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

Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 175 posts

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#131

Post by adrian_b »

PurpleFoxy wrote: post #128
adrian_b wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Visa and Mastercard should not do whatever they want, because they are just middlemen in transactions and all their decisions affect their paying customers, much more than themselves. Visa/MC take the money of their customers, who use their cards, by promising to help them pay for anything they want. Visa/MC do not have any right to decide unilaterally what their customers might want to buy (as long as no illegal goo…

As it stands right now they do have the right to do whatever they want. I guess you are proposing that this needs to be changed.

All large companies that have a quasi-monopoly, e.g. the large cable providers, ISPs, mobile phone companies, and so on, take frequently abusive decisions that affect negatively many of their customers.

In most cases the customers are forced to accept these unilateral decisions, because they do not have the power to attempt a legal battle with those companies, e.g. for modifying the fees or the data caps.

Nevertheless, even when we do not want or cannot fight such decisions, we should not say that they are private companies and they can do whatever they want.

Those companies are not independent to do whatever they want, they are in contractual relationships with their paying customers.

They may use their power to unilaterally change the contracts as they want to, but that does not mean that we must accept that might is right.

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#132

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

manigandham wrote: post #122
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the USA, domestic wire transfers typically US$20. ACH requires that the receiver provides you with their bank account and routing number, which while common in the EU, is extremely unusual and invasive in a US context. You are right that PayPal/Venmo (same company) may be an alternative for now, although they generally end up applying the same restrictions as Visa/MC. American Express ... wow, it's been years sinc…

You're arbitrarily discounting alternatives to fit your narrative. If you think that ACH or Amex is less accessible then that's no different than other networks not having the same scale or distribution as Twitter and Apple. Why is it ok for some but not others when they all technically have alternatives? Anyways my greater point is that illegal actions should be forwarded to the appropriate state department which ca…

ACH takes longer than 24 hours, so there's no goal post moving there.

As I indicated below, I think it is pretty hard to get paid via Amex if Visa/MC have blocked you (3rd party payment processors such as paypal will likely block you too).

I would agree about the "forward to the government" part if that was part of normal business to find the illegal actions. I read the Visa/MC - Pornhub thing as more as a case of of Visa/MC saying "look, we think its clear that there's illegal stuff happening on your platform; we're not going to play detective here; we don't want to run the risk of being complicit of processing payments for illegal stuff, so we're cutting you off." That is, it's a statement about their desire to (not) take legal risks. They are operating within a legal context where others may do what you are suggesting and then put them in legal jeopardy.

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#133

Post by PurpleFoxy »

adrian_b wrote: post #131
PurpleFoxy wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As it stands right now they do have the right to do whatever they want. I guess you are proposing that this needs to be changed.

All large companies that have a quasi-monopoly, e.g. the large cable providers, ISPs, mobile phone companies, and so on, take frequently abusive decisions that affect negatively many of their customers. In most cases the customers are forced to accept these unilateral decisions, because they do not have the power to attempt a legal battle with those companies, e.g. for modifying the fees or the data caps. Nevertheles…

I agree that they should not be able to do what they want. I’m just saying that they can. Which is something also think should be changed but it doesn’t change the reality of how it is currently.

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#134

Post by glogla »

adrian_b wrote: post #70
occamrazor wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Android/iOS is a duopoly as pervasive as Visa/MasterCard. The ither examples only to a much lesser degree.

The comparison is not valid. For example my phones use Android, but I do not have a Google account. There exists no legal action that could be done by Google and that could influence anything that I am using my phone for. On the other hand, if Visa and Mastercard would decide to not let me buy something, that would be very bad for me, because I buy almost nothing with cash and most things that interest me could not b…

For a common person, Google/Apple cartel is about as much unavoidable as Visa/MC one. You are one of the very few exceptions - just as there are surely exceptional people who can do financial transactions that avoid Visa/MC.

Society is not math or computer science where existence of one counterexample makes things invalid. Society is a thing of ratios and percentages. If something is almost impossible for most people, we have to treat it as impossible even though it is possible for some - otherwise bad actors get away with terrible stuff on technicalities.

(I for example pay everything with cash or wires which are free and instantaneous in my country - I use card only once in a while to withdraw cash - but it does not invalidate Visa/MC duopoly any more than your special Android that only one in ten thousand people can use either)

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#135

Post by glogla »

tidepod12 wrote: post #74
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm willing to revise my take on the "big tech takedown" when someone explains to me how a random member of the American public can pay a pornographic performer/model without using Visa/Mastercard and in less than 24 hours. If there were no alternatives to Twitter, Android, iOS and AWS then I'd be as unhappy about that as I am about Visa/Mastercard's decision here. However, it's my judgement that there are alternativ…

Then the pornographic performers should just make their own payment network, no? That's what everyone's been telling Parler since they started being removed from these platforms. I also don't know how you can reconcile this comment with the fact that Gab and others were removed from Visa/MC networks, to much fanfare. To be clear, I'm in favor of Parler going away, but I can't help but notice the double standards.

> but I can't help but notice the double standards.

Yes! It's almost as if Nazis and terrorists are not the same thing as sex workers.

What a puzzling thing.

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#136

Post by yarcob »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #114
yarcob wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to the NY Times article, what you suggest is exactly what people have tried to do. However, according to the article, it was really hard to get Pornhub to remove illegal videos. And since videos could be downloaded and uploaded by anyone, removed videos quickly showed up on the website again and again. Sex abuse victims have been fighting for years to keep their videos off Pornhub, yet they show up again an…

> However, according to the article, it was really hard to get Pornhub to remove illegal videos. You're saying that if you go to them with a court order, they don't comply with it? So then have the court find them in contempt. This requires no involvement from Visa or Mastercard. > And since videos could be downloaded and uploaded by anyone, removed videos quickly showed up on the website again and again. How are the…

> You're saying that if you go to them with a court order, they don't comply with it?

No, I'm saying it's hard for sex abuse victims to get their videos off Pornhub.

> How are they supposed to know it's the same video?

If they can't even prevent re-uploads of known illegal videos, maybe they should never have allowed user uploads at all.

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#137

Post by tomatotomato37 »

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #109
tidepod12 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the pornographic performers should just make their own payment network, no? That's what everyone's been telling Parler since they started being removed from these platforms. I also don't know how you can reconcile this comment with the fact that Gab and others were removed from Visa/MC networks, to much fanfare. To be clear, I'm in favor of Parler going away, but I can't help but notice the double standards.

Nobody is suggesting to Parler that they build anything like the equivalent of a payment processing network. They just need a hosting service. If they relied heavily on specific services provided by AWS, they would need to either recreate them or reengineer their code to do things differently. These are on an entirely differently level of "just make your own" from "make your own payment network". Unless, that is, the…

Wait, ignoring the freedom implications, why is it so necessary for Parler to rent compute in the first place? If the twitter clone analogy holds as true as I think it does they are just serving text snippets and the occasional image; that's well within the capabilities of a rack or two of servers sitting in an office closet somewhere.

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#138

Post by tidepod12 »

glogla wrote: post #135
tidepod12 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then the pornographic performers should just make their own payment network, no? That's what everyone's been telling Parler since they started being removed from these platforms. I also don't know how you can reconcile this comment with the fact that Gab and others were removed from Visa/MC networks, to much fanfare. To be clear, I'm in favor of Parler going away, but I can't help but notice the double standards.

> but I can't help but notice the double standards. Yes! It's almost as if Nazis and terrorists are not the same thing as sex workers. What a puzzling thing.

Are you aware of what "double standards" means? The fact that they are not the same thing is the point.

Furthermore, please review the HN guidelines for posting. Your comment is not substantive nor constructive.

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#139

Post by LatteLazy »

sushid wrote: post #129
LatteLazy wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

200 years ago, those 10 year olds would have seen their parents at it pretty regularly. 2000 years ago, they'd have seen everyone in the tribe with their partners.

Are you sure about that? Your claim is that folks during the Enlightenment just regularly wanted into their parents having sex. And moreover you're equating porn to walking in your parents. And you're saying people in ancient Rome saw everyone in their "tribe" going at it? You do realize that humans weren't cavemen 2000 years ago, right? Ancient Rome/China/etc. had prostitutes and brothels 2000 years ago.

Folks during the enlightenment were mostly illiterate peasants. Try keeping your sex life a secret when you, your brother, your wives, your parents and 6 kids/orphans all share 1 hut with a single room.

Back in Rome, life was again one room, all share 1 bed etc for most people. Add to that a few examples from their public activity: The poisoner Locusta (the world's first serial killer supposedly) was executed by being raped to death by a specially trained giraffe. Half their pottery is people being killed, the other half is sex scenes. Seriously. You think kids there didn't know what sex looked like?

I don't know why people are shocked by this. It was the Victorians that brought in both the idea of privacy and the idea that sex was sinful and people should hide it.

If you're going to argue for more restrictions on porn, you need to argue from first principles and evidence. You can't harken back to an imaginary time when no one knew where babies came from until the priest told them on their wedding night...

Re: Sex workers say 'defunding Pornhub' puts their livelihoods at risk

#140

Post by bluGill »

LatteLazy wrote: post #139
sushid wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure about that? Your claim is that folks during the Enlightenment just regularly wanted into their parents having sex. And moreover you're equating porn to walking in your parents. And you're saying people in ancient Rome saw everyone in their "tribe" going at it? You do realize that humans weren't cavemen 2000 years ago, right? Ancient Rome/China/etc. had prostitutes and brothels 2000 years ago.

Folks during the enlightenment were mostly illiterate peasants. Try keeping your sex life a secret when you, your brother, your wives, your parents and 6 kids/orphans all share 1 hut with a single room. Back in Rome, life was again one room, all share 1 bed etc for most people. Add to that a few examples from their public activity: The poisoner Locusta (the world's first serial killer supposedly) was executed by bein…

Most families had someone who could read during the enlightenment. It is a simple and useful skill. They probably were not as good as modern people, but the evidence is reading was not as uncommon as we think.

Christans have always had the idea of sexual privacy, something they inherited from the Jews. We have plenty of writing from early Christians that make it clear that they objected to how open the Romans were.

The Victorians might have invented the idea that sex is sinful, but no religion surrives long if there are no children, so I'm not sure how common that belief was. (The shakers of course did have that belief and did well for a few years. I'm not aware of other groups with such beliefs, though I'd be surprised if they were alone)

Post reply on HN