Comments
royisabau5 t1_iuew9so wrote
And of course, we won’t make it public because corporations need to hoard it for themselves
vriska1 t1_iueyuh3 wrote
Thing is the bill and the AV part are so unworkable that it is likely to collapse under its own weight just look at the last age verification law that was delayed over and over again until it was quietly scraped.
Same with the bills from the UK and California.
Traditional-Trip7617 t1_iufh1so wrote
It’ll become an arms race for hackers to get ahold of these “internet social security numbers” and all the data tied to them. Companies who are hiring you will ask you to put them down right next to your ss and run you through a data base
acoolusersknee t1_iufhg8c wrote
Yep, that's the way I see it shaking out. We already have some companies asking to see applicant's social media accounts. Just a matter of time before it becomes standard across the business landscape.
Traditional-Trip7617 t1_iufj1m6 wrote
Some companies? I work in a blue collar industry and they ask me for social media handles at the same rate they ask for my first name
acoolusersknee t1_iufmbhy wrote
Really? That is interesting to hear. Maybe we are further along than I thought.
Psychonuat_Summer t1_iufqjjy wrote
Yeah, I’ve had a few applications ask that I put in any social media handles and that they would be searching for “offensive online behavior” that didn’t “align with the company values” and could hurt their reputation or something.
Idk, to me it just sounded like they were shady af and didn’t want any reason for anyone to be poking around cuz their shit castle would fall down and expose them
DimitriV t1_iugbwkk wrote
Those companies are walking a dangerous path. Applicants who post about any protected status—religion, sexuality, disability, etc.—and don't get hired could sue those companies claiming discrimination. Not to say that they'd win, but the cost of those suits could quickly outweigh any benefits in screening applicants.
choke_da_wokes t1_iuffdy1 wrote
Blockchain for people
acoolusersknee t1_iuffmah wrote
Yeah pretty much
terminalblue t1_iugd2ok wrote
cant wait for that "internet credit score"
DutchieTalking t1_iugpc2o wrote
And at that point I'll renounce the internet.
silkflowers47 t1_iuft1au wrote
You know other countries have identification from birth thats used online right?? Its not the hell hole you imagine but kids actually not being able to view porn
acoolusersknee t1_iuftrlz wrote
I am not aware of any countries that require some form of state ID to get online. I could see China implementing something of the sort but I haven't seen any source that suggests that they do. What countries are you referring to?
silkflowers47 t1_iufu3y2 wrote
Im south korean and we have an identification number for everyone. Websites are actually well regulated with the number. Collecting data works great for korea and tech companies are able to support government regulations and work with them.
acoolusersknee t1_iufyqgi wrote
That is really interesting. How does it work exactly? Do you enter your number when you first open a web browser or is it a per website thing?
From the outside looking in it seems like the South Korean government cares a lot more about its citizens than the US government does. An online identification system may work in South Korea but I don't think there would be any consumer protections implemented in the US if such an identification system was implemented. Of course this is just my opinion and I don't have anything to back it up besides what I see going in the country.
dmintz t1_iug2ljh wrote
The South Korean Government has had tons of scandals recently about being directly in bed with Samsung etc.
Throwawayingaccount t1_iug3cvv wrote
> How does it work exactly? Do you enter your number when you first open a web browser or is it a per website thing?
It's a per website thing, or at least it was ~10 years ago.
This lead to something -INCREDIBLY- stupid.
South Korea is where a -LOT- of MMOs start.
So... there became a market for Korean SSNs, purely so you can play video games.
I am 100% serious. The leading reason for using someone else's identity in South Korea is to play video games.
[deleted] t1_iufwldd wrote
[removed]
Poltras t1_iuf1v4r wrote
I’m going to be a bit /r/UnpopularOpinion here and state that age should be verified and exposed all over the place on the internet. Names, gender/associations, etc could all be hidden or anonymous and I’d be happy, but we should force every users on social media to disclose their age (or at least a few choices, like teenage, YA, etc).
My discussions here and on many other platforms would be way healthier if I knew I’m taking to a 12 year old or a 40 year old.
Edit: I was expecting the downvotes but if you guys wanna start a discussion instead I’d be much more appreciative.
acoolusersknee t1_iuf33lx wrote
So the problem I see is the only way to verify age is via some form of identification. That identification is going to be stored and sold whether the website admits to it or not. You shouldn't expect to have a quality discussion with anyone on the internet until they display that they are capable of having one.
685327593 t1_iufc1oj wrote
Exactly. Only way to verify age is to verify identity. The two can't be separated.
Uristqwerty t1_iug996y wrote
Pretty much everyone has a phone, right? And pretty much every phone has a TPM that can store cryptographic keys and self-destruct rather than ever let them leak, right? So, you need two keys: One proof-of-age key that's the same for everyone, perhaps generated fresh each month by the government, for which simply having access to the key says that you're over the threshold and nothing more. Then, a unique-to-you key generated by your phone that is only used once a month on a fixed date to fetch the latest proof-of-age key. Setting that one up may require visiting a government office in-person once to verify your identity. Then, everyone over 18 in a single nation looks alike to the websites asking for your identity. To ensure they don't sneakily swap out the proof key for targeted individuals, each month's public half would be made public, for all users and websites alike to see. Perhaps have the TPM verify a fingerprint or face match before unlocking the proof key.
And if that's a scheme that a cryptography amateur can come up with in minutes, based on a high-level understanding of TPMs and SSL certificates, imagine what someone who properly understands M-of-N secret sharing, zero-knowledge proofs, and all sorts of other clever mathematical tools could do, given months to refine their design and peers to identify and help correct flaws all along the way!
KonChaiMudPi t1_iufekys wrote
This is the biggest problem, and this is entirely why I’m against it. Either A.) Your age cannot be rigidly/effectively verified, because it’s a gameable system, or B.) Your age is directly tied to information that is far too personal to disclose in this way.
As an aside, a big problem with this proposed system is that exposing minors online as minors makes them even bigger targets for exploitation, all while someone who manages to impersonate a young person is given the perfect sheep’s-clothing to do it in. It is an extremely dangerous concept.
Bhraal t1_iufuqvd wrote
> all while someone who manages to impersonate a young person is given the perfect sheep’s-clothing to do it in. It is an extremely dangerous concept.
If the system is based on positively identifying someone as a minor I can totally see someone having/getting access to the credentials of their own or a relative's kids and using that to set up a profile. Hell, if they are controlling enough they could probably use a kids actual account and pressuring them to stay silent.
On the other end parents let their guard down because they believe everyone else their kid can interact with is verified.
KonChaiMudPi t1_iufxf3z wrote
> On the other end parents let their guard down because they believe everyone else their kid can interact with is verified.
This is the biggest problem even today with online safety is parents who don’t take accountability for protecting their kids. With the current state of the internet, it needs to be treated a lot like a public place. Would you let your young children just free roam in public and interact with whoever with no supervision?
It’s challenging because I see both sides of that conversation, I’ve been a minor who often felt monitored, and who escaped into online communities, and it is important that kids can have some sense of privacy. In a broad sense though, I think parents still need to be aware of roughly how their children spend their time online and roughly who they are interacting with.
I’ve seen a few different stories lately about parents suing major tech companies because their children got hurt by people online or through an online platform. I understand the desire to lash out in a challenging situation but the truth is as a parent you need to be responsible for protecting your children online, because the world won’t do it for you.
[deleted] t1_iufiffd wrote
Agreed, I am against this as well. This doesn't have to be inevitable, we can fight against it, and we will.
leopard_tights t1_iufdpzh wrote
You set up a trusted partner (like with the new passkeys) that verifies that you're of age, or over X years old, not the exact number. And that's it. Easy peasy lemon squeasy.
JackIsBackWithCrack t1_iuf3554 wrote
You’re an advertiser’s best friend!
Poltras t1_iuf41iq wrote
That’s okay. The best advertisers can already figure it out just by listing your comment history.
Mikatron3000 t1_iuf33g2 wrote
I think showing if someone was over 18 or not would be better than showing their full age imo
UrbanGhost114 t1_iufdi8y wrote
Please look up the book Common Sense, written by Thomas Paine, originally written and published anonymously.
There is no free speach without anonymous speach.
Makenchi45 t1_iufkmhs wrote
So flaw in that is this, IP address is kinda easy to get if the person belonging to it doesn't use a VPN or know how to set up a dynamic IP with their ISP. Having ages listed for the world to see allows someone to see that a person lives at that IP address with that age and can be traced to a physical address. Hell it wouldn't even be a stretch to say predators could use that to their advantage to find new victims regardless of what they plan to do.
COBE1 t1_iuf3fz9 wrote
Only if social media was regulated like a bank or hospital. With all the privacy and data control requirements.
conquer69 t1_iugmegx wrote
What difference does it make? We already have 30yo with the mental and emotional intelligence of a 13yo.
EmbarrassedHelp t1_iuf1q6j wrote
> Other groups have called for an effective ban on online pornography. Anti-porn group Collective Shout called for all pornography to be treated under the same classification as child sexual abuse material or terrorism material, which would be required to be removed or blocked in Australia.
Its no surprise that the groups pushing for this massive privacy invasion are batshit insane.
Guac_in_my_rarri t1_iuf3jtp wrote
I don't get groups that want to outright ban something. It doesn't hurt you, leave it the fuck alone. Block it from your family, but as soon as they get freedom, they aren't coming back to the old rules.
685327593 t1_iufb2y1 wrote
There's plenty of things that should be outright banned, this just isn't one of them.
XkF21WNJ t1_iufct4w wrote
Yep, though you should always be careful what mechanisms you allow to be used to ban stuff. It's no surprise they're trying to use laws designed for terrorist and child sexual abuse, those are often the ones used as justification for mechanisms that would seem excessively authoritarian otherwise (those and money laundering).
The danger with allowing tools like this to exist is always that people get weird ideas about what other things they can be used for. Doesn't matter how loudly anyone promised they'll never be used for anything else.
doogle_126 t1_iufrny9 wrote
leopard_tights t1_iufdufs wrote
Kids on social media should be banned straight away. It should be banned for everyone but we can't take it away from the adults.
bakfietsman69 t1_iui7jnl wrote
my brother in christ, you are literally posting this on a social media platform
leopard_tights t1_iuiq4cp wrote
Reddit is more like an old forum. It's still anonymous, separated by topics, you follow those topics, not people, etc.
I don't care though, ban Reddit too.
tuscanspeed t1_iuj59o9 wrote
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_Online_Protection_Act
There's what happens when you try.
Mundane_Magi t1_iugsxvm wrote
We should ban the public exercise of religion.
These people wanna act all persecuted, let’s make it their reality.
I mean not that I have anything against that kind of thing, I just don’t think it should ever EVER be seen in public. I mean how the hell am I supposed to explain the weekly human-sacrifice-and-ritualistic-cannibalism role playing to my kids???
Love the evil cultist, hate their evil cult.
DuncanIdahoPotatos t1_iuhs2y0 wrote
Like circumcising without a doctors advised medical need.
nyaaaa t1_iufcfon wrote
It hurts their favorite fantasy novel. And that's reason enough for them.
Pretzel_Boy t1_iugx168 wrote
It's not even well written.
Plot holes everywhere and no internal consistency.
MetalBawx t1_iuffuk7 wrote
Because once something is banned it's alot harder to get it unbanned generally.
conquer69 t1_iugmjfz wrote
> I don't get
They are religious nutjobs. There is nothing to get because they don't use reason and logic for their motives. They are cultists, not intellectuals.
Mundane_Magi t1_iugsrzm wrote
“i BeLiEvE iN tHe GoD oF tHe bIbLe!!!”
Deadlocked02 t1_iuf940h wrote
They’re apparently a radical feminist group, judging by their page. It’s hard to tell them apart from evangelicals, they share a passion for some of the same causes.
[deleted] t1_iufk2c9 wrote
[deleted]
Deadlocked02 t1_iuflhej wrote
That’s what happens when you don’t believe in middle grounds. They don’t believe people can watch pornography without being addicted and trying to emulate what they see there IRL. They don’t believe someone (or better, women) in their right mind can possibly consent to do porn or sex work for money.
I have a friend like that. She spouses many of the same views of the group mentioned above. Anti-pornography, anti-prostitution. Goes as far as calling prostitution “consented rape”. And you know what’s funny? Despite being an outspoken radical feminist who is against all those things, I heard she’s making good money on OnlyFans. Not only that, she’s doing actual sex work. And her parents supported her financially, so it’s not like she needed that to not starve. But it’s good money that can allow a very expensive lifestyle for her age.
I understand their premise. I truly do. The professional porn industry is plagued with problem, there’s amateur porn being uploaded without the consent of one or both parts, there are people addicted to porn, there are women in third world countries with no option other than prostitution to make a living. But putting us at the mercy of corporations to remedy that or even leaving room for dodgy/dictatorial governments to use our data against us? That’s insane. As well assuming that a middle class woman in college from a first world country who does porn to earn money and afford an expensive lifestyle or an exhibitionist couple who decides to monetize their sex is the same as an underage girl being sexually exploited in a third world country or a mother who resorts to prostitution because that’s the only way to support her family. Or that someone who is single and watches porn once or twice a week is the same as someone who prefers pornography to sex with their partner.
roiki11 t1_iuhai6m wrote
Wait, an active sex worker who opposes porn and sex work?
Deadlocked02 t1_iuhuifl wrote
She was against sex work and pornography long before she started earning money with those things. You’d think she would change her mind, but apparently not. She still follows and shares things from anti-porn/anti-prostitution pages on Facebook. How people can deal with this level of cognitive dissonance is beyond me.
roiki11 t1_iuhv9qt wrote
That's wild.
wrath_of_grunge t1_iuht029 wrote
Kanye West is a rich black dude, who's actually a white supremacist.
[deleted] t1_iuhv79l wrote
[removed]
yukiaddiction t1_iuhsj3u wrote
I saw drama about this earlier in SDR about former porn addicted guy post about how porn is inherited bad because he used to addicted to it and thinking other people who watch porn also addicted too lol.
lIlI1I1Il1l1 t1_iuif4db wrote
Wasn't onlyfans female empowerment? Girls make so much fucking money
MetalBawx t1_iufehac wrote
It's the same old shit use kids/terrorism/etc to justify invasive, vague and easily abused laws and surveilence.
WillDeletOneDay t1_iufj69l wrote
It's generally authoritarian extremists that hate privacy.
sids99 t1_iufrf4l wrote
Way before photography and film, people created porn. It's not going away.
[deleted] t1_iugpe7r wrote
[deleted]
chuckuckucker t1_iuf38hq wrote
I don’t think you know what a honeypot is Dave
ProcyonHabilis t1_iuf4nym wrote
Really weird choice to just make up a random definition for that word in an article related to security.
bobslawnservice t1_iufg2w2 wrote
Came here to say this. For an organisation that is supposed to be about IT security not knowing the meaning of “Honey Pot” in an IT security context is pretty rubbish.
Flaky-Reindeer1545 t1_iueqj4r wrote
You submit your IDs to go to pornhub?
compstomper1 t1_iufuvfw wrote
That's what this proposal would require
GetOutOfTheWhey t1_iuh2obc wrote
Sounds like I am not going to go onto pornhub anymore and sounds like someone is going to open a new no-ID required website that siterips all the content from pornhub for easy viewing.
compstomper1 t1_iuitcku wrote
until that startup gets shut down for not complying to the same req
Hot_soup_in_my_ass t1_iuj198n wrote
meh why do you think it'll be legit website with a headquarters and all lol. it'll be more like a torrent site.
IndicationHumble7886 t1_iuf5z1a wrote
Whay cant we just register a device as being a childs and white list the content
tms10000 t1_iufa0v7 wrote
That sounds like work. That sounds like parents would be ultimately responsible for parenting. The horror.
IndicationHumble7886 t1_iufajz5 wrote
Well work for someone, im not aware of a android for kids or apple for kids OS.
End of the day kids are gonna find a way to access any number of things online. My daughter was playing on a talking tom app the other day and i realized she was being played ads for a fucking gambling website. Its fucked up. I mean she has the device for games but thats supposed to be it. The software side of shit needs to be set up better.
fluffyykitty69 t1_iufgvyl wrote
There are a metric ton of parental controls natively available in iOS. Imagine there’s much the same in Android.
IndicationHumble7886 t1_iufn60d wrote
Ill take another look
fusillade762 t1_iufldnt wrote
The crazy thing is most "porn sites" already have a IDs embedded to easily block any device with filters turned on. The adult industry implemented this 20 years ago and every device, brower etc recognizes an embedded meta tag for filtering. The people pushing these agendas dont want to protect kids, they want to control adults.
LuckyPlaze t1_iuh06ep wrote
There is? Do parents know how to use it?
fusillade762 t1_iui5fa6 wrote
Yeah, the RTA system, Restricted To Adults. Been around for many years. Just dont turn off filtering, default settings of all devices and browsers is to filter.
EpicCyndaquil t1_iufb9dk wrote
Or how about we encourage parents to take one of the many possible actions to filter and monitor their children's internet activity? There's locally installed software, network level options, and even some ISPs have a filter option you can just toggle from your account page.
Or, even better, parents could just communicate with their children openly, inform them about the reality of sex and content on the web, and be an active participant in their life to the point their kids feel safe enough to talk about any questions they may have.
Nah, that's probably asking too much, verifying everyone's ID before they access every site sounds much more logical.
ADZIE95 t1_iuffku2 wrote
start downloading your favourite porn folks.
SpotifyIsBroken t1_iueta7y wrote
Elon has everyone's ID who verified on Twitter now...
bdone2012 t1_iuez7t6 wrote
Any company can already buy that stuff. We basically let that ship sail awhile ago as far as I know
SpotifyIsBroken t1_iuf1o5d wrote
Yeah...but I am talking about one human (Elon Musk) having access to that data now. That is scary shit.
[deleted] t1_iuf40fs wrote
[deleted]
bdone2012 t1_iuf6841 wrote
And my point was that Elon already had access to it anyway. When I said any company could buy it that includes any of the companies that Elon already owns.
midnightcaptain t1_iug1wlg wrote
Wait, twitter is selling the personal information / ID scans of all verified accounts to anyone who wants it? Was this a big story when it was found out? I don't remember it...
[deleted] t1_iuf92c0 wrote
[removed]
MrMarklar t1_iufc22m wrote
Unironically I think your obsession with Elon Musk is a lot more scary. Your history is pure manic obsession
thatfreshjive t1_iuf0k0e wrote
There are several reasons I only watch videos I have ripped/downloaded. Aside from never needing to search for, or stream again, I also don't get wrapped up in the sort of inevitable data collection the industry profits (hugely) from.
dannylew t1_iufembw wrote
Not the US, but I might as well get some glamor shots of my taint in solidarity for all the Aussies with no privacy.
unlocalhost t1_iufavnu wrote
I feel like those that care about privacy are in the minority. The majority want instant gratification and will give away a body part of they could for it.
685327593 t1_iufcnxa wrote
The number of people who fight for privacy and free speech is certainly far less than it once was.
andio76 t1_iufn0v0 wrote
I'm 73 years old
TyrannosaurusWest t1_iufunfr wrote
“And I’m Winnie The Pooh, ready to fuck up some honeypots” - Advertisers
mchammerdeez t1_iug69db wrote
I got a hard drive full of all my favorites so when this happens I don't have to use the internet anymore.
REPOST_STRANGLER_V2 t1_iuglst3 wrote
VPN and if I still need age verification I leave the site, Youtube tries but that's an easy bypass.
Law_Doge t1_iug2rry wrote
More like a cummy-pot. I’ll see myself out…
dethb0y t1_iugjd0f wrote
yeah no shit - the control freaks in the government want, above all, more control over your life, and as a handy secondary the police can score some nice blackmail material on you to help turn you into an informant.
Marchello_E t1_iugktof wrote
Hacks are usually not a matter of If, but more a matter of When. It may not be a 'honeypot', but it sure attracts unwanted 'database users'.
>A variety of options for age verification has been offered during the roadmap’s development, including the use of third party companies, individual sites verifying ages using ID documents or credit card checks, and internet service providers or mobile phone operators being used to check users’ ages.
*Alarm bells*
And how will this system make the connection between the person to verify and the ID on file. What kind of token, mugshot or hardware+drivers+system requirements is required for this idiocy?
Basically, just like TV, the newspaper or whichever magazine, no one should need to know who's looking at some website, when and how. This may seem normalized because of ad-revenue and site-owner voyeurism, but it isn't normal.
jerwong t1_iugm03w wrote
Terrible idea. This is just going to create headaches, pointless work, and unnecessary tracking of users for very little gain.
vriska1 t1_iueyvsq wrote
Do want to point out the bill and the AV part are so unworkable that it is likely to collapse under its own weight just look at the last age verification law that was delayed over and over again until it was quietly scraped.
For56 t1_iugcz8w wrote
Pretty sure google already knows who what and when.
mrnoonan81 t1_iui6nep wrote
This is supposed to be an effort to prevent children from viewing porn? As in - they want to verify viewers ages?! They should fuck off on that. It's absurd!
Posting content is where age verification becomes important!
[deleted] t1_iuf8p0p wrote
[removed]
rayinreverse t1_iufe4v5 wrote
Honeypot is my current porn genre.
Jordasee t1_iufxcvz wrote
Black Mirror.
Uristqwerty t1_iufytzi wrote
In theory, there are mathematicians working with cryptography systems (no relation to cryptocurrencies, cryptography is a vast field and the rest of it is very useful for everyday life) could invent a scheme where you can prove your age without leaking any metadata to either the website asking, or the government that verified your date of birth and identity at some point in the distant past.
In practice, most implementations will be utter shit, and leak details everywhere. If someone does propose a good solution, the public won't have the expertise, or even willingness to read the specification and think critically about it to tell the difference, and will rally against both good and bad solutions alike. Except the bad solutions will be forced forwards more fervently by people poised to abuse them, so any reasonable one is all but guaranteed to be shot down.
Pocketpine t1_iugobh0 wrote
The problem is I don’t trust phub with a zero knowledge proof, and there’s no point in even pretending the government would try.
tuscanspeed t1_iuj6byn wrote
And even if everything you stated were solved neatly and tied with a bow...
One more iteration of censorship will fail to achieve it's goals.
CaptainC0medy t1_iug59cx wrote
Or we could just not use the service
atroxodisse t1_iugk300 wrote
What's to stop anyone from getting a username and password and sharing it with all of their friends?
cosmernaut420 t1_iuh0gqy wrote
>not lying about your birthday on age verifications to fuck with the algorithm
PidgeonCat t1_iuhn885 wrote
YOTI: has this problem sewn up. ID as a service. Your identity never leaves your phone, where it is encrypted. Your ID is verified and leaves a certificate on your phone. This certificate is trusted by the third party. Nothing identifying is shared without consent other than the fact you have a trusted age. Not even YOTI stores anything about you. You lose your phone you need to re-certify.
CanonNobara t1_iug90ie wrote
my simple solution is just not using those systems, take youtube for example i don't have a google account. I just watch youtube with yattee on the app store to watch youtube without an google account and it lets me subscribe to accounts etc. take twitter i dont have it i use mastodon
[deleted] t1_iugov9g wrote
[deleted]
FuelledByRage t1_iuhab39 wrote
Good thing that isn't anything to do with the article / how this would actually be implemented lol
letbillfixit t1_iuf0xns wrote
Why is it legal for minors to access the internet outside of walled garden setups that meet some kind of standard? I mean I guess it was like that with drugs, alcohol, automobiles, etc... Until society fucked around and found out. I mean you could buy morphine and cocaine in over the counter products until we learned our lesson.
All_ t1_iufgo8o wrote
Because the moment that happens, freedom on the internet is gone. Having to verify your age with your license, and have everything you do online tracked back to you? No thanks.
Is it so hard to keep your fucking kids offline? As a parent of 2 under 10, it's easy to lock shit down yourself.
letbillfixit t1_iufh83c wrote
What I'm suggesting is make it neglect if the parents let them on. Ofc that's assumes we fix foster and family courts and all of the other issues there I suppose.
WillDeletOneDay t1_iufjqfb wrote
> Why is it legal for minors to access the internet outside of walled garden setups that meet some kind of standard?
You people seriously underestimate how much harm putting children into tightly controlled bubbles can do. If a lot of parents had it their way, their closeted gay kids would hear absolutely nothing except "homosexuality is a sin".
DevCatOTA t1_iuf7aug wrote
Yeah, we wouldn't want those politicians and televangelists outed by a hack, now, would we? /s
BIG_EL-DUCE t1_iufend0 wrote
So dont watch porn? I dont understand the hysteria about your privacy being breached when FAANG can very easily track down your precise location and your habits, incognito mode isnt exactly a privacy shield.
Not to endorse conglomerates knowing everyones personal information but this feels like fear-mongering.
theshere t1_iufvhd0 wrote
Whether someone does or doesn't consume porn is no one's business. "Just don't watch porn" isn't a solution because the problem isn't with adults viewing porn in the first place.
How about "just parent your children properly" instead?
e: Similarly, arguments to the effect of "Well, some other thing already has your data" are just relative privation and have nothing to do with the thing being discussed. Other privacy breaches existing isn't a reason to keep adding new ones.
throwaway463682chs t1_iuewe39 wrote
Oh no how will children get addicted to pornography now
CustomerSuspicious25 t1_iuewpwd wrote
The old fashioned way. Magazines, pictures, and VHS.
CordouroyStilts t1_iuey04g wrote
There's always that kid with the "porn dad". I imagine he'll start a lucrative thumb drive business.
MrPissedHimself t1_iuf2ux8 wrote
By finding ways to get around the verification. I'm sure that will go great
executiveADHDcoach t1_iufybx6 wrote
Good luck finding porno mags in the woods these days.
throwaway463682chs t1_iueyk50 wrote
Those probably don’t ruin their minds the same as the front page of xvideos
WillDeletOneDay t1_iufjyuq wrote
Yeah, instead of looking at porn they should go back to knocking eachother up at 14 like the good old days.
throwaway463682chs t1_iufn912 wrote
Awesome Reddit brained take that porn is good for kids
twistedrapier t1_iufrg3f wrote
Not so much good as less harmful than the brain rotting shit people like you force feed them.
throwaway463682chs t1_iufvkbv wrote
What are you talking about lol
twistedrapier t1_iugm3t9 wrote
People who are anti-porn tend to have very sex negative views of the world, close to those you see out of puritanical conservatives. Oh, the language changes, but it's the same narrow minded horseshit used to dictate/control how men/women express/conduct themselves.
A kid seeing a tit ain't going to hurt them, at least no more than the flood of misinformation and violence they are subjected to thanks to other stupid belief systems that permeate western culture.
throwaway463682chs t1_iugp6p6 wrote
A kid seeing a tit isn’t going to hurt them. A kid being exposed to hours and hours of degrading content at their fingertips warps their brains and how they develop sexually. They see women as meat and develop damaging fetishes.
It’s not a religious thing it’s not a conservative thing.
twistedrapier t1_iugrh87 wrote
The fact you see all porn as degrading is a conservative viewpoint. Even ignoring that, your argument boils down to the same "violent videogames cause children to be violent" nonsense that has been pushed by conservative/religious nuts since the 90s and is thoroughly debunked. Media alone does not shape a person's world view, it at best reinforces existing preconceptions and biases.
I'm not even going to get into the fetish thing, because that's been long used as an excuse to demonise LGBT people and frankly you should know better if you're "progressive".
throwaway463682chs t1_iugw4b8 wrote
How is it not degrading to show women as an object that men use as a glove to bust? A violent industry with rape abuse and exploitation everywhere? And it’s not the same “violent video games make people violent”. Porn sickness is real. It’s not media shaping a world view. It’s a drug and a cycle that many men get trapped to at a young age because they have such easy access to porn. The two are just not equivalent at all.
[deleted] t1_iugw2xr wrote
[removed]
Lazy_Grabwen_9296 t1_iuf951y wrote
Like you don't choke and spit on your stepmom as you're railing her in the kitchen.
throwaway463682chs t1_iufreyc wrote
It’s just the birds and the bees don’t be such a prude
acoolusersknee t1_iuev2o4 wrote
It was always going to come to this. Soon enough everyone will be issued some form of online identification at birth and all of your information will be tracked through it.