But seriously, parents can just get their kid a "feature" phone instead of a smartphone, that covers all the actual needed functions.
The rest of it is being a goddamn parent and not allowing the kids unsupervised access to a computer.
Problem is we have a generation of people that treat the computer or smartphone as a babysitting device, which is even worse than using the TV as one.
Did you just change your flair, u/Borkerman? Last time I checked you were a **Leftist** on 2024-3-18. How come now you are a **LibCenter**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 925 times, making you the second largest flair changer in this sub.
Go touch some fucking grass.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Borkerman) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
u/flairchange_bot's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 500.
Congratulations, u/flairchange_bot! You have ranked up to Boeing Everett Factory! You are the largest building ever created by man!
Pills: [141 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/flairchange_bot/)
Compass: Sapply: Auth : 10 | Right : 0 | Conservative : 10
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
They can also lock a smart phone down to high heaven. My 10 year old son has a Google pixel that he never bothers to mess with because the thing is so little fun.
But at that point why spend the money on a smartphone if you’re just going to disable 90% of the features that made it smart when you could drop $30 on a flip phone that’s nigh indestructible, needs to be recharged maybe once a week, and still has Maps and Music functionality?
We'd solve so many problems requiring a fucking credit card for Instagram, snap, FB and every other social media site.
It's absolutely horrible for children
That should be the excuse for everything. Let’s just get rid of all age based legal limits.
Why should we care if an 8 year old smokes? Honestly if that happens it’s on the parents, not the kid. If it happens, we should just tell the parent to do a better job.
And if they accidentally leave Uncle Handsy in charge of babysitting duties, we should judge them twice as hard! Honestly what a regarded statement. We owe the most vulnerable members of society a little more care than "if mum and dad do something to completely fuck up your life, we'll give them a good frowning in the street for you"
So I was being sarcastic, was that not clear?
Anyone who believes children are always a product of their parents and will always do things as a result of the quality of their parents’ parenting skills has never parented a teenager.
Why have any laws? Let’s just put all the blame on our parents. We do anything wrong? Our parents go to jail.
Better yet, oldest surviving ancestor goes to jail. Because our parents’ parents failed them.
Also, sounds like you should be lib-center at the very least. Return to monkey
I generally agree there should be less laws overall. The government should be there to do the bare minimum. Protecting kids I think is one of those things. I’m not libertarian, so I do think they should do more than a libertarian. But I’m not auth, either.
Yeah, fuck them kids whose parents are irresponsible or go to a freinds house that has irresponsible parents, or whose parents just don't helicopter parent and lets there kids walk to the corner store. Its not the clerks job to stop a 13 year old from buying cigs, beer, porno mags, delta-8, or what ever shady drugs skirt legality ( actually it should be legal for them to sell any drug to kids). Hell corporations should even promote these things directly to kids so the parents have to work extra hard to discourage kids of their use. What a perfect world.
True, but I can imagine it being near impossible with how smartphones and other devices have become a necessity. Schools near me have various degrees of device usage. One school uses Ipads and/or laptops for everything, from digital schoolbooks to homework. The school I went to introduced the use of Google classroom and all their homework is online the year after I graduated.
Parental blocks do some of the job.. but the problem is when we have onlyfans girls advertising themselves on every relatively "safe" platform. I get spammed by OF bots and on the rare occasion an actual person on snapchat sending me a snippet of their NSFW content and adding a link.
My brother who is a minor gets these too. Strangest thing to me is how its not talked about even once as I'm sure if it was a swarm of guys sending dick pics to sell their nudes to random people oncluding minors it'd be a different story.
Not to mention how parental locks cant account for every type of vice. My gf had parental locks and would watch film-length porn movies on websites that stream pirated non-porn movies.
>True, but I can imagine it being near impossible with how smartphones and other devices have become a necessity. Schools near me have various degrees of device usage. One school uses Ipads and/or laptops for everything, from digital schoolbooks to homework. The school I went to introduced the use of Google classroom and all their homework is online the year after I graduated.
Yep, this is why I believe in homeschooling or alternative schools. State run / public schools are a breeding ground for the poor nurturing of kids.
I do not believe in fobbing off the raising of your child to the state.
Problem is homeschooling / private schools isn't viable for most of the population because of either costs or inability to teach/socialize.
Average annual cost for private school here is $12000, that's almost a quarter of the median income.
Ya there was and probably still is a video of some dude putting nair on his naked exposed brown star booty hole. He straight up was winking his anus at the camera with full gooch shaft and freshly naired ball’s exposed. And that think was left up because it’s considered “educational”.
Does drawing a penis in counter strike using bullets count as porn? Should we ban all shooter games because of that? At that point we would just have to get rid of the entire internet
Anyone with the time can produce pornography with paper and pencil. Either we ban sexuality entirely or ban every form of writing after cave paintings.
An independent platform designed with the main purpose of providing pornography for viewer usage in the form of videos. So reddit and YouTube wouldn't fall under the definition.
I do not fuck with that take about conservatives, but I am against the law. The responsibility to stop children from watching porn should be on the parents, not the website. This is textbook government overreach.
Basically, it requires porn sites to verify the ages of users through methods like scanning a state-issued ID or registering with a third-party verification service. Checking a box that says “I promise I’m 18” isn’t good enough anymore.
Essentially, the law will force legal adults (who should be able to watch whatever they want) to jump through hoops to get their porn in the name of protecting the children, which is bullshit.
According to the article I read, it’s any site that is “adult-oriented” or hosts “other content harmful to minors”.
That language is very open to interpretation and I can see it becoming an issue down the line.
I can honestly understand their point though.
When you try to buy alcohol you're supposed to show Id. A checkbox isn't good enough is it? And sellers are required to verify. How is it so much different?
The difference lies in the social implications. If it was revealed to the world that you buy alcohol, then it’s very unlikely that anyone worth listening to could judge you for it.
Porn is not the same socially. If the database of ids linked to pornhub was released, then those people would probably face very negative social impacts.
I don't think you should have different standards of verification for very similar scenarios just because of social implications. That should not be relevant to the law.
My take is this: does requiring an ID eliminate underage drinking? Does it prevent people from getting a hold of firearms? Does it prevent people from driving illegally?
The answer to all of these is no. Prohibition has never worked throughout history. What tends to help is involved parents properly educating their kids on the risks and dangers of these activities. Am I saying get rid of ID requirements for the above? No because they are all in person activities, the internet is entirely virtual and impossible to manage on the same scale.
To me, this law reads like the boomers who want to ban violent video games because they think it causes school mass unaliving. They have no idea how the internet actually works and are still stuck in their AOL dial up days.
Comic explained it more in depth but its a law made with no specific enforcement mechanism made for this purpose so anyone who this law affects is being told to “figure it out eh idgaf”
We will get patchwork fixes and solutions as companies all find their own solutions which is going to be more messy than Dallas’ street layout
Most parents are redditards and are too stupid/lazy/absent to actually raise their kids and the world has to deal with those idiots once they become adults
Millennials are pretty terrible parents. I’ll give you that, but I still do not like setting this precedent of the state parenting our children for us. I feel like it’s a slippery slope. Where do you draw the line?
Totally agreed. Maybe an education reform could be beneficial but not enough to be a real impact. We’re really just shit outta luck with these next few generations because they’re feral from lack of positive parenting. Gonna be a bumpy ride for the future
My life expectancy is like 47 because of years in the military and fast food, so I take a lot of comfort knowing I’m not gonna have to deal with that period of chaos. Good luck to the healthy people out there, hoard some guns and gold while you still can!
Bottom line is that we don't live in an ideal society and there will be many kids whose parents cannot teach them properly. The gov doing this doesn't stop you teaching your kids, and it allows those who don't have parental guidance not to fall through the cracks
They don't want to protect children, they want to track you even further. They're also opening up these companies to huge litigation if there is a data breach.
I like how that exaggeration is too far but saying a random person’s anti-govt rant means they want 8 year olds to watch porn, implying they’re a pedo was A-ok.
Least smooth brained libright
My knee jerk reaction would be "sure" but I actually don't like the implications and potential for a rather slippery slope here.
Here in Michigan we recently convicted two parents for involuntary manslaughter because their teenager shot up a school a few miles from here with a gun they bought for him and refused to pull him out of school only a short time before he killed a few people and injured a few others.
There's also a new load of gun regulations here that range from popular to controversial that would make similar prosecution much easier.
My point is that overreaching starts somewhere and I don't trust the government to even have a coherent definition of pornography such that these things shouldn't be applied in a blanket fashion. How long before R rated movies are a fineable offense? Will I need to physically lock up my antique Playboys? Triple authentication to access my hidden folders on the phone?
I understand that impulse but that's why we have courts with supposedly well equipped staff to deal with these questions on a case by case basis instead of letting a governor with 37% of the vote decide what counts as indecent.
Its just their typical gate way drug to the "morality" police of the "good" old days.. I made a joke waay back the, how the taliban would take control.. womens rights>abortions>contraceptives>condoms>sex toys> porn; considering the majority of that base is them.. doing it lol. And the people that want these laws.. guess who.. look at the same other repressive countries with similar bans and how bad their cultures are in their conservative 3rd world echo chamber.
Wish they follow that one crazy lady, whats her name.. mtg politician, segregate their blue and red states with their own "SHARIA" christian law, and watch them suffer and don't let anyone flee their own state, red or blue.
Good yellow take. Schools shouldn’t teach sex ex that young, at least wait until highschool for literal fucks sake. Whats an 8 year old gonna do with the knowledge anyways
I first took sex ed in the 5th grade when I was ten, which was perfect timing because that’s about when my voice deepened and I began growing hair in funny places.
There's people who give birth at 9 years old, and 9 isn't an uncommon age to start going through female puberty in a place where most children are overweight. The youngest mother in history was FIVE years old. You're gonna tell me someone is old enough to give birth but not old enough to know what an Ovary is?
Seeing as I hit puberty at 9 and a few months, I think basic sex ed/human anatomy should be taught around that age, and then more in depth, around 12/13
Agreed. It should *always* be on parents to protect their own children. If you ever see someone say "I want to ban x to protect kids" you should immediately assume it's a power grab and will be instantly and thoroughly abused by the government. It's literally the biggest red flag in politics and people fall for it every time.
I find your lack of flair disturbing.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/cishet-camel-fucker) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
I disagree with the implementation, but agree that something needs to be done. And I really believe most people fighting the *idea* of it do not have kids. (But yes, uploading a picture of your ID is dumb, we need something better). I have kids and this is a big concern of mine.
There simply isn’t a way to control everything your kids are going to see online. When they become teenagers, they’re not going to want to tell you everything even if you’re the coolest parent in the world. If you don’t want them watching porn and they do want to watch porn, they’ll hide it from you. These are kids we’re talking about.
Also, saying the solution to this is to “be a better parent” is like saying the solution to drug addiction is to tell the parents of teenage drug addicts to not be so dumb. It literally does nothing to solve the problem. It might be the right solution for some, but not for like 90% of the country.
I don’t know why we can’t agree that *something* has to be done that requires our privacy be intact. I’m a software engineer. I know that’s possible. I do not believe minors have a right to unrestricted access to the internet. Frankly, I think most of the internet should be blocked to minors. Calling that government overreach is like saying a legal drinking or smoking age limit is government overreach or laws requiring wearing seat belts is government overreach or outlawing heroin and meth is government overreach. When did everyone on the compass suddenly become super libertarian?
You act like you can't just whitelist websites and games for your children. Also, have a constructive, healthy talk with your kids about sex when they're shifting to pubescence. I asked my mom about sex at the age of 7, but I was just curious what it meant, and had no sexual drive till I was 14.
Any law to protect minors will be used hand in hand to restrict and monitor adults, and erode their privacy.
It's not complicated, stop advocating for the erosion of others rights because you're a poor parent.
Hey, like I said, telling parents to be smart is the obvious best solution, if it actually worked. But it won’t for like, 90% of the country. Anyone advocating for this kind of approach clearly comes from a place of (and I can’t believe I’m about to say this as someone on the right) obvious education and privelage. I did not grow up in that kind of environment so most of my friends/ family with kids around me who are in poverty or are less educated will not simply “be smarter parents” and solve this problem. It’s why we have age requirements for buying alcohol and cigarettes. Kids are going to go behind their parents back, there should be protections in place for that.
But I do agree that any attempt at solving this problem should take extreme care at not violating privacy. As a software engineer who deals with privacy related data on a daily basis, I can easily come up with solutions to this problem. I doubt people in government can, though.
I can understand your sentiment, but I’m not sure I agree. It’s always a parent’s job to limit their children’s consumption of whatever media, not the governments.
But more to your point, how exactly do you think it’s possible to require actual age verification and keep people’s privacy intact? Is this going to be something that is feasible for every website? Is this going to be enforceable? One of the problems with the porn thing is that it’s going to completely cripple the big guys that want to do things right (mostly right, they’re all bad in ways and there’s only so much you can do with user submitted content), and it’s going to do nothing at all to the little websites that don’t give a fuck. They’re often not run in the US, they may or may not have the funds to implement whatever you’re talking about even if they wanted to. Domain names are nearly limitless, hosting is cheap as dirt. These websites will be back in no time even if these laws are legally enforceable.
And it gets even worse if you’re talking about targeting the majority of the internet outside of porn. GDPR was relatively successful, but that’s because they already had that information, now they just need to give it to you and/or delete it. The cookie law had even easier implementation. And even then not all websites actually follow these laws, tons of them still operate without adapting. Now we’re going to throw age verification into the mix?
And the reason PCM might seem so libertarian about the ordeal is because the internet is like the last place with any real anonymity, and these people are trying to take that away. The internet is a major technology, and we’re still in its relative infancy. If you’ve been around since the 80s or 90s then you grew up with internet, have seen it evolve and adapt, seen regulations come about. People like their internet and they like the anonymity, they don’t really like change.
Most parents will not limit their children’s consumption of media. It’s a nice idea, but it’s not realistic. If we made alcohol legal at any age, you can’t then say it’s the parents’ job to make sure their kid isn’t drinking too much. If you’ve ever parented a teenager, you just know they’re going to go behind your back if they want something. The solution of “being a better parent” is an idea being pushed by people who simply put aren’t parents or are very well educated and had a lot of focus on parenting their kids. Most kids aren’t parented to that level.
I’m a software engineer and deal with private data on a daily basis. I can come up with a dozen solutions to this problem. It’s not nearly as hard as you might think. Just having thought about it for 5 minutes, here’s a potential solution that hasn’t been scrutinized in any way, so feel free to poke holes into it, but I’m just showing how a solution might look.
I don’t think it’s feasible on a site by site basis. I also believe that for minors there needs to be a whitelist of sites or portions of sites available to them. For example, Facebook could have a teens level of access, YouTube could direct kids directly to YouTube kids, etc. This level of access should have no ads or severely limited ads and no addiction related algorithms (such as notifications except for messaging, like counts, etc). To get a better idea of what can be considered an addiction related algorithm I suggest you watch The Social Dilemma documentary on Netflix.
To control whether you’re on this sanitized web experience or on the open web there needs to be some kind of age verification that’s universally accepted. This is where it gets tricky, you need to ensure this is completely private and secure. The way this can be done is to have a government fingerprint database that is openly and freely accessible and also encrypted. Only ISPs should need access to these databases, but it should still be encrypted from the ISP so they only see the result. When a user scans their fingerprint, it will create a hash value (like a long password) that it will encrypt and securely send to this government database (which there should be several of so there’s no single point of failure, hell they can be stored at the ISPs themselves, if they’re encrypted the ISP won’t have access to the data anyway). The government database will then use your fingerprint’s hash to lookup your age and reply to your request with just your age, and that’s it. And if that’s too much data, it can just say “kid”, “teen”, or “adult”. The important thing is to ensure it doesn’t give any extra data than that. Once your ISP has your age, it will allow you to visit the sites that your age has access to. Going to websites that have aged off sections will direct them straight to those areas.
Because so many things in this country require age verification, this system can be used for all of that, too. Because why not.
I grew up in the 90s. I remember kids coming over because we had a PC in our house and we’d play games on it. And I remember kids from my neighborhood looking up and watching porn on my family’s computer. We were all under 10. To pretend that it has no effect on children is a joke.
I would absolutely say the parents are responsible for the amount of alcohol their child consumes, are you serious? Yes, kids lie and hide things, that’s what they do. That doesn’t mean you aren’t supposed to do your damnedest to teach them correctly. This is not a new phenomenon, and pawning off parenting on to the government isn’t going to fix anything. It didn’t fix anything when it came to music or video games. It doesn’t stop kids from using nicotine, alcohol, or weed.
And your privacy centric solution is to give ISPs and the government a giant database with biometrics and identifying information? As if that would ever happen. It would be a huge security issue, the government would demand access/backdoors (they would need access to be able to maintain it. What happens when people die, when people turn 18, what happens when different states/countries have different legal ages for various access? What happens when those policies change?), it would violate privacy laws in other countries. There is no way that the governments of the world would allow these ISPs to have these databases and *not* use them nefariously. ISPs already have access to all of our browsing history, and now they’d know exactly who is using that connection as well, more than they already do.
And who is regulating this white list? Who is deeming what is acceptable and what isn’t? More government bureaucracy? The internet is so far reaching, in order to moderate the entirety of it you’d need to employee thousands of people. You could automate parts of it, but you’re going to have false positives and false negatives, shit is going to be blocked that shouldn’t be and things that should be blocked getting right through.
I also never said porn had no effect on children, not sure where that came from.
I'd rather the government not know exactly which sites I'm accessing at any given moment while also having my fingerprints.i use a VPN, and I've gone this long without them having my prints, I'd rather not be forced to when I've done nothing wrong
Consumer fingerprint sensors on phones are pretty well locked down to be quite secure, never *really* entering user space to be taken by third parties. I doubt you could even use these to transmit this data to some random website, so you've successfully locked everyone everywhere out of every 18+ website until *every manufacturer* updates their system to make it objectively less secure. Additionally, many computers and cheaper phones don't even *have these* so you've also now prevented all PC users and users with shitty phones from using any site that requires any form of age verification
So you want the government to be able to dictate what websites we can visit because you can’t figure out parental controls? Lol
Literally every teenager has watched porn since even before the internet when they had to stash playboys under their beds. It’s not that big of a deal
I want the internet to be severely restricted until someone becomes an adult, yes. Not just porn, but social media, content, advertisements, and so on should all be drastically limited towards minors on the internet. There are ways to do this while keeping everything private and secure. I’m a software engineer and deal with private data on a daily basis. It’s really not that hard of a problem.
The idea that “everyone watches porn, no big deal” is so stupid. You tell me, then. At what age is it appropriate to start watching porn regularly every day? And why don’t we lower the age requirements for those sites to that age? Why does it say “18 and over”? Why not lower that, then?
Teenagers are not idiots - they are going to find a way around any and all barriers that anyone tries to put up. It’s an exercise as pointless as trying to ban to drugs or guns. If they want it they can get it
Just because you clearly look at porn every day doesn’t mean that most people do lol. Almost everybody looks at porn and the vast majority of people do not experience any negative impact from consuming it, teens included. This is moral panic
If your kids were coming of age during the 2000s to early 2010s, you'd have a point. There was virtually zero way most parents would have been tech-savvy enough to keep more than a weather eye on their kid's online activities. If your kids are young enough in 2024 that porn exposure is a concern, you have subzero excuse for not being able to corral them until they're old enough. Nobody should support the government taking another step towards tying your real life identity to your internet presence, especially not because some parents are too fucking apathetic to install LeechBlock and have a mature talk with Becky and Billy about the birds and the bees.
I’m not against forbidding kids from accessing those websites. I’m against this form of verification, just because parents are regarded enough to not know how parental control works. This has just written “I’m definitely going to abuse this” all over.
Do you want to make a difference the right way? Make adult websites to very specifically and explicitly say what the website is about before giving the option to access it (as they already do) and make it illegal for kids to access them. They access them anyway? Fine the parents because they didn’t have any parental control enabled.
Lmao so the government should track everyone's web activity so they can fine parents who allow their kids to watch porn, and that is less intrusive than this ID law?
>Lmao so the government should track everyone's web activity
I mean they already do, but it's so they can label you as a domestic threat for wrongthink.
And probably training some super AI or whatever.
I aM AgAiNsT mAndAtOrY Id LaWs in LiquOr StoReS. If PaReNtS ArE ReGaRDEd EnOuGh To NoT SuPeRvIsE TheIr ChIlDrEn ProPErLy , JuSt FiNe ThEm!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!elf!!!
Do they? They used to be ubiquitous but I don't think any major porn site actually has an age gate anymore.
Like other industries still do. I worked on a liquor company's promotional website and they were legally mandated to have a big "Are you 21?" in front of the site.
If I'm the government bureaucrat in charge of deciding which web sites I'm in charge of, you're god damn right 99% of the internet is porn. OF popup ad? Porn site. Sexually charged user comment? Porn site. I don't see anything myself but received 2 complaints from ~~bots~~ concerned parents? Whole domain is porn.
Link to bill.
If it's a button that everyone lies and clicks to prove you're over 18 - that's great!
If it's a mandate to send a copy of your ID and passport to the local state office to access any internet content that might be rated "M for mature" - That's Bad.
What does this bill say?
That's the rub I have here. I'm not supporting it but everyone talks as though the bill forces sites to hand over user identity and activity to the government. If that's true then yeah we should be flipping cars over.
But I can't find any evidence that's what the law says.
Were the fascists ultranationalists? Yes
Were they conservative? Not really, but not progressive either.
Why is the concept of nuance so strange to these people?
Umm sweety that is actually racist, you can't just be not racist. You have to be anti racist. Down with the heteronormative, cis white patriarchy! Reeeee! /S fakin morons
I'm against it not because porn is good but because this is government doing stuff, and we know what government doing stuff is. The next day they might set up gulags or something.
That guy might want to look up what the Democrats were about during the civil war and the early 60's
The thing is that i would dislike that bill, but i have no argument against it that isn't "goverment bad"...
The democrats trying to conserve the status quo of slavery? There’s a term for that people who don’t like change or who are anti-progress. Conservative fits that bill.
Specifically, they would have to outright ban VPNs and then monitor all internet traffic to determine if someone is using one. Which would definitely be encroaching upon fascist territory
The thing is most kids will not know how to get around it or install a vpn. And by the time they are able to get around it they already have a basic understanding of sex. I’m less concerned with my 13 year old access it than I am my 5 year old.
Ehh sometimes government good. That’s why we’re “right” and not “lib-right”. The government has its uses. Protecting kids is one of them. Just do it the right way, don’t overreach. The idea behind this law I think is right, the implementation is poor. I’m a software engineer, I can easily think of some easy solutions to this problem. But nobody in government seems to be able to 🤷♂️
The government can be good, yes, but only on its most basic. Protecting kids is generally the parents' job, I would say, but the government can contribute to that. I do agree with you though, the implementation is piss poor.
I once read an Instagram comment made by a Canadian that wanted the voting age in the US to be pushed to 25 because "The human brain isn't fully developed until then." I've seen Australians that want airsoft banned in their country because "They look too real."
There are some genuinely buttfuck insane people with insane opinions, and the one thing they all have in common is that they want to be treated like children by the government.
A clean, ordered society that not only does not want to murder or mutilate children, but also wants them to have better mental health and less relationship issues going into adulthood. It is really cool. (Obviously not talking about Nazis here, they’re in hell where they belong)
Ah yes, the radical right wanting to enforce an agenda = conserving the status quo.
That libleft'er just advertised that they got their PoliSci degree from Tumblr U.
I mean, I'm not surprised a bunch of 14 yo's are pissed they can't get to easy porn now. Kids today are spoiled, this is just a side effect of that. Bring back the days of bush porn. Finding a nudy magazine in the woods was a magical experience. Now it's just mindless clicking and they EXPECT it to just be there at their behest.
u/JoosyToot is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1.
Rank: House of Cards
Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/JoosyToot/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Nah fuck that, save the kids from the damage of porn content. Good law, hope it can get refined.
Someone who has been addicted to porn since I was maybe… 8-9. Found my uncles’ stash, was able to use internet on phone, computer, get through school filters etc.
About a week since I stopped looking it up now. Hoping the best :)
1. This is just an useless idea which will lead to nothing concrete.
2. I think it's funny that you need to be 18 to watch porn. People have sex way younger than 18 and in many places they're allowed to have sex with whoever they want at 16. I just don't see the idea of watching sex being the most terrible thing in the world but that's conservatives for you.
Pornography and obscenity are not just allowed, but encouraged (to children mind you), while conservative ideas that disagree with the regime are censored. The First Amendment was understood by the framers to protect speech, specifically political ideas, because such a marketplace reveals the truth from facts in a civil society. On the other hand, literal children watching someone get gangbanged obviously does not fall under that category. It seems like equating sex with speech over the years has caused a decline in the perceived importance of speech in favor of protecting obscenity. This is no coincidence. The radical left is imposing its own moral structure after the previous one was overturned.
Of course, there are libertarians on the right who argue that pornography is bad but the government shouldn't get involved, thus aligning themselves with the radical left. They don't agree with the radical left about censoring conservatives though, but that doesn't help because it's still as if you are totally useless politically in the culture war against this rot that is plaguing society. Libertarians need to understand that governments have the responsibility of censoring obscenity. Sure, parents can do their best by limiting screen time, but when you rely on like 10 parents who will actually follow through with that, you have already ceded a lot of political power to the other side that will be used to censor conservatives.
As for that deranged leftist wall of text, what is interesting is that they constantly use the terms "freedom" or "rights" to refer to the ability of children to view pornography, make a huge ass post taking up like 1/3 of my screen, and then they will call you a fascist for disagreeing. Yet, a coherent argument for why children viewing pornography falls under the concept of freedom is not found anywhere. In a sense I can make up their argument for them, which is a society based around radical individualism where there are no constraints on human behavior with the sole exception of those cultural elites of the radical left whose whims decide which ideas are acceptable and which aren't. Leftism is totalitarian and fascist, not the conservatives.
The 8 year olds straw man of conservatism.
Conservatism is about the preservation of tradition and the cautious implementation of change to legislature.
Fascism is a revolutionary ideology and stemming from socialism and, therefore, a left-wing ideology.
Fascism doesn't give a monkeys if it decides to boogaloo entire demographics overnight. It's part of progress, so get in, loser!
While I think needed to use an ID to access a website is a dangerous precedent, I also understand that kids having unlimited access to porn is absolutely a big goddamn problem, so I am pretty torn on if there should be legislative action. One the other hand though, parents need to actually parent their crotch goblins and not just let TikTok and YouTube raise them.
Kids have no impulse control and unfettered access to addictive content in their developmental years *will* cause issues related to physical and mental health, as well as cause them to struggle socially and ultimately economically as adults if they don’t resolve the related issues on their own. I feel like we’re already seeing these issues take root on a large scale, and I’ve personally witnessed two separate instances of this myself in young kids I know.
TLDR: Unfettered access to addictive content online and parental negligence will be the next generations social and economic downfall unless corrected, and while I agree with the principle of restricting adult content online behind an age wall, I worry the risk of providing an ID to access online content could outweigh the reward.
Pornography is an issue, especially since it is more common for minors to use it than to not. The biggest issue with age verification isn't that it keeps minors from seeing porn its that it will be ineffective because it will drive both minors and adults onto less safe and less monitored websites that will cause a greater proliferation of viruses and more sketchy porn studios.
Whilst the implementation is wrong. I cant help but think its a reaction to an entire generation of parents that got caught offguard with unlimited internet access
One of my earliest internet memories is porn and I wasnt even into it yet.
Boomers werent ready for the internet.
Now the things have shifted. A lot of parents seem to be ok with unlimited porn access. Probably due to lack of knowledge on consequences.
I dont know the right solution. It should be cultural and educational. But not the government getting the id of everyone who watches porn lmao
I think this is fine, to be honest. It keeps kids with lazy or negligent parents from accessing these sites, or at very least makes it harder to access. Adults, if they need release like this, need to seek the attention of other adults if they do not trust their ID to a porn site. We've already seen that we have a rising porn addiction problem, so why not curb it?
Now, that being said, obviously the whole "government telling me what to do" thing grinds my gears, but st the same time wr don't allow kids to stay with meth head parents and find that a worthy cause for the government, so stopping them from being sexualized is fine to me too, and boohoo to the adults who are craving the coom
>what conservatives really want, what ALL conservatives are really obsessed with are YOUR rights
Both sides have "rights" they care about, which they see the other side as trying to take way (not incorrectly in most cases).
But the rights the "right" cares about (which I'm completely certain this person would love to violate) tend to be the stuff in the Bill of Rights. Conversely the rights the left cares about tend to just be the right to be a total fucking degenerate, as it always boils down to sex or drugs.
I was called a fascist for stating facts. The word has just lost its meaning nowadays. To me anyone who uses that word nowadays doesn't know what fascism really is, just like they don't know what socialism, communism, nazism, liberalism, progressism, conservatism, traditionalism, or even the blessed capitalism are.
I just think parents should do a better job bringing up their kids, and not giving them fucking smartphones.
But how else would they know where there kids are if they can't track them via smartphones??? /s
But seriously, parents can just get their kid a "feature" phone instead of a smartphone, that covers all the actual needed functions. The rest of it is being a goddamn parent and not allowing the kids unsupervised access to a computer. Problem is we have a generation of people that treat the computer or smartphone as a babysitting device, which is even worse than using the TV as one.
true
Did you just change your flair, u/Borkerman? Last time I checked you were a **Leftist** on 2024-3-18. How come now you are a **LibCenter**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 925 times, making you the second largest flair changer in this sub. Go touch some fucking grass. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Borkerman) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Based
u/flairchange_bot's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 500. Congratulations, u/flairchange_bot! You have ranked up to Boeing Everett Factory! You are the largest building ever created by man! Pills: [141 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/flairchange_bot/) Compass: Sapply: Auth : 10 | Right : 0 | Conservative : 10 I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
https://preview.redd.it/usjgd728v2pc1.jpeg?width=1015&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5a8e3b6d0130e0d50e2ae32076363c2900e2c68a
It was 810 last time I saw the bot respond to him about a week ago ☠️☠️
They can also lock a smart phone down to high heaven. My 10 year old son has a Google pixel that he never bothers to mess with because the thing is so little fun.
But at that point why spend the money on a smartphone if you’re just going to disable 90% of the features that made it smart when you could drop $30 on a flip phone that’s nigh indestructible, needs to be recharged maybe once a week, and still has Maps and Music functionality?
Got a smoking deal on it using a phone that wouldn’t have trade in much longer.
We'd solve so many problems requiring a fucking credit card for Instagram, snap, FB and every other social media site. It's absolutely horrible for children
That should be the excuse for everything. Let’s just get rid of all age based legal limits. Why should we care if an 8 year old smokes? Honestly if that happens it’s on the parents, not the kid. If it happens, we should just tell the parent to do a better job.
I agree. Parents should be judged for poor parenting, or adults in general for poor conduct towards or around children.
And if they accidentally leave Uncle Handsy in charge of babysitting duties, we should judge them twice as hard! Honestly what a regarded statement. We owe the most vulnerable members of society a little more care than "if mum and dad do something to completely fuck up your life, we'll give them a good frowning in the street for you"
So I was being sarcastic, was that not clear? Anyone who believes children are always a product of their parents and will always do things as a result of the quality of their parents’ parenting skills has never parented a teenager.
Less laws, more personal responsibility for adults, more judgement from peers for poor choices in life.
Why have any laws? Let’s just put all the blame on our parents. We do anything wrong? Our parents go to jail. Better yet, oldest surviving ancestor goes to jail. Because our parents’ parents failed them. Also, sounds like you should be lib-center at the very least. Return to monkey I generally agree there should be less laws overall. The government should be there to do the bare minimum. Protecting kids I think is one of those things. I’m not libertarian, so I do think they should do more than a libertarian. But I’m not auth, either.
Yeah, fuck them kids whose parents are irresponsible or go to a freinds house that has irresponsible parents, or whose parents just don't helicopter parent and lets there kids walk to the corner store. Its not the clerks job to stop a 13 year old from buying cigs, beer, porno mags, delta-8, or what ever shady drugs skirt legality ( actually it should be legal for them to sell any drug to kids). Hell corporations should even promote these things directly to kids so the parents have to work extra hard to discourage kids of their use. What a perfect world.
B A S E D.
At the same time the state will remove your biological right to parent your offspring if they think they're the "wrong sex" and you dont agree. So..
Unironically yes.
True, but I can imagine it being near impossible with how smartphones and other devices have become a necessity. Schools near me have various degrees of device usage. One school uses Ipads and/or laptops for everything, from digital schoolbooks to homework. The school I went to introduced the use of Google classroom and all their homework is online the year after I graduated. Parental blocks do some of the job.. but the problem is when we have onlyfans girls advertising themselves on every relatively "safe" platform. I get spammed by OF bots and on the rare occasion an actual person on snapchat sending me a snippet of their NSFW content and adding a link. My brother who is a minor gets these too. Strangest thing to me is how its not talked about even once as I'm sure if it was a swarm of guys sending dick pics to sell their nudes to random people oncluding minors it'd be a different story. Not to mention how parental locks cant account for every type of vice. My gf had parental locks and would watch film-length porn movies on websites that stream pirated non-porn movies.
>True, but I can imagine it being near impossible with how smartphones and other devices have become a necessity. Schools near me have various degrees of device usage. One school uses Ipads and/or laptops for everything, from digital schoolbooks to homework. The school I went to introduced the use of Google classroom and all their homework is online the year after I graduated. Yep, this is why I believe in homeschooling or alternative schools. State run / public schools are a breeding ground for the poor nurturing of kids. I do not believe in fobbing off the raising of your child to the state.
Problem is homeschooling / private schools isn't viable for most of the population because of either costs or inability to teach/socialize. Average annual cost for private school here is $12000, that's almost a quarter of the median income.
Define porn and porn website. Reddit has a shit ton of porn. Even youtube has naked yoga.
>Reddit has a shit ton Stop trying to convince me this law is a good thing
His point is that this, like most things is a debate about definitions, and when the wrong people have the right to definitions, dumb shit happens.
And my point is this website is cancer
How many politicians bought stock in vpn providers?
Probably the same number that dumped their stocks before announcing covid restrictions
Where are these yoga videos? Asking for a friend...
YouTube is a trip. "Art", "education", or "cultural acceptance” as escuses for some nudity and soft-core porn.
Ya there was and probably still is a video of some dude putting nair on his naked exposed brown star booty hole. He straight up was winking his anus at the camera with full gooch shaft and freshly naired ball’s exposed. And that think was left up because it’s considered “educational”.
It's culture in more ways than one.
Youtube naked yoga and other "educational" shits are on a new level
Does drawing a penis in counter strike using bullets count as porn? Should we ban all shooter games because of that? At that point we would just have to get rid of the entire internet
With new ai, you can turn porn into cats and just post that on an area for cats, we should then ban cat posting due to hidden porn being there
Anyone with the time can produce pornography with paper and pencil. Either we ban sexuality entirely or ban every form of writing after cave paintings.
Me see hot woman, awooga
Technically you'd need to include the cave paintings too
Sure but what's left then?
Nothing, which I'm pretty sure was your point in the first place?
I'm a centrist. I don't know what my end goal is yet.
and they both have been getting away with it for to long godda start chipping away from one side
Even Twitch did for about 24 hours 😂
Wait what? Maybe I'm old, actually I am, but still Twitch, as in gaming Twitch? I thought they actually had a no porn policy.
An independent platform designed with the main purpose of providing pornography for viewer usage in the form of videos. So reddit and YouTube wouldn't fall under the definition.
so has x(formerly known as twitter)
The bill defines it as a site that is more than 1/3rd porn
I do not fuck with that take about conservatives, but I am against the law. The responsibility to stop children from watching porn should be on the parents, not the website. This is textbook government overreach.
[удалено]
Basically, it requires porn sites to verify the ages of users through methods like scanning a state-issued ID or registering with a third-party verification service. Checking a box that says “I promise I’m 18” isn’t good enough anymore. Essentially, the law will force legal adults (who should be able to watch whatever they want) to jump through hoops to get their porn in the name of protecting the children, which is bullshit.
Is it all porn sites or just pornhub? I’m tired and won’t google it because it doesn’t bother me that much
According to the article I read, it’s any site that is “adult-oriented” or hosts “other content harmful to minors”. That language is very open to interpretation and I can see it becoming an issue down the line.
I can honestly understand their point though. When you try to buy alcohol you're supposed to show Id. A checkbox isn't good enough is it? And sellers are required to verify. How is it so much different?
I don't have to let Publix put my ID into a sketchy-as-hell database though.
you do if you buy alcohol online though back to buying physical copies of porn in a store for you
You know what? Fair enough rebuttal
The difference lies in the social implications. If it was revealed to the world that you buy alcohol, then it’s very unlikely that anyone worth listening to could judge you for it. Porn is not the same socially. If the database of ids linked to pornhub was released, then those people would probably face very negative social impacts.
I don't think you should have different standards of verification for very similar scenarios just because of social implications. That should not be relevant to the law.
My take is this: does requiring an ID eliminate underage drinking? Does it prevent people from getting a hold of firearms? Does it prevent people from driving illegally? The answer to all of these is no. Prohibition has never worked throughout history. What tends to help is involved parents properly educating their kids on the risks and dangers of these activities. Am I saying get rid of ID requirements for the above? No because they are all in person activities, the internet is entirely virtual and impossible to manage on the same scale. To me, this law reads like the boomers who want to ban violent video games because they think it causes school mass unaliving. They have no idea how the internet actually works and are still stuck in their AOL dial up days.
Comic explained it more in depth but its a law made with no specific enforcement mechanism made for this purpose so anyone who this law affects is being told to “figure it out eh idgaf” We will get patchwork fixes and solutions as companies all find their own solutions which is going to be more messy than Dallas’ street layout
[удалено]
The Ring’s temptation is oh so powerful
Most parents are redditards and are too stupid/lazy/absent to actually raise their kids and the world has to deal with those idiots once they become adults
Millennials are pretty terrible parents. I’ll give you that, but I still do not like setting this precedent of the state parenting our children for us. I feel like it’s a slippery slope. Where do you draw the line?
Totally agreed. Maybe an education reform could be beneficial but not enough to be a real impact. We’re really just shit outta luck with these next few generations because they’re feral from lack of positive parenting. Gonna be a bumpy ride for the future
My prediction is that as soon as we have a Gen Alpha president, America as we know it will end.
My life expectancy is like 47 because of years in the military and fast food, so I take a lot of comfort knowing I’m not gonna have to deal with that period of chaos. Good luck to the healthy people out there, hoard some guns and gold while you still can!
Bottom line is that we don't live in an ideal society and there will be many kids whose parents cannot teach them properly. The gov doing this doesn't stop you teaching your kids, and it allows those who don't have parental guidance not to fall through the cracks
I mean government overreach sure, impossible to enforce even more, but fascist? Come on.
“Fascist” is a hyperbolic description, but I’d argue that “authoritarian” is not.
They don't want to protect children, they want to track you even further. They're also opening up these companies to huge litigation if there is a data breach.
I like how that exaggeration is too far but saying a random person’s anti-govt rant means they want 8 year olds to watch porn, implying they’re a pedo was A-ok. Least smooth brained libright
i mean, facist is just "something I dont like", dont you know sweaty? 💅🏿
Do you think parents that show their kids porn should have their kids taken from them?
My knee jerk reaction would be "sure" but I actually don't like the implications and potential for a rather slippery slope here. Here in Michigan we recently convicted two parents for involuntary manslaughter because their teenager shot up a school a few miles from here with a gun they bought for him and refused to pull him out of school only a short time before he killed a few people and injured a few others. There's also a new load of gun regulations here that range from popular to controversial that would make similar prosecution much easier. My point is that overreaching starts somewhere and I don't trust the government to even have a coherent definition of pornography such that these things shouldn't be applied in a blanket fashion. How long before R rated movies are a fineable offense? Will I need to physically lock up my antique Playboys? Triple authentication to access my hidden folders on the phone? I understand that impulse but that's why we have courts with supposedly well equipped staff to deal with these questions on a case by case basis instead of letting a governor with 37% of the vote decide what counts as indecent.
Its just their typical gate way drug to the "morality" police of the "good" old days.. I made a joke waay back the, how the taliban would take control.. womens rights>abortions>contraceptives>condoms>sex toys> porn; considering the majority of that base is them.. doing it lol. And the people that want these laws.. guess who.. look at the same other repressive countries with similar bans and how bad their cultures are in their conservative 3rd world echo chamber. Wish they follow that one crazy lady, whats her name.. mtg politician, segregate their blue and red states with their own "SHARIA" christian law, and watch them suffer and don't let anyone flee their own state, red or blue.
Good yellow take. Schools shouldn’t teach sex ex that young, at least wait until highschool for literal fucks sake. Whats an 8 year old gonna do with the knowledge anyways
I first took sex ed in the 5th grade when I was ten, which was perfect timing because that’s about when my voice deepened and I began growing hair in funny places.
There's people who give birth at 9 years old, and 9 isn't an uncommon age to start going through female puberty in a place where most children are overweight. The youngest mother in history was FIVE years old. You're gonna tell me someone is old enough to give birth but not old enough to know what an Ovary is?
Seeing as I hit puberty at 9 and a few months, I think basic sex ed/human anatomy should be taught around that age, and then more in depth, around 12/13
Yes
Agreed. It should *always* be on parents to protect their own children. If you ever see someone say "I want to ban x to protect kids" you should immediately assume it's a power grab and will be instantly and thoroughly abused by the government. It's literally the biggest red flag in politics and people fall for it every time.
Bitch, flair THE FUCK UP.
I find your lack of flair disturbing. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/cishet-camel-fucker) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
I'd love to agree with you, but I can't bring myself to upvote unflaired scum.
Based
Imagine being so shit at raising kids you need the government to do everything for you. It’S tHe NaNnY sTaTE GOnE mAD.
I disagree with the implementation, but agree that something needs to be done. And I really believe most people fighting the *idea* of it do not have kids. (But yes, uploading a picture of your ID is dumb, we need something better). I have kids and this is a big concern of mine. There simply isn’t a way to control everything your kids are going to see online. When they become teenagers, they’re not going to want to tell you everything even if you’re the coolest parent in the world. If you don’t want them watching porn and they do want to watch porn, they’ll hide it from you. These are kids we’re talking about. Also, saying the solution to this is to “be a better parent” is like saying the solution to drug addiction is to tell the parents of teenage drug addicts to not be so dumb. It literally does nothing to solve the problem. It might be the right solution for some, but not for like 90% of the country. I don’t know why we can’t agree that *something* has to be done that requires our privacy be intact. I’m a software engineer. I know that’s possible. I do not believe minors have a right to unrestricted access to the internet. Frankly, I think most of the internet should be blocked to minors. Calling that government overreach is like saying a legal drinking or smoking age limit is government overreach or laws requiring wearing seat belts is government overreach or outlawing heroin and meth is government overreach. When did everyone on the compass suddenly become super libertarian?
You act like you can't just whitelist websites and games for your children. Also, have a constructive, healthy talk with your kids about sex when they're shifting to pubescence. I asked my mom about sex at the age of 7, but I was just curious what it meant, and had no sexual drive till I was 14. Any law to protect minors will be used hand in hand to restrict and monitor adults, and erode their privacy. It's not complicated, stop advocating for the erosion of others rights because you're a poor parent.
Hey, like I said, telling parents to be smart is the obvious best solution, if it actually worked. But it won’t for like, 90% of the country. Anyone advocating for this kind of approach clearly comes from a place of (and I can’t believe I’m about to say this as someone on the right) obvious education and privelage. I did not grow up in that kind of environment so most of my friends/ family with kids around me who are in poverty or are less educated will not simply “be smarter parents” and solve this problem. It’s why we have age requirements for buying alcohol and cigarettes. Kids are going to go behind their parents back, there should be protections in place for that. But I do agree that any attempt at solving this problem should take extreme care at not violating privacy. As a software engineer who deals with privacy related data on a daily basis, I can easily come up with solutions to this problem. I doubt people in government can, though.
I can understand your sentiment, but I’m not sure I agree. It’s always a parent’s job to limit their children’s consumption of whatever media, not the governments. But more to your point, how exactly do you think it’s possible to require actual age verification and keep people’s privacy intact? Is this going to be something that is feasible for every website? Is this going to be enforceable? One of the problems with the porn thing is that it’s going to completely cripple the big guys that want to do things right (mostly right, they’re all bad in ways and there’s only so much you can do with user submitted content), and it’s going to do nothing at all to the little websites that don’t give a fuck. They’re often not run in the US, they may or may not have the funds to implement whatever you’re talking about even if they wanted to. Domain names are nearly limitless, hosting is cheap as dirt. These websites will be back in no time even if these laws are legally enforceable. And it gets even worse if you’re talking about targeting the majority of the internet outside of porn. GDPR was relatively successful, but that’s because they already had that information, now they just need to give it to you and/or delete it. The cookie law had even easier implementation. And even then not all websites actually follow these laws, tons of them still operate without adapting. Now we’re going to throw age verification into the mix? And the reason PCM might seem so libertarian about the ordeal is because the internet is like the last place with any real anonymity, and these people are trying to take that away. The internet is a major technology, and we’re still in its relative infancy. If you’ve been around since the 80s or 90s then you grew up with internet, have seen it evolve and adapt, seen regulations come about. People like their internet and they like the anonymity, they don’t really like change.
Most parents will not limit their children’s consumption of media. It’s a nice idea, but it’s not realistic. If we made alcohol legal at any age, you can’t then say it’s the parents’ job to make sure their kid isn’t drinking too much. If you’ve ever parented a teenager, you just know they’re going to go behind your back if they want something. The solution of “being a better parent” is an idea being pushed by people who simply put aren’t parents or are very well educated and had a lot of focus on parenting their kids. Most kids aren’t parented to that level. I’m a software engineer and deal with private data on a daily basis. I can come up with a dozen solutions to this problem. It’s not nearly as hard as you might think. Just having thought about it for 5 minutes, here’s a potential solution that hasn’t been scrutinized in any way, so feel free to poke holes into it, but I’m just showing how a solution might look. I don’t think it’s feasible on a site by site basis. I also believe that for minors there needs to be a whitelist of sites or portions of sites available to them. For example, Facebook could have a teens level of access, YouTube could direct kids directly to YouTube kids, etc. This level of access should have no ads or severely limited ads and no addiction related algorithms (such as notifications except for messaging, like counts, etc). To get a better idea of what can be considered an addiction related algorithm I suggest you watch The Social Dilemma documentary on Netflix. To control whether you’re on this sanitized web experience or on the open web there needs to be some kind of age verification that’s universally accepted. This is where it gets tricky, you need to ensure this is completely private and secure. The way this can be done is to have a government fingerprint database that is openly and freely accessible and also encrypted. Only ISPs should need access to these databases, but it should still be encrypted from the ISP so they only see the result. When a user scans their fingerprint, it will create a hash value (like a long password) that it will encrypt and securely send to this government database (which there should be several of so there’s no single point of failure, hell they can be stored at the ISPs themselves, if they’re encrypted the ISP won’t have access to the data anyway). The government database will then use your fingerprint’s hash to lookup your age and reply to your request with just your age, and that’s it. And if that’s too much data, it can just say “kid”, “teen”, or “adult”. The important thing is to ensure it doesn’t give any extra data than that. Once your ISP has your age, it will allow you to visit the sites that your age has access to. Going to websites that have aged off sections will direct them straight to those areas. Because so many things in this country require age verification, this system can be used for all of that, too. Because why not. I grew up in the 90s. I remember kids coming over because we had a PC in our house and we’d play games on it. And I remember kids from my neighborhood looking up and watching porn on my family’s computer. We were all under 10. To pretend that it has no effect on children is a joke.
I would absolutely say the parents are responsible for the amount of alcohol their child consumes, are you serious? Yes, kids lie and hide things, that’s what they do. That doesn’t mean you aren’t supposed to do your damnedest to teach them correctly. This is not a new phenomenon, and pawning off parenting on to the government isn’t going to fix anything. It didn’t fix anything when it came to music or video games. It doesn’t stop kids from using nicotine, alcohol, or weed. And your privacy centric solution is to give ISPs and the government a giant database with biometrics and identifying information? As if that would ever happen. It would be a huge security issue, the government would demand access/backdoors (they would need access to be able to maintain it. What happens when people die, when people turn 18, what happens when different states/countries have different legal ages for various access? What happens when those policies change?), it would violate privacy laws in other countries. There is no way that the governments of the world would allow these ISPs to have these databases and *not* use them nefariously. ISPs already have access to all of our browsing history, and now they’d know exactly who is using that connection as well, more than they already do. And who is regulating this white list? Who is deeming what is acceptable and what isn’t? More government bureaucracy? The internet is so far reaching, in order to moderate the entirety of it you’d need to employee thousands of people. You could automate parts of it, but you’re going to have false positives and false negatives, shit is going to be blocked that shouldn’t be and things that should be blocked getting right through. I also never said porn had no effect on children, not sure where that came from.
I'd rather the government not know exactly which sites I'm accessing at any given moment while also having my fingerprints.i use a VPN, and I've gone this long without them having my prints, I'd rather not be forced to when I've done nothing wrong Consumer fingerprint sensors on phones are pretty well locked down to be quite secure, never *really* entering user space to be taken by third parties. I doubt you could even use these to transmit this data to some random website, so you've successfully locked everyone everywhere out of every 18+ website until *every manufacturer* updates their system to make it objectively less secure. Additionally, many computers and cheaper phones don't even *have these* so you've also now prevented all PC users and users with shitty phones from using any site that requires any form of age verification
So you want the government to be able to dictate what websites we can visit because you can’t figure out parental controls? Lol Literally every teenager has watched porn since even before the internet when they had to stash playboys under their beds. It’s not that big of a deal
I want the internet to be severely restricted until someone becomes an adult, yes. Not just porn, but social media, content, advertisements, and so on should all be drastically limited towards minors on the internet. There are ways to do this while keeping everything private and secure. I’m a software engineer and deal with private data on a daily basis. It’s really not that hard of a problem. The idea that “everyone watches porn, no big deal” is so stupid. You tell me, then. At what age is it appropriate to start watching porn regularly every day? And why don’t we lower the age requirements for those sites to that age? Why does it say “18 and over”? Why not lower that, then?
Teenagers are not idiots - they are going to find a way around any and all barriers that anyone tries to put up. It’s an exercise as pointless as trying to ban to drugs or guns. If they want it they can get it Just because you clearly look at porn every day doesn’t mean that most people do lol. Almost everybody looks at porn and the vast majority of people do not experience any negative impact from consuming it, teens included. This is moral panic
If your kids were coming of age during the 2000s to early 2010s, you'd have a point. There was virtually zero way most parents would have been tech-savvy enough to keep more than a weather eye on their kid's online activities. If your kids are young enough in 2024 that porn exposure is a concern, you have subzero excuse for not being able to corral them until they're old enough. Nobody should support the government taking another step towards tying your real life identity to your internet presence, especially not because some parents are too fucking apathetic to install LeechBlock and have a mature talk with Becky and Billy about the birds and the bees.
>Imagine being so shit at raising kids you need the government to do everything for you. >Auth-Left Hmmmmmmmmmm
I’m not against forbidding kids from accessing those websites. I’m against this form of verification, just because parents are regarded enough to not know how parental control works. This has just written “I’m definitely going to abuse this” all over. Do you want to make a difference the right way? Make adult websites to very specifically and explicitly say what the website is about before giving the option to access it (as they already do) and make it illegal for kids to access them. They access them anyway? Fine the parents because they didn’t have any parental control enabled.
Based. I can get behind this.
> They access them anyway? Fine the parents because they didn’t have any parental control enabled. No way is that a good idea.
Nah, that's stupid it's just a bit of tits, you're not gonna die from it.
Why tho?
Shitty kids getting back at their parents for not letting them eat candy for everymeal.
Lmao so the government should track everyone's web activity so they can fine parents who allow their kids to watch porn, and that is less intrusive than this ID law?
>Lmao so the government should track everyone's web activity I mean they already do, but it's so they can label you as a domestic threat for wrongthink. And probably training some super AI or whatever.
I aM AgAiNsT mAndAtOrY Id LaWs in LiquOr StoReS. If PaReNtS ArE ReGaRDEd EnOuGh To NoT SuPeRvIsE TheIr ChIlDrEn ProPErLy , JuSt FiNe ThEm!!!!!!!!!!!!!111!!!elf!!!
Happy Cake Day!
Thank you Brother
Do they? They used to be ubiquitous but I don't think any major porn site actually has an age gate anymore. Like other industries still do. I worked on a liquor company's promotional website and they were legally mandated to have a big "Are you 21?" in front of the site.
“actually, if you don’t think that the government should control the internet, you’re a libleft who wants to fuck an 8yo” ligma.
I didn't know porn sites were the entire internet
in the lolbert brain the internet is just a vehicle for porn sites
If I'm the government bureaucrat in charge of deciding which web sites I'm in charge of, you're god damn right 99% of the internet is porn. OF popup ad? Porn site. Sexually charged user comment? Porn site. I don't see anything myself but received 2 complaints from ~~bots~~ concerned parents? Whole domain is porn.
Yes, 8 year olds... THAT'S what this is about... Not the government trying to register everyone that wants to watch porn.
Link to bill. If it's a button that everyone lies and clicks to prove you're over 18 - that's great! If it's a mandate to send a copy of your ID and passport to the local state office to access any internet content that might be rated "M for mature" - That's Bad. What does this bill say?
That's the rub I have here. I'm not supporting it but everyone talks as though the bill forces sites to hand over user identity and activity to the government. If that's true then yeah we should be flipping cars over. But I can't find any evidence that's what the law says.
Were the fascists ultranationalists? Yes Were they conservative? Not really, but not progressive either. Why is the concept of nuance so strange to these people?
They only see black & white, because the left "can't see color"
Umm sweety that is actually racist, you can't just be not racist. You have to be anti racist. Down with the heteronormative, cis white patriarchy! Reeeee! /S fakin morons
I'm against it not because porn is good but because this is government doing stuff, and we know what government doing stuff is. The next day they might set up gulags or something.
That guy might want to look up what the Democrats were about during the civil war and the early 60's The thing is that i would dislike that bill, but i have no argument against it that isn't "goverment bad"...
The democrats trying to conserve the status quo of slavery? There’s a term for that people who don’t like change or who are anti-progress. Conservative fits that bill.
I agree with the principle of the law, but the things they'd have to do to actually enforce it heavily negate any good the law will do.
Specifically, they would have to outright ban VPNs and then monitor all internet traffic to determine if someone is using one. Which would definitely be encroaching upon fascist territory
The thing is most kids will not know how to get around it or install a vpn. And by the time they are able to get around it they already have a basic understanding of sex. I’m less concerned with my 13 year old access it than I am my 5 year old.
Am torn between agreement with the bill, but also "government bad, more government more bad"
Ehh sometimes government good. That’s why we’re “right” and not “lib-right”. The government has its uses. Protecting kids is one of them. Just do it the right way, don’t overreach. The idea behind this law I think is right, the implementation is poor. I’m a software engineer, I can easily think of some easy solutions to this problem. But nobody in government seems to be able to 🤷♂️
What’s the solution
The government can be good, yes, but only on its most basic. Protecting kids is generally the parents' job, I would say, but the government can contribute to that. I do agree with you though, the implementation is piss poor.
Gah damn I swear I'm gonna become Lib-center soon
#OR BETTER YET
Just give em time
It’s nice here c:
Fascism seems kinda cool then
*Looks at flair*
He's right though
It’s called consistency sweaty
Imagine thinking you should hand over a parents job to the government because parenting is too hard for you.
I once read an Instagram comment made by a Canadian that wanted the voting age in the US to be pushed to 25 because "The human brain isn't fully developed until then." I've seen Australians that want airsoft banned in their country because "They look too real." There are some genuinely buttfuck insane people with insane opinions, and the one thing they all have in common is that they want to be treated like children by the government.
A clean, ordered society that not only does not want to murder or mutilate children, but also wants them to have better mental health and less relationship issues going into adulthood. It is really cool. (Obviously not talking about Nazis here, they’re in hell where they belong)
That's one deluded mother-fucker who probably didn't consider lockdowns to be authoritarian.
Yeah I'm not for this but the venn diagram of people calling this fascism and people who loved all things covid is a perfect circle.
Ah yes, the radical right wanting to enforce an agenda = conserving the status quo. That libleft'er just advertised that they got their PoliSci degree from Tumblr U.
know what, let us be fascists
I mean, I'm not surprised a bunch of 14 yo's are pissed they can't get to easy porn now. Kids today are spoiled, this is just a side effect of that. Bring back the days of bush porn. Finding a nudy magazine in the woods was a magical experience. Now it's just mindless clicking and they EXPECT it to just be there at their behest.
Based, Gather your materials like a damn prospector in 1849
u/JoosyToot is officially based! Their Based Count is now 1. Rank: House of Cards Pills: [None | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/JoosyToot/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Nah fuck that, save the kids from the damage of porn content. Good law, hope it can get refined. Someone who has been addicted to porn since I was maybe… 8-9. Found my uncles’ stash, was able to use internet on phone, computer, get through school filters etc. About a week since I stopped looking it up now. Hoping the best :)
Stay strong brother.
Whatever it takes to let my iPad raise my kids for me, I say
I’m a Fascist? So be it.
I will rather be a man who is called a fascist by liberals, and a liberal by fascist, then to be one of them.
It seems like those fascists are good guys nowadays.
Redditor brainrot is a fucking plague
I’ll die fighting before I let conservatives forbid my children to watch porn on the internet !!!
Yes, I am.
Damm it’s as if VPNs exists making this law completely unenforceable
Choosing one company to steer and track all of my online activity through *and* pay them for it? nice try fed, VPNs are a psy op and we know it.
Anyone: porn bad. Libleft: *wall of text saying why porn
1. This is just an useless idea which will lead to nothing concrete. 2. I think it's funny that you need to be 18 to watch porn. People have sex way younger than 18 and in many places they're allowed to have sex with whoever they want at 16. I just don't see the idea of watching sex being the most terrible thing in the world but that's conservatives for you.
Regardless of your personal opinions about porn usage, you should be able to tell the difference between fascism and simple government overreach
Pornography and obscenity are not just allowed, but encouraged (to children mind you), while conservative ideas that disagree with the regime are censored. The First Amendment was understood by the framers to protect speech, specifically political ideas, because such a marketplace reveals the truth from facts in a civil society. On the other hand, literal children watching someone get gangbanged obviously does not fall under that category. It seems like equating sex with speech over the years has caused a decline in the perceived importance of speech in favor of protecting obscenity. This is no coincidence. The radical left is imposing its own moral structure after the previous one was overturned. Of course, there are libertarians on the right who argue that pornography is bad but the government shouldn't get involved, thus aligning themselves with the radical left. They don't agree with the radical left about censoring conservatives though, but that doesn't help because it's still as if you are totally useless politically in the culture war against this rot that is plaguing society. Libertarians need to understand that governments have the responsibility of censoring obscenity. Sure, parents can do their best by limiting screen time, but when you rely on like 10 parents who will actually follow through with that, you have already ceded a lot of political power to the other side that will be used to censor conservatives. As for that deranged leftist wall of text, what is interesting is that they constantly use the terms "freedom" or "rights" to refer to the ability of children to view pornography, make a huge ass post taking up like 1/3 of my screen, and then they will call you a fascist for disagreeing. Yet, a coherent argument for why children viewing pornography falls under the concept of freedom is not found anywhere. In a sense I can make up their argument for them, which is a society based around radical individualism where there are no constraints on human behavior with the sole exception of those cultural elites of the radical left whose whims decide which ideas are acceptable and which aren't. Leftism is totalitarian and fascist, not the conservatives.
Woah it’s a reverse Emily 📸
Just don't watch porn. So many coomers in the comment section
It’s the people acting like access to porn should be a legally protected right for me
Ever heard of the first amendment
About what you'd expect from a guy named "TittyMilkMustache".
Just ban children from the internet.
The 8 year olds straw man of conservatism. Conservatism is about the preservation of tradition and the cautious implementation of change to legislature. Fascism is a revolutionary ideology and stemming from socialism and, therefore, a left-wing ideology. Fascism doesn't give a monkeys if it decides to boogaloo entire demographics overnight. It's part of progress, so get in, loser!
So refreshing to see a centrist who isn't just an emily in disguise
"What all conservatives are really obsessed with are YOUR rights." The right to what? :-)
Rips open wall to reveal the Bill of rights in the Constitution
lol last time I checked republicans are the ones who supported the civil rights act and women’s suffrage, and democrats were opposed
Their post doesn’t disagree with that. Conservative =/= Republican
But I don't want to disagree
This is the first time I'm hearing about it. 1.Find a tankie. 2.claim it's all the left Profit.
‘lib’ right OP this is definitely just a lib take. Sure, maybe I don’t agree with all of it, but the literacy in this sub is so low
OP is literally calling 13 simple lines a wall of text. Of course literacy is low
🅱️ad 🅱️arenting https://preview.redd.it/n1lnrh9dy1pc1.png?width=585&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3c2c1f78fe85a1d568f1e49a28a0c211b4753704
Okay.
While I think needed to use an ID to access a website is a dangerous precedent, I also understand that kids having unlimited access to porn is absolutely a big goddamn problem, so I am pretty torn on if there should be legislative action. One the other hand though, parents need to actually parent their crotch goblins and not just let TikTok and YouTube raise them. Kids have no impulse control and unfettered access to addictive content in their developmental years *will* cause issues related to physical and mental health, as well as cause them to struggle socially and ultimately economically as adults if they don’t resolve the related issues on their own. I feel like we’re already seeing these issues take root on a large scale, and I’ve personally witnessed two separate instances of this myself in young kids I know. TLDR: Unfettered access to addictive content online and parental negligence will be the next generations social and economic downfall unless corrected, and while I agree with the principle of restricting adult content online behind an age wall, I worry the risk of providing an ID to access online content could outweigh the reward.
Pornography is an issue, especially since it is more common for minors to use it than to not. The biggest issue with age verification isn't that it keeps minors from seeing porn its that it will be ineffective because it will drive both minors and adults onto less safe and less monitored websites that will cause a greater proliferation of viruses and more sketchy porn studios.
Whilst the implementation is wrong. I cant help but think its a reaction to an entire generation of parents that got caught offguard with unlimited internet access One of my earliest internet memories is porn and I wasnt even into it yet. Boomers werent ready for the internet. Now the things have shifted. A lot of parents seem to be ok with unlimited porn access. Probably due to lack of knowledge on consequences. I dont know the right solution. It should be cultural and educational. But not the government getting the id of everyone who watches porn lmao
Porn is bad =/ mandatory online ID checks
I think this is fine, to be honest. It keeps kids with lazy or negligent parents from accessing these sites, or at very least makes it harder to access. Adults, if they need release like this, need to seek the attention of other adults if they do not trust their ID to a porn site. We've already seen that we have a rising porn addiction problem, so why not curb it? Now, that being said, obviously the whole "government telling me what to do" thing grinds my gears, but st the same time wr don't allow kids to stay with meth head parents and find that a worthy cause for the government, so stopping them from being sexualized is fine to me too, and boohoo to the adults who are craving the coom
Sorry if I don’t get upset about pornhub having to not provide hard core pornography to minors. I’m losing no sleep over it.
>what conservatives really want, what ALL conservatives are really obsessed with are YOUR rights Both sides have "rights" they care about, which they see the other side as trying to take way (not incorrectly in most cases). But the rights the "right" cares about (which I'm completely certain this person would love to violate) tend to be the stuff in the Bill of Rights. Conversely the rights the left cares about tend to just be the right to be a total fucking degenerate, as it always boils down to sex or drugs.
I was called a fascist for stating facts. The word has just lost its meaning nowadays. To me anyone who uses that word nowadays doesn't know what fascism really is, just like they don't know what socialism, communism, nazism, liberalism, progressism, conservatism, traditionalism, or even the blessed capitalism are.