4 ms·

> This is arguably much worse than allowing children to watch porn online, because this will for sure effect people's whole life in a negative way. I would lik

> This is arguably much worse than allowing children to watch porn online, because this will for sure effect people's whole life in a negative way. I would like you to make that argument.

pembrook 5mo ago
What argument? You're the one that needs to argue the presence of harm, given you're the one arguing we need to create a surveillance dragnet to shield certain age groups of humans from witnessing how their species procreates. The default state is that humans procreate via sexual reproduction. You need to argue why we need to take action to hide this, especially given we let children witness other far more brutal activities from the human species like violence.
- delusional 5mo ago
  The argument I am asking him to make is the one about how age verification is "much worse" than "allowing children to watch porn". If your argument in favor of that is that watching porn isn't harmful to children, then I don't understand what all that superfluous waffling about china is doing in there.
- ckjellqv 5mo ago
  > This is arguably much worse Surely someone claiming it's arguable should be willing to make that argument. For me it's not that it's reproduction. Film that shows sex is not an issue as I see it and I don't know anyone that has developed serious addictions to sex in Hollywood film. However I know several people, family members included, that have absolutely obliterated their childhoods and early adult years by becoming addicted to porn. They were groomed by adults online from a young age and, although their parents tried to stop it, kids are sneakier and they got around it, exposing themselves to some truly dark things. It is not easy for families to recover from having dealt with a child with serious addiction issues. I think it's pretty silly to argue that systemic protections are ineffective and overreach whereas the efforts of one or two parents should be enough and are the correct level of enforcement for the protection of children. The parents of the people I know went to extremes to protect their children and they were mostly unsuccessful.
  - JCattheATM 5mo ago
    Sounds like the people you describe were outliers with some preexisting conditions, and probably shouldn't be used as any sort of baseline or point of comparison.
    - ckjellqv 5mo ago
      I wouldn't think that since people who don't suffer from these issues outnumber those who do suffer, that makes this not a real issue. Consider the victims of opiate addiction, alcoholism, or sex trafficking. Are those situations so fundamentally different? How many people does one have to know with tragic childhoods for it to be a problem that people take seriously?
      - JCattheATM 5mo ago
        There's a big gap between 'some kids get addicted to porn' and 'lets agegate the internet as completely as possible'
    - 2duct 5mo ago
      Just to add my perspective, I am one of those outliers who is still going to therapy for porn/sex addiction that started in adolescence. Age verification wouldn't have helped me because addiction wasn't my main or only issue - I also had significant sources of stress owing to my upbringing. I could have just as easily been addicted to drugs or alcohol because of those stressors, or used a VPN. Either way I needed some form of stress relief beyond what any teen ought to need, and those were the options I saw. Combination of abuse and unfettered access to drinks/drugs/Internet is way worse than either one alone. At the same time I think the issue of bad parenting is a) not one people talk about out loud because of stigma (we can attack tech CEOs all day for pushing addictive products but anyone can become a parent and none of them will stand to be called the "bad" one) and b) not amenable to much change save for a global in-house surveillance panopticon. Yes we can choose to place trust in parents to protect children from Instagram and PornHub, but consider that some parents just... won't. Neither can we force them to. What then?
swiftcoder 5mo ago
Nobody thought to protect western millennials from accidentally wandering across porn on the internet, and we mostly grew up ok
- neonstatic 5mo ago
  I don't understand why porn is such a problem and an excuse. There is so much genuinely horrifying stuff on the internet - including gore, pictures and videos of all kinds of abuse, but the problem is always with people having sex on camera for money...
  - joe_mamba 5mo ago
    >I don't understand why porn is such a problem and an excuse. Because porn is the most taboo things in public, even if a lot of people use it at home. Nobody will come and defend liberal porn access because then everyone will call you a gooner or a pedo. It'll probably be the end of your political debate. Which means porn access can be weaponized without any political opposition. It's the perfect scapegoat to remove online anonymity disguised as "age verification".
    - neonstatic 5mo ago
      Yes, I agree, my point was more about why is sex such a taboo, when there are things out there, that are genuinely worse. But I guess it's a bit too wide of a topic to have a productive discussion.
      - joe_mamba 5mo ago
        You misunderstood. Sex is not taboo, admitting to consuming porn to the public is.
  - mcv 5mo ago
    I think the important part is that parents talk with their children about the nature of porn. It's unavoidable that they're going to run into it at some point, and I think it's important that they understand that's not what real sex is like. I did catch my son watching porn when he was 13. We talked about it, I blocked some stuff at my router (hardly comprehensive, but mostly to make it easy to avoid the thing he was watching), and then stopped worrying about it. He's 17 now. I'm sure he knows how to find it if he wants it, but I also trust he's able to interpret it responsibly. He seems like a well-adjusted kid. I worry more about his gaming addiction, but it doesn't seem to be interfering with school anymore.
christophilus 5mo ago
Parents can protect their children. Source: I’m a parent. My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet. This doesn’t affect the free exchange of ideas that my fellow countrymen enjoy. Governments getting involved absolutely, unequivocally will be used to clamp down on the free exchange of ideas.
- delusional 5mo ago
  That wasn't the point i was asking for an argument for. What I wanted to know is how age verification is worse then allowing children to watch porn. To make that argument. > Source: I’m a parent. My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet. Are they above the age of 16? Because then you're either Amish or out of touch.
  - carlosjobim 5mo ago
    Age verification isn't the problem. It is just a tool for censorship. It's censorship which is the problem.
    - delusional 5mo ago
      So to put the bricks together: Age verification is worse than allowing children to watch pornography, because age verification is censorship. I hope you can see how that argument is not compelling.
      - afpx 5mo ago
        It’s not only compelling to a lot of Americans, it’s foundational.
      - carlosjobim 5mo ago
        Age verification will be implemented as identity identification. And that means anything you read or write or watch or say will be tied to your identity, registered by the government and other organizations, and used against you as an individual. Do you understand now? Or will you only understand when you get fired from your job and they won't tell you the reason?

> This is arguably much worse than allowing children to watch porn online, because this will for sure effect people's whole life in a negative way. I would like you to make that argument.

pembrook 5mo ago

What argument? You're the one that needs to argue the presence of harm, given you're the one arguing we need to create a surveillance dragnet to shield certain age groups of humans from witnessing how their species procreates. The default state is that humans procreate via sexual reproduction. You need to argue why we need to take action to hide this, especially given we let children witness other far more brutal activities from the human species like violence.

delusional 5mo ago
The argument I am asking him to make is the one about how age verification is "much worse" than "allowing children to watch porn". If your argument in favor of that is that watching porn isn't harmful to children, then I don't understand what all that superfluous waffling about china is doing in there.
ckjellqv 5mo ago
> This is arguably much worse Surely someone claiming it's arguable should be willing to make that argument. For me it's not that it's reproduction. Film that shows sex is not an issue as I see it and I don't know anyone that has developed serious addictions to sex in Hollywood film. However I know several people, family members included, that have absolutely obliterated their childhoods and early adult years by becoming addicted to porn. They were groomed by adults online from a young age and, although their parents tried to stop it, kids are sneakier and they got around it, exposing themselves to some truly dark things. It is not easy for families to recover from having dealt with a child with serious addiction issues. I think it's pretty silly to argue that systemic protections are ineffective and overreach whereas the efforts of one or two parents should be enough and are the correct level of enforcement for the protection of children. The parents of the people I know went to extremes to protect their children and they were mostly unsuccessful.
- JCattheATM 5mo ago
  Sounds like the people you describe were outliers with some preexisting conditions, and probably shouldn't be used as any sort of baseline or point of comparison.
  - ckjellqv 5mo ago
    I wouldn't think that since people who don't suffer from these issues outnumber those who do suffer, that makes this not a real issue. Consider the victims of opiate addiction, alcoholism, or sex trafficking. Are those situations so fundamentally different? How many people does one have to know with tragic childhoods for it to be a problem that people take seriously?
    - JCattheATM 5mo ago
      There's a big gap between 'some kids get addicted to porn' and 'lets agegate the internet as completely as possible'
  - 2duct 5mo ago
    Just to add my perspective, I am one of those outliers who is still going to therapy for porn/sex addiction that started in adolescence. Age verification wouldn't have helped me because addiction wasn't my main or only issue - I also had significant sources of stress owing to my upbringing. I could have just as easily been addicted to drugs or alcohol because of those stressors, or used a VPN. Either way I needed some form of stress relief beyond what any teen ought to need, and those were the options I saw. Combination of abuse and unfettered access to drinks/drugs/Internet is way worse than either one alone. At the same time I think the issue of bad parenting is a) not one people talk about out loud because of stigma (we can attack tech CEOs all day for pushing addictive products but anyone can become a parent and none of them will stand to be called the "bad" one) and b) not amenable to much change save for a global in-house surveillance panopticon. Yes we can choose to place trust in parents to protect children from Instagram and PornHub, but consider that some parents just... won't. Neither can we force them to. What then?

swiftcoder 5mo ago

Nobody thought to protect western millennials from accidentally wandering across porn on the internet, and we mostly grew up ok

neonstatic 5mo ago
I don't understand why porn is such a problem and an excuse. There is so much genuinely horrifying stuff on the internet - including gore, pictures and videos of all kinds of abuse, but the problem is always with people having sex on camera for money...
- joe_mamba 5mo ago
  >I don't understand why porn is such a problem and an excuse. Because porn is the most taboo things in public, even if a lot of people use it at home. Nobody will come and defend liberal porn access because then everyone will call you a gooner or a pedo. It'll probably be the end of your political debate. Which means porn access can be weaponized without any political opposition. It's the perfect scapegoat to remove online anonymity disguised as "age verification".
  - neonstatic 5mo ago
    Yes, I agree, my point was more about why is sex such a taboo, when there are things out there, that are genuinely worse. But I guess it's a bit too wide of a topic to have a productive discussion.
    - joe_mamba 5mo ago
      You misunderstood. Sex is not taboo, admitting to consuming porn to the public is.
- mcv 5mo ago
  I think the important part is that parents talk with their children about the nature of porn. It's unavoidable that they're going to run into it at some point, and I think it's important that they understand that's not what real sex is like. I did catch my son watching porn when he was 13. We talked about it, I blocked some stuff at my router (hardly comprehensive, but mostly to make it easy to avoid the thing he was watching), and then stopped worrying about it. He's 17 now. I'm sure he knows how to find it if he wants it, but I also trust he's able to interpret it responsibly. He seems like a well-adjusted kid. I worry more about his gaming addiction, but it doesn't seem to be interfering with school anymore.

christophilus 5mo ago

Parents can protect their children. Source: I’m a parent. My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet. This doesn’t affect the free exchange of ideas that my fellow countrymen enjoy. Governments getting involved absolutely, unequivocally will be used to clamp down on the free exchange of ideas.

delusional 5mo ago
That wasn't the point i was asking for an argument for. What I wanted to know is how age verification is worse then allowing children to watch porn. To make that argument. > Source: I’m a parent. My kids haven’t seen porn and can’t access the internet. Are they above the age of 16? Because then you're either Amish or out of touch.
- carlosjobim 5mo ago
  Age verification isn't the problem. It is just a tool for censorship. It's censorship which is the problem.
  - delusional 5mo ago
    So to put the bricks together: Age verification is worse than allowing children to watch pornography, because age verification is censorship. I hope you can see how that argument is not compelling.
    - afpx 5mo ago
      It’s not only compelling to a lot of Americans, it’s foundational.
    - carlosjobim 5mo ago
      Age verification will be implemented as identity identification. And that means anything you read or write or watch or say will be tied to your identity, registered by the government and other organizations, and used against you as an individual. Do you understand now? Or will you only understand when you get fired from your job and they won't tell you the reason?