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

Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 87 posts

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#71

Post by _-david-_ »

Thetawaves wrote: post #69
_-david-_ wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely you agree that certain content should not be consumed by children? Do you believe a 5 year old should be watching a gang bang?

Why would a child watch a gang bang? I worry about vile content targeted toward children. I worry about these things showing up on his youtube feed, not a porn website.

>Why would a child watch a gang bang?

Because they accidentally ran across a link and clicked on it. YouTube comments are filled with links to porn / non age appropriate material for example.

>I worry about vile content targeted toward children.

As do I. But I don't think targeting is necessarily the issue here.

PornHub does target to children though. Their Instagram had a post about children watching porn for example.

>I worry about these things showing up on his youtube feed, not a porn website.

It isn't hard to mistype YouTube and since many pornsites have the word "tube" in them it wouldn't be hard to imagine they could get to a porn site.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#72

Post by Thetawaves »

_-david-_ wrote: post #71
Thetawaves wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would a child watch a gang bang? I worry about vile content targeted toward children. I worry about these things showing up on his youtube feed, not a porn website.

>Why would a child watch a gang bang? Because they accidentally ran across a link and clicked on it. YouTube comments are filled with links to porn / non age appropriate material for example. >I worry about vile content targeted toward children. As do I. But I don't think targeting is necessarily the issue here. PornHub does target to children though. Their Instagram had a post about children watching porn for exampl…

I do not see what an instagram post has to do with putting porn in children's content feeds, thats a non-sequitur.

The fact that a website has 'tube' in it is yet another non-sequitur. It does not follow.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#73

Post by tibbydudeza »

greggarious wrote: post #62
tibbydudeza wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They probably check for Lafayette - what else is there in that hick state ;).

Apparently there’s a parade in New Orleans every year :)

New Orleans is like a place displaced from the rest of the state.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#74

Post by tibbydudeza »

_-david-_ wrote: post #38
tibbydudeza wrote: post #20

33% - typical boneheaded move from the usual suspects - how is this measured and who decides this ???. Let me guess Texas and Florida will jump on this as well - will be interesting to see if this goes to the Supreme Court - afaik porn is protected as freedom of expression in the US is it not ???.

Obscenity is not protected freedom of expression. "Vanilla" porn is generally not considered to be obscenity. Child porn, rape, etc are obscenity. However, just because something is protected does not mean you cannot require an ID. If that was the case then it would be unconstitutional to require an ID before buying a gun.

Thanks - Miller test.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#75

Post by _-david-_ »

Thetawaves wrote: post #72
_-david-_ wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Why would a child watch a gang bang? Because they accidentally ran across a link and clicked on it. YouTube comments are filled with links to porn / non age appropriate material for example. >I worry about vile content targeted toward children. As do I. But I don't think targeting is necessarily the issue here. PornHub does target to children though. Their Instagram had a post about children watching porn for exampl…

I do not see what an instagram post has to do with putting porn in children's content feeds, thats a non-sequitur. The fact that a website has 'tube' in it is yet another non-sequitur. It does not follow.

I don't think you are following my points likely due to me not explaining it well.

Kids can easily access porn on accident. That is all my point is. We should make it easy to prevent kids from seeing it.

Pornhub was on Instagram and so kids could get to PornHub's page and view content directed to kids about porn. I think banning Pornhub from Instagram was the right choice and helps prevent putting adult related content on a kid's feed.

My point about tube being in other websites is when you google YouTube you may end up with a porn site if you have a typo. Kids, in an attempt to go to child friendly content on YouTube may end up on a porn site just by accident.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#76

Post by Tozen »

sterlind wrote: post #40
guywithahat wrote: post #3

As someone who started watching porn when he was 10 and wishes he hadn't, this seems like great news to me. Hopefully sites like reddit follow suit

why isn't this the parents' responsibility? parents can (or at least should be able to) block porn sites at the router. my parents set up my computer in the kitchen, where I couldn't hide the screen. that wouldn't work with mobile devices, but in the pre-smartphone world it was pretty effective. I still watched porn as a 15-yo, but I had to be careful not to get caught, and I don't regret it.

> parents can (or at least should be able to) block porn sites at the router.

Not only can parents block porn sites at the router, but they can lock down their kids browsers and even phones. Plenty of software and methods to accomplish this. That's what the state can be doing, making it easier for parents to supervise and manage their kids.

What the state is instead doing, is sneaking in a nanny and police state, under the disguise of "protecting kids". Their nanny and police state regulations affect all, not kids.

Just as easily (and arguably being more smart about it), the state could have setup a website and given free software tools for concerned parents to lockdown their kids computers and smartphones, if you really want to take it that far. Take it even further, have "certified" stores selling computer devices to be used by kids, to have this available for configuration and install for parents who want it.

The BS that Louisiana is trying to pull off, is not going to stop kids (with any lick of knowledge about VPNs), nor help facilitate better parenting. It's just the state lying and fumbling its way towards becoming more draconian and pulling off more grift.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#77

Post by _-david-_ »

cvalka wrote: post #67
_-david-_ wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Supreme Court can just determine the scope of an amendment when it comes to dangers to children then there is no reason they can't say porn is damaging to children and say this law is constitutional. Not to mention, none of the founding fathers intended for the first amendment's "purpose role and intention" to include porn. Obscenity laws banned porn and anything remotely close. Also, don't forget that the int…

You read something somewhere but it's clear you're clueless when it comes to the US constitutional law. The first paragraph seems to be written by GPT-3. The second paragraph contains one outright false statement and another statement which is very likely to be false. The third paragraph is non sequitur since the 14 amendment is currently the law of the land.

>You read something somewhere but it's clear you're clueless when it comes to the US constitutional law. The first paragraph seems to be written by GPT-3.

Calling somebody a bot is a great argument.

>The second paragraph contains one outright false statement and another statement which is very likely to be false.

This is complete and utter nonsense. Obscenity is not and was never protected by the first amendment. Porn was considered to be obscene when the 1st amendment was created.

> The third paragraph is non sequitur since the 14 amendment is currently the law of the land.

The intent of the 14th amendment was not to push the bill of rights onto the states. This was a development that occurred well after the 14th amendment. The earliest you could argue the 14th amendment creating incorporated rights is 3 decades after it was created though many people consider it to be closer to be 50 years after the 14th amendment. The incorporated rights interpretation is extremely dubious and was not the intended purpose of the amendment.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#78

Post by Tozen »

guywithahat wrote: post #3

As someone who started watching porn when he was 10 and wishes he hadn't, this seems like great news to me. Hopefully sites like reddit follow suit

Where were the parents? That a kid was able to pull such off without the parents knowing, demonstrates that Louisiana's nanny state laws are not going to help at all. Sneaky kids with some tech knowledge (access to a VPN being just the start) are going to circumvent the state, as easily as they can their parents.

What the state is really trying to do, is push unreasonable police state control over adult citizens. They are making excuses for tracking and monitoring adults, along with censoring freedom of speech and expression.

> ...seems like great news to me...

There are people that think it's a great idea for all the women to cover up from head to toe. And even others that feel any violations of their religious beliefs (including sexual practices) are punishable with death. The state and those seeking to impose on others can keep taking this as far as others are willing to let them.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#79

Post by MivLives »

ultrarunner wrote: post #44
MivLives wrote: post #19

I'd be curious if sites like Reddit will run into issues. It's 33% of the content of the site to qualify.

33% of content how? By byte? Surely this has to be defined better than that.

I hope it's by image count total. Then you can have just one giant high res porn image and be 99.99% porn free.

Re: Louisiana now requires a government ID to access Pornhub

#80

Post by Tozen »

_-david-_ wrote: post #63
Brybry wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't believe the average parent has the capability of blocking porn The average parent has the capability to block porn because blocking porn can be simply done with controlling internet device access. It's similar to how parents block porn when it is in books or Playboy magazines or VHS tapes or TV. Parents restrict access to their property that contains porn. If someone's kids are at an age where they don't wa…

>The average parent has the capability to block porn because blocking porn can be simply done with controlling internet device access. How are parents supposed to control devices their kid's friends have at school or at a friends house? By your reasoning the parents must homeschool and be present at any friend's house. Is that what you are advocating for? >It's similar to how parents block porn when it is in books or…

No need to make excuses for parents not managing and supervising their kids. If a parent is concerned about sexuality or porn, it is their job to talk with their kids, tell them what they expect, and manage their environment.

So if they are so worried, they should make the effort to find out how to lock down their kids computer and phones that they personally bought and handed to them. Just a little more effort, and they can (or someone they pay to can) lock the devices down, prior to giving it to them.

Parents (not the state) should also be periodically checking their kid's phones and computers too. Not just for sex, but anything else they find objectionable (violence, guns, weird messages from unknown people, etc...) and may need to talk to them about.

> How are parents supposed to control devices their kid's friends have at school or at a friends house?

That is illogical. By the same measure, their kid can see people having sex at their friend's house too or be handed a sex book/magazine. Sex and depictions of sex can happen anywhere, not just on a device.

If the parents don't trust the people they are allowing their kids to go visit, then maybe it's time to not allow them to go there or talk to the other parents. These types of actions, of managing where and what kids do, are the primary job of the parents and not the state.

The context of the argument, is that on computing devices, parents have the means to lock them down. If they don't know how, they can find out or request the services of people that do know how to do it. Otherwise, if they are so worried about them seeing sex on such devices, then don't give them to their kids. The answer to the question is not to turn the entire world into a nanny and police state.

Post reply on HN