Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

addons.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 80 posts

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#31

Post by hjgjhyuhy »

_8j50 wrote: post #24
mlindner wrote: post #12

I don't get why these filters are needed. I was relatively early to the internet compared to most people (I'm 33 but I grew up on the internet since around the age of 7) yet I grew up perfectly fine without needing to be blocked from adult content. A kid seeing a sex scene in something they stumble upon is not going to scar them for life... Additionally I was never forced to use a piece of school equipment that had f…

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

As far as biological reactions go, in certain countries lots of people visit public saunas naked and find nothing sexual about it. People’s perceptions of nudity vary by culture.

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#32

Post by jasonhansel »

_8j50 wrote: post #24
mlindner wrote: post #12

I don't get why these filters are needed. I was relatively early to the internet compared to most people (I'm 33 but I grew up on the internet since around the age of 7) yet I grew up perfectly fine without needing to be blocked from adult content. A kid seeing a sex scene in something they stumble upon is not going to scar them for life... Additionally I was never forced to use a piece of school equipment that had f…

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

> or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree.

Somewhat irrelevant, but: do parents actually have a right to enforce a no-meat diet on their kids?

I understand (say) having a "no meat in the house" rule, telling your kids not to buy meat products with your money, and/or only cooking vegetarian food.

But requiring your kid to adopt a vegetarian diet at all times--even when they're away from home--seems excessive.

Maybe it's OK at age 5, but once the kid is old enough to understand the distinction it should be entirely their choice.

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#33

Post by hrgiger »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #28
_8j50 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

> There is literally nothing more addicting than porn. Citation? > biologically speaking naked people arouse a sexual reaction Have you never been to a nudist beach? ------- > not [...] morality but consent "morality" is not distinct from consent: it's more that your/my/our position on sexual morality is grounded in individual consent. "morality" as a word is not shorthand for (Western) Christian or Victorian traditi…

"showing porn to people against their consent is a form of sexual abuse" is more descriptive then your quotes I believe, at least this kind of precautions adds an alarm/notification options between kids in social media and twisted adults

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#34

Post by gcr »

_8j50 wrote: post #24
mlindner wrote: post #12

I don't get why these filters are needed. I was relatively early to the internet compared to most people (I'm 33 but I grew up on the internet since around the age of 7) yet I grew up perfectly fine without needing to be blocked from adult content. A kid seeing a sex scene in something they stumble upon is not going to scar them for life... Additionally I was never forced to use a piece of school equipment that had f…

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

do you see the difference between "user stumbles across sexual content" (the previous conversation topic) and "showing porn to people against their consent"?

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#35

Post by _8j50 »

jasonhansel wrote: post #32
_8j50 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

> or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. Somewhat irrelevant, but: do parents actually have a right to enforce a no-meat diet on their kids? I understand (say) having a "no meat in the house" rule, telling your kids not to buy meat products with your money, and/or only cooking vegetarian food. But requiring your kid to adopt a vegetarian diet at all times--even when they're away from home--seems exce…

You may disagree with it but so long as the kids get all the same nutrients from other food sources and they don't go hungry it is the parent's discretion what the child eats. Otherwise it would be the government or society that raises the kids not the parents or guardians which are the people who have the most affection and desire to see the best outcome for that specific child. If a parent or guardian is acting in malice or willful ignorance of facts that will result in harming a child, I have no problem with the government stepping in and figuring out who else would be best suited to care for the child.

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#36

Post by gjsman-1000 »

jasonhansel wrote: post #32
_8j50 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

> or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. Somewhat irrelevant, but: do parents actually have a right to enforce a no-meat diet on their kids? I understand (say) having a "no meat in the house" rule, telling your kids not to buy meat products with your money, and/or only cooking vegetarian food. But requiring your kid to adopt a vegetarian diet at all times--even when they're away from home--seems exce…

Yes - they can, though by the time they become teenagers, what is a parent going to do if they disobey and eat meat?

Funny story though - we have a family relative with younger children who was raising them strictly vegetarian. No meat (the mother insisted), though the dad quietly admitted he eats meat on occasion much to her chagrin. On a family vacation the children were left at the house for dinner, and another relative began preparing a chicken dinner.

The conversation between that relative and the children went something like this:

"Dinner's ready! Come get the chicken!"

"This doesn't have meat in it, right?"

"What? Well, it's chicken!"

"Right, but does that have meat in it?"

"Well... No... Certainly not. This is bona-fide, 100% pure, Grade A Chicken. Now eat!"

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#37

Post by _8j50 »

hjgjhyuhy wrote: post #31
_8j50 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

As far as biological reactions go, in certain countries lots of people visit public saunas naked and find nothing sexual about it. People’s perceptions of nudity vary by culture.

The keyword there is visit, it is consensual. People kiss on the lips without making it sexual as well but you still need consent right? If all parties consent I have no problem with it. Why do people have a need to expose others to their nudity or to sexual content against the consent of other people? Even nude beaches have a sign so that non-consenting parties can stay out. That's my standard for public nudity, it should not be allowed everywhere just in areas line parks and beaches with clear signs for others so long as there are similar public places where people who don't consent can go to.

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#38

Post by User23 »

pinktriangle wrote: post #20

I can't help but find the whole NSFW filtering thing incredibly funny since I found out there's a "healthy" fetish community working on this problem, with Chrome extensions like "Beta Safety" or "Beta Protection"

That reminds me of repackaging a traditional historical male dominated marriage, including occasional corporal punishment, as a BDSM kink to make it normal again. You think you’re seeing a woman in a dress, but actually it’s fetish gear showing her submission.

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#39

Post by _8j50 »

gcr wrote: post #34
_8j50 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's called consent. For a minor, their parent or guardian must consent to show them adult or other traumatizing content. Despite your personal experience, parents and guardians ultimately have the right,authority and responsibility to do their best to ensure the well being of a minor under their care which could mean no porn or even no meat in their diet. You don't have to agree. > Much worse than adult content is a…

do you see the difference between "user stumbles across sexual content" (the previous conversation topic) and "showing porn to people against their consent"?

How do you mean? Presuming a person give consent by default and making it public and accesible without warning and explicit consent is the same as ... well not asking consent . Same logic as nude texting and flashing.

Re: Show HN: Firefox Addon to Filter NSFW Content

#40

Post by gcr »

idontknowifican wrote: post #29
DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is literally nothing more addicting than porn. Citation? > biologically speaking naked people arouse a sexual reaction Have you never been to a nudist beach? ------- > not [...] morality but consent "morality" is not distinct from consent: it's more that your/my/our position on sexual morality is grounded in individual consent. "morality" as a word is not shorthand for (Western) Christian or Victorian traditi…

people really loose sight of “normal habits” when talking about sex. there’s this intense religious shame, so the folks with the most fucked up libidos assume everyone must be like them. i see posts like this as a confession, much less an anecdote

as someone who used to have exactly this sort of internalized shame, i think you've hit the nail on the head 100%.

let's look at the statement: "biologically speaking, naked bodies arouse a sexual reaction".

i'm wary of this way of thinking. here's one possible consequence: "anyone who chooses to be naked around me is trying to interact in a sexual way"

when boiled down, the same root of thought leads to dark conclusions, like

- "she was asking for it because she wore revealing clothing"

- "i was sexually aroused and therefore couldn't control myself"

Post reply on HN