Live data from Hacker News

Sex censorship killed the internet we love

engadget.com

291–300 of 520 posts

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is thst no one's actually saying 'sex bad', it's just that sex is a private endevour while violence is more universal.

The Church is definitely saying sex is bad, sex is a sin, must only be used for making children, not for pleasure, even in married couples. It's insane.

Come on, that's ignorant. Nobody is saying that.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#292

When I was a kid there were very few black people on television, and no major black characters (I'm from the US). Likewise there was no sex; Laura and Rob Petrie slept in separate beds, etc. There were three majors-- CBS, NBC, and ABC-- and people with names like Pastor Bob from Decent Society Now! would get their folks to pressure network departments, and these departments found it easiest for business to just not r…

Google been a defacto monopoly for a long-time. I always just assumed it was to keep regulation from some states backwards religious senators/congresspeople at bay.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the logic checks out, but is fighting it any better? In this case there are basically 2 options. Create a competing superstition that says black doors are good, or make laws requiring doors to be painted black. So now you either have 2 superstitions or something a whole lot worse than a superstition. In this case it's probably better to just live with not having black doors.

> Create a competing superstition that says black doors are good, or make laws requiring doors to be painted black. Or, you know, that the color of the door doesn't matter? I fail to see how that'll be a superstition.

It isn't. And the point of the initial comment is that it loses out to a superstition.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#294
post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would also blame religion if not that here in Sweden we went from accepting sex and censoring violence to accepting violence and censoring sex, within about the span of almost just 10-20 years. The norm just changed and its very noticeable in movies if one compared those made before 1990 and those made after 2000. There is no corresponding change in the religious demographic. If anything that demographic went down…

That's the Americanization of the world. If most of one's movies, songs, tv shows, social media control, search engine biases, etc, come from a single country, with its cultural stickups, that's what you get.

There is almost too much ridiculousness in these two sentences to unpack. From the notion that American hegemony suddenly began post-9/11, rather than 70 years ago. To the assertion that Google is deliberately biased toward violence over sex.

The "America == bad, anything I don't like about my country == also America" mindset is a disingenuous rejection of agency. There are a lot of things going on the world today. If gender dynamics and sexual mores have shifted over the past decade where you live, it MIGHT be more closely related to that, rather than Tumblr fizzling out.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#295
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enjoying sex isn’t a sin. Sex is supposed to be held in the highest regard. It’s a wonderful and joyous thing. The point is, I believe, to avoid cheapening it, making it less than the truly awesome thing it is. It’s supposed to be a priceless gift shared with your true love. Packaging it and selling it makes it less valuable. I believe that if you approach the subject with that mindset, a lot of the decisions that so…

Replace "sex" with "food" and you just described French culture.

Poor quality food never was illegal in France. For a time, fast food joints avoided France because they thought there would be no market. There were wrong, and they are everywhere now.

It doesn't mean the value of good food has cheapened. If anything, now that there is a point of comparison, the opposite is true.

Good restaurants, from Michelin 3-star to inexpensive "plat du jour" lunches, are still there. So are long lunch breaks and good home cooking. And I am talking about people of every age.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#296

When I was a kid there were very few black people on television, and no major black characters (I'm from the US). Likewise there was no sex; Laura and Rob Petrie slept in separate beds, etc. There were three majors-- CBS, NBC, and ABC-- and people with names like Pastor Bob from Decent Society Now! would get their folks to pressure network departments, and these departments found it easiest for business to just not r…

Google been a defacto monopoly for a long-time. I always just assumed it was to keep regulation from some states backwards religious senators/congresspeople at bay.

Aside from the privacy, google has been the best company of my life.

But I'm one of those, dont care about privacy people with mild porn habits and I'm starting a non-profit. I don't have much to hide, especially given the good I've accomplished with Google's support.

(Also I get 200+ website visitors from google daily)

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#297
post #210
post #172

In general, superstitious behavior tends to win over non-superstitious behavior, even if it is a small minority . For example, say there are two communities in a given town; one of the community has decided that black doors were evil, and won't go through them. The other community doesn't care. Shops that have black doors lose the business of the superstitious community; even if that community is small, it simply mak…

that's another example of Popper's paradox of tolerance.

> Popper's paradox of tolerance.

Except there's zero empirical data to support the existence of this alleged "paradox". In the meantime, it's used to justify all sorts of intolerance of its own. Paradox indeed.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#298
post #172

In general, superstitious behavior tends to win over non-superstitious behavior, even if it is a small minority . For example, say there are two communities in a given town; one of the community has decided that black doors were evil, and won't go through them. The other community doesn't care. Shops that have black doors lose the business of the superstitious community; even if that community is small, it simply mak…

Depends on the superstition, if it were "you should say 'black door' every time you see one [and you'll have good luck]" then it would make no difference. It would neither inhibit nor encourage those of the out-group. Let's look at religion: if my religion says "give money to orphans" then you don't need to fight it, it doesn't harm you, if it says "make everyone who's not part of our group subservient or dead" then…

The situation outlined in the article isn't the "live and let live" kind. Where you do something for yourself or for someone else and don't expect anything further (donate to your cause). It's the kind where you wish your preferences be imposed on everyone else for your benefit (force everybody to donate to your cause). It's hard to decide what "harmful" is as far as superstitions go, everybody will see it differently.

And human nature makes it so most people only push things they don't see as a direct or major inconvenience and ignore the rest. I don't like to see sex on the internet? Nobody should see it.

How many people claiming they do something to uphold some values actually uphold more than the values they find easy or effortless? Superstitions or people's interpretation of religion are the same. It's always "don't walk through the black door", never "when you see a broken door fix it for free". It's "homosexuality is a sin", never "lying is a sin". Everything is ok as long as it falls perfectly within the framework you operate under, the values you consider worthy of appreciation.

Re: Sex censorship killed the internet we love

#299
post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another thing I saw in US is that they can't make the distinction between hardcore porn, soft porn, erotica, nudity and showing some cleavage. I used to work at a European game company that made erotic games for PocketPC. Our biggest market was US, and most negativity also came from US. Video striptease is labeled as "porn". What they preach is very different from how they act. You cannot say fuck or shit on tv or in…

> You cannot say fuck or shit on tv What TV shows are you talking about? Kids shows? American television in general is full of profanity. Some shows have way higher profanity content than what’s observed in real life, they always makes me wonder if certain demographics really fucking talk like that all the time.

Yes. It can be pretty common. It’s been a while since I was in the oil business but there were plenty of people who had trouble getting a few sentences out without a fuck or a shit.

I do know a few tech people who cuss quite a bit but it’s certainly not super-common abd, increasingly, there’s also a greater sensitivity to language etc. that someone will take offense to even if in your mind it’s perfectly ok.

Post reply on HN