider?
- Disposal8433 1y ago> I live in the UAE I'm sure you don't. Feel free to disconnect from the internet though, I don't mind. Also, I wouldn't compare the freedom to have porn with the freedom to have slaves, but it's a cultural difference, right?
- viridian 1y agoWhy would anyone lie about that?
- random9749832 1y agoMeanwhile weapons are being sent to Israel to bomb children because they really care about the lives of others. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9964/ https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-...
- nickt 1y agoAnd right on cue as expected, the push for age verification to use VPNs in the UK https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn438z3ejxyo https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn438z3ejxyo
- 1970-01-01 1y agoThe smart children will figure it out if they haven't already, and then go and tell the less acute children how to do it properly, without an app and account. Then we're back to basics of domains and ports instead of apps and accounts.
- grishka 1y agoAnd then what, age verification to get a VDS?
- tboyd47 1y agoSorry, but what on the internet is not already censored?
- normalaccess 1y agoI don't have proof but I have a felling this is the work of Palantir. After Trump made the announcement that they would be working on solving the ID crisis in America not a month later everywhere all at once started pushing for online IDs.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- normalaccess 1y agoThe beauty behind that is if they can get all the rest of the world to do it then they can point to that to push it here at home. Break the narrative abroad and after the frogs are acclimated turn up the heat at home.
- runjake 1y agoInstead of "$x is destroying us", I wish we would focus more on personal resilience, introspection, coping skills, and ingenuity. No matter how many $x's you conquer, there's always another $x around the corner.
- danaris 1y agoYou can't "individual resiliency" your way out of systemic problems.
- runjake 1y agoWhich "systemic problems" are you referring to?
- Henchman21 1y agoNot who you were responding to, but here are some: - anthropogenic climate change - institutional racism - healthcare availability and affordability - gun violence How does “personal resilience, introspection, coping skills, and ingenuity” help solve any of those??
- runjake 1y agoThe topic at hand was non-existential threats, so my comment was oriented toward that. But, I think my comment stands with regard to existential threats, as well, but at scale (so, education and social movements are key). Resilience and coping skills to better deal with the compromises and hardships required, be it refraining from things we enjoy because it fights climate change or dealing with violence from the state to make our voices heard. Introspection to strengthen our beliefs, ethics, behaviors, and understanding of the world and different viewpoints. Ingenuity to come up with solutions to these existential risks. These are all vitally important at scale. Stronger people brings smarter choices and less vulnerability to external influences (especially the malicious kinds).
- danaris 1y ago
- EarlKing 1y agoWhat amazes me is that this article fails to mention that the slippery slope is already underway. Multiple states have some variation on the "App Store Accountability Act" that requires you present ID just to download apps, including Texas (SB 2420) and Louisiana (HB 570), with several more underway. Then there's the various acts that try to regulate social media by demanding you present ID to be able to post (or else gimp your site to fit one of the carve-outs they have which conveniently ensures that users cannot engage in public posting of any kind towards one another) such as Texas's HB 186 (from 2024). Put simply: You've all been asleep at the switch while the US-side Internet has been systematically under attack by pornscolds trying to implement Chinese-style censorship, this article's author included.
- s1gsegv 1y agoWe haven’t been asleep. We’ve been saying no at every turn. But they’re using propaganda, and they will continue until something sticks. It’s an endless fight and we are losing, despite our efforts.
- 1970-01-01 1y agoIf we're honest, this is exactly what it will take for the bots to evaporate into the void. I have always been against 'having a license to internet', but I am very interested in seeing what will happen to all the bots if it does (temporarily) succeed. No bot should be able to pass an ID check, and if one does, its pure legal fuel to sue the system.
- numpad0 1y agoThat's beyond naive. Nothing will happen to bots because they're not human (and/or) individuals from first world nations. Bot farm runners can either print IDs, post from unrestricted locations, or through bulk posting APIs offered behind doors. Social media operators has less issues with cooperative spams than actually organically trending posts because contents are less original. It only hurts real users.
- 1970-01-01 1y ago
- 1970-01-01 1y agoI've dusted off the old form. Here you are: This advocates a: ( ) technical (*) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante ...solution to control explicit or controversial content online. It won’t work. Here’s why: Why it fails: (*) Can be bypassed with basic tools (VPNs, mirrors, alt accounts) (*) Users and creators won’t tolerate the restrictions (*) Requires unrealistic global cooperation (*) Censors legitimate content (art, education, etc.) (*) Lawmakers don’t understand the tech they’re regulating (*) Platforms may quietly ignore or undermine it (*) Trolls and bots will weaponize it What you didn’t consider: (*) Jurisdiction conflicts across countries (*) Encrypted and decentralized content sharing (*) Abuse of takedown/reporting systems (*) Privacy and free expression concerns (*) Content filters are always one step behind And finally: (*) Sorry, it just doesn’t work. ( ) This idea causes more harm than good. ( ) You're solving a symptom, not the problem
- Krutonium 1y agoI think the second to last one should also be checked. Most implementations include Government Sponsored Identity Theft.
- normalaccess 1y agoThe road to hell is paved with good intentions.
- general1726 1y agoI agree, there already is a lot of leaked IDs, enough to feed into AI to generate any ID you wish with any name on it. The ID verification system via a picture is dead on arrival.
- therealpygon 1y agoI’d say all three in the and “finally” category are relevant. This does cause more harm than good because it is more likely to be weaponized by the government when they start to carve out more exceptions to free speech. It is also solving a symptom (where kids go when they are curious about adult topics) rather than the problem (parenting…not providing a safe space for your kids to ask those questions).
- tolerance 1y agoThis issue raises one of those odd dynamics where people concerned with the welfare of humanity brush against the people arguing for the longevity of public infrastructure. And against them both are the string-pulling hands who have an advantage if either interest prevails. Or maybe it’s not that odd and this is a common conflict. I stand on the side of those indifferent to the material consequences of this censorship on pure moral grounds. And the funny thing is that there are people who seek to mean well and who find the material trade-off intolerable for their own reasons. Society as a whole is kept in quite the quagmire by the string of these aforementioned hands, ain’t they?
- zingababba 1y agoI mean there are apps now that realistically declothe people. No amount of legislation is going to stop digitally naked people from existing lol.
- charlie90 1y agothats a feature, not a bug
- mvdtnz 1y ago> While these laws are outwardly about preventing minors from accessing porn sites Take a look at the Australian age verification law. Mainstream websites aren't even collateral damage, they are explicitly the target.
- sunshine-o 1y agoStupid question: is there a reason they did not mandate every ISP in the UK to allow the blocking of porn as an opt-in feature? (and make it the default for mobile subscribers under 18yo)
- rolph 1y agoits not about porn, its about the visceral reaction to porn being exploited in order to drive support for absolute deanonymization.
- josefritzishere 1y agoWe are all bots now.
- Molitor5901 1y agoMaybe. I am still not sold on the idea that porn should be so freely available to children, and we can't depend on parental controls - everyone reading this should know that by now. So we either keep our children off the internet, closely monitor their usage, or let them have at it. As for destroying the internet? No. It may, in fact, make the internet a little better. Less bandwidth usage. Less intrusive advertisements, maybe even less spam. Age verification for pornography is not the hill to die on. A national internet identification number is the hill to not only die on, but riot.
- BergAndCo 1y ago[dead]
- sincerecook 1y ago[dead]
- lo_zamoyski 1y agoThe first distinction to emphasize is between moral principle and the practical. Pornography is not free speech or free expression, unless you assume a totally unhinged and nihilistic/libertarian view of these terms to mean "anything goes". Pornography is morally reprehensible in every imaginable way, and it is the source of too many social and personal ills to list. It destroys human relationships, ruins a person's ability to relate to others in a healthy and respectful way, cultivates habits that cripple intellectual function, involves the mistreatment and abuse of women in the industry, contributes to infertility, stunts moral development and psychological health, the list goes on. There is no real argument for porn, only boring skeptical rationalization and relativist sophistry, and a list of reasons of why it is a bad thing. That covers principle. What about policy? Here is where questions of implementation are relevant. The fallacy we must avoid is the false implication that if a particular way of containing, reducing, or eliminating porn is impractical, then all means are impractical. (I have given here a general principle that should guide policy. It may very well be the case that the tactics proposed won't "ruin the internet", even if they may shape the internet in ways that opponents don't like. Porn is so odious, that we may need to entertain certain restrictions that bleed into other areas.) FWIW, I think a more aggressive, categorical assault on the production and distribution of pornography is more sensible. The internet is a medium of delivery, not a producer of pornography, so existing laws criminalizing the distribution or other objectionable content could be expanded to include pornography. Targeting producers, whether corporate or private individuals, is arguably the most fruitful tactic, with the secondary result that there will be less porn being distributed. And we mustn't ignore the chilling effect that criminalization has on attitudes. It is not true that the only laws worth making are those that can be enforced. A law is a kind of declaration of expectations that has the power to shape social norms. Simply knowing something is illegal has a psychological and social effect. It gives the conscience a signal, or at threat to motivate the morally unscrupulous, and it provides a tangible basis for establishing social sentiment and stigmas. There is a social stigma attached to being a criminal, and so by criminalizing porn, you receive a clear social sanction to classify those involved in porn as criminals and therefore worthy of being ostracized. It won't prevent all pornographic activity, but it will create an environment that will reduce its presence and shape attitudes toward it.