3 ms·
Who wants this?
by Avicebron 4mo ago
Who wants this?
- Simulacra 4mo agoGovernment
- Avicebron 4mo agoWe need opt-out clauses in taxes, so we can vote with our wallets if regular voting isn't working..
- greenavocado 4mo agoTax opt outs are written in blood
- hackingonempty 4mo agoThe GOP. This is part of Project 2025. They want to outlaw porn. > Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered. https://web.archive.org/web/20241103190346/https://static.project2025.org/2025_MandateForLeadership_FOREWORD.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20241103190346/https://static.pr...
- jm4 4mo agoA lot of it would go away if they just stopped consuming it. They consume it at least as much as anybody else. The only difference is the self loathing and belief that they need to be - and are qualified to be - the moral police.
- mrtksn 4mo agoIIRC the onlyfans creators were deemed the desired kind of immigrants. What’s the plan here, lure them in and throw them in jail?
- Avicebron 4mo agoUnfortunately I don't think it's that cut and dried. Here is the list of cosponsors in case anyone was curious if their "representative" is on the list https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/s1748/cosponsors https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/119/s1748/cosponsors
- hoppp 4mo agoWhy not just outlaw sex? If looking at sex is illegal they might as well go all the way.
- throw9398449 4mo ago[flagged]
- hoppp 4mo agoWhat you mean no way to consent? We can talk or use non-verbal communication. Marriage is by itself not consent for sex and you can't sue somebody to get them to have sex with you either
- jdsnape 4mo agoBecause in their philosophy sex serves a purpose (procreation and the deepening of the marital union). Anything that doesn’t support those two aims (contraception, abortion, gay marriage, pornography etc.) is therefore immoral but there’s nothing wrong with sex in its ‘proper’ context.
- microgpt 4mo agoTheir philosophy is extremely inconsistent. In reality it's emotionally driven. Not sure what specific emotions cause one to think sex is wrong except for reproduction, but a lot of the people who push this sort of thing turn out to be closeted gay homophobes.
- wewewedxfgdf 4mo agoAll governments in the world, both sides of politics. It's for the kids, you understand - to protect the kids. There is no more noble purpose than to protect the kids. Only a monster would not want to protect the kids.
- mdp2021 4mo agoIt's by the kids (the goats).
- Bender 4mo agoThink of the children [1] [1] - https://nochan.net/b/Internet-Crap/20230829-Think-Of-The-Children/ https://nochan.net/b/Internet-Crap/20230829-Think-Of-The-Chi...
- ivanjermakov 4mo agoKids want it themselves. All popular people want it too. Imagine if we don't do this for the kids? Either this or kids will get hurt. All my friends want it too. One eastern country didn't protect their kids and look where it's at. This is the only way to save kids and we need to act fast! You should rather be against child labor than this. Tried to collect more logical fallacies here.
- microgpt 4mo ago"kids" is just another word for "people" by the way - everyone is a kid, and everyone is an adult, except for people who die very young. We should not make the mistake of thinking of them as two separate independent categories of people.
- newsclues 4mo agoAnyone who wants to centralize power: so big tech, big government, big corporations, and big dummies who think this is progress
- felooboolooomba 4mo agoMeta has spent $2B lobbying for this. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47410870 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47410870
- brettgo1 4mo agoThey're lobbying FOR it?! I thought this would hinder them along with everyone else
- hoppp 4mo agoThey lobby for because then they can collect biometrics from kids and then reject them. So they don't serve underage kids , no fines but they do get data.
- baby_souffle 4mo agoAnd it's another non-trivial barrier to entry for any potential upstart that may eventually grow to be a problem for meta
- haunter 4mo ago> then they can collect biometrics from kids They will collect it from everyone to prove your age. The question only that is it worth the gamble by Meta, as in how many people would rather leave the sites (from Whatsapp to Insta to Facebook) than give them their ID
- shomp 4mo agoIf Facebook knows your precise age they can market to you "better."
- microgpt 4mo agoThey want to know all the children are 18+ to remove liability for what they do to them.
- felooboolooomba 4mo agoMeta has a long history of breaking the law. I have no doubts Meta will have access to the personal details once you've "verified your age". They'll know WHO you are, as accurately as possible. Can you imagine how much that it worth to Meta, history's largest harvester of personal data? A whole lot more than $2B. Now, based on their ruthless disregard for the law, do you think they're just going to use it to sell your ads?
- microgpt 4mo agoParents who want to raise healthy children. Politicians who want to track everyone all the time. The rare few politicians who want it to be easier to raise healthy children. Tech CEOs who don't want to be liable for harming children's development. Tech CEOs who want to track everyone all the time. The rare few tech CEOs who want to improve the world (by not harming children's development) and whose business model doesn't require it or who compete with one that does (e.g. operators of edutainment websites if those even still exist). App coders who don't want to train a neural network to check IDs themselves.
- stackedinserter 4mo agoThese people are around you. Watch this "regulate 3d printers because of children" hearing: https://youtu.be/sue88CXzPcQ?t=2285 https://youtu.be/sue88CXzPcQ?t=2285 Normal people that call themselves good names like "moms for actions" drag us into this totalitarian hell.