Live data from Hacker News

PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

kslnewsradio.com

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A block doesn't need to be completely effective as to prevent violations - all it needs is to provide enough data to authorities so they can make sure you don't do it too often.

Or let people violate the law so that you can selectively enforce it on the people that you want to. "For my friends, everything; for my enemies, the law" - Oscar Benavides

Oh yes. That's also on the playbook of every authoritarian.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#512

Multiple issues with this. It starts off with arbitrary definitions of what pornography is ( https://le.utah.gov/~2023/bills/static/SB0287.html ): "nipple of the female breast" You can suck on it when you are a baby, but god forbid you ever take a look at it again before you are married. What's wrong with these people? Even public nudity laws differ from city to city (e.g. in California), so clearly, people aren't al…

> What's wrong with these people?

It's Utah. Utah, for all the ways that actually matter, is effectively a theocracy operated by an ultra-conservative religious minority. Utah is about as similar to the rest of the United States as the rest of the United States is similar to the Middle East.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#513
post #193

Just the fact that pornography is being taken seriously as something that's dangerous for minors is a good thing really.

But is pornography dangerous for minors? Has it been researched? What "dangers" are there? Do these apply to all age groups of "minors"?

It’s noteworthy to me that in your replies not one single comment links to any research. Multiple comments state point after point as fact with no sources, one comment directly ascribes its entire opinion to an anecdote.

In short…I’m not getting the kind of perspective expanding value I often find on HN from this discussion. Just a lot of back and forth from people exchanging the opinions they already had before opening the parent article.

I would instinctively agree that it's unhealthy for minors to have unchecked access to pornography but on the other hand I don't see how we could effectively address that problem societally without any kind of objective understanding of it. Has the exchange of unqualified personal opinions ever resulted in effective political policy, especially policy meant to manage a vice? That didn't work well for Prohibition or the War on Drugs.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#514

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What's wrong with these people? someone told me once "Think of the US less like a secular Western European country and more like a very rich Iran" and that really does help to make sense of a lot of these decisions

Isn't the US still the world largest producer of porn? Honestly we (Europeans) make the same mistake the Americans do in regards to us, we view the US as one homogeneous mass. The difference between states seems like it's often as great as between European nations. I'd be less concerned about the laws of the individual state, if companies did target the lowest common denominator for the entire US, just to make busine…

> Isn't the US still the world largest producer of porn?

Yeah, but only in a few areas in terms of studios, not individual creators. iirc studios/companies are mostly in California (LA mostly), Florida (Miami), and NYC.

> PornHub is in my mind doing the right thing, blocking the state that's causing issues.

Curious to know if this is strategic, in the sense that they're hoping their blocking of the state will piss off enough people to reverse the policy.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#515

Multiple issues with this. It starts off with arbitrary definitions of what pornography is ( https://le.utah.gov/~2023/bills/static/SB0287.html ): "nipple of the female breast" You can suck on it when you are a baby, but god forbid you ever take a look at it again before you are married. What's wrong with these people? Even public nudity laws differ from city to city (e.g. in California), so clearly, people aren't al…

Way to regurgitate a tired argument. Kids are addicted to porn before they’re old enough to drive these days and it’s messes them up for life (see: the incel movement.) Something has to be done about corporations that profit off of showing literal children hardcore porn. “Talking to your kids” doesn’t work when multinational corporations are incentivized to addict them for ad revenue.

Honestly, I think you both have a valid concern. However, these two views are not mutually exclusive.

I think you can have both the overly aggressive censoring of nudity and also at the same time have corporations aggressively pushing porn onto anyone and everyone for profit.

In my opinion, you could pretty clearly enact policy to resolve both of these issues without making it a one or the other argument or saying "something has to be done".

Why does it have to only be one "something"? Could it not be two different "somethings" that target each issue specifically?

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#516

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not aware of any cases holding that distribution of pornography to minors is protected speech, but I’d be happy to be educated if you have one.

Why?

Why what? Try posting a comment with more than a word or two if you want a meaningful discussion.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#517

Multiple issues with this. It starts off with arbitrary definitions of what pornography is ( https://le.utah.gov/~2023/bills/static/SB0287.html ): "nipple of the female breast" You can suck on it when you are a baby, but god forbid you ever take a look at it again before you are married. What's wrong with these people? Even public nudity laws differ from city to city (e.g. in California), so clearly, people aren't al…

[flagged]

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First admendment?

Amendments obviously don't apply to underage citizens. Otherwise, there would be no precedence for stopping children from buying firearms or voting. Saying this is protected speech is ridiculous.

It’s not quite that simple. Some parts of the Bill of Rights do apply to minors, other parts apply but in weakened form, etc.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#519

Multiple issues with this. It starts off with arbitrary definitions of what pornography is ( https://le.utah.gov/~2023/bills/static/SB0287.html ): "nipple of the female breast" You can suck on it when you are a baby, but god forbid you ever take a look at it again before you are married. What's wrong with these people? Even public nudity laws differ from city to city (e.g. in California), so clearly, people aren't al…

[flagged]

Addiction to anything is harmful. I don't make the leap that everything should be banned.

Re: PornHub blocks users in Utah, cites state’s age verification law

#520
post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My son runs a vpn to get around my dns enforced fillers. I’ve tried to block vpns but he still finds a way.

I don't understand - if I did this kind of thing as a kid I'd just lose progressively more and more privileges. My parents never put technical obstacles in my way - there were just clear consequences for braking the rules. If your son keeps braking the rules you've set....surely there comes a point where he loses his phone/PC or whatever? No?

tldr: if your kid keeps breaking the rules, ramping up enforcement is not going to change that for the same reasons that punitive punishment in the judicial system is not effective. Your kid has to understand why the rules are if they're ever going to function well within them, and that also requires a level of parental compassion and understanding that often isn't present.

> If your son keeps braking the rules you've set....surely there comes a point where he loses his phone/PC or whatever?

The efficacy of this depends wildly on how the rules are explained and enforced, I think. This is a topic that comes up often between my aunt and I. She has two kids about 10 and 13 years younger than I am, and often asks my father and I, the tech people of the family, how to enforce content filtering and screen time limits for both kids. I've effectively refused to help on the basis that it'll only offer her a false sense of security, given that I was able to circumvent every control I faced with relative ease at the same age as her son. I felt that anything she tried to do on the "blind enforcement" angle would just encourage conflict with her oldest, who like me was rather technically inclined and often frustrated by parental oversight.

Note, I'm not a parent, just an adult with some frustrations over how this stuff was handled when I was a kid, so I'm sure there's blindspots and misconceptions here. Take all this with a grain of salt.

My mom embodied the philosophy of "these are the rules, and you lose privileges if you don't follow them." This most often came up in conflicts over technology. She would set rules over what kinds of games I could play (non violent only), when I could use the computer (not after like 7pm), and broadly how much time in a week I could spend on it (maybe 5 hours before I'd start getting pressure to hop off), in addition to the standard no-admin-rights and interent-content-filtering.

I'd often circumvent this stuff through a combination of linux boot disks and just messing with the BIOS clock.

Mom never really explained why the rules were what they were. Some I could extrapolate: the content filtering seemed to largely stem from her Puritan view of sex. Thou Shall Not, and no further discussion. The time-spent I was less clear on, but I think it was broadly just that "screen bad" and there were more interesting things to do in the world, in her opinion. For my part, games and computers were my only social connection to others, as an only child who lived across town from all his school friends. This means whenever I "lost privileges" for my phone/computer/etc, I was now socially isolated as well, which just made me more upset.

There certainly were times she took everything away, as a "loss of privileges" for breaking the rules, but then I just got more miserable because the root problems for me still weren't being addressed. Moreover, that meant she was constantly framed as an adversary: enforcing the rules as a single parent takes significant effort, because there's no outlet. I had nobody to vent to, she had no other adults for backup or to bounce ideas off of. Plus, I needed the thing for school often: writing papers for class, or looking up how to do my math problems. There came a point where, philosophically, it was difficult to physically take things away because I'd bought them with my own money or they were gifts from other family members.

Compare this to my dad's strategy: He knew there were plenty of things in the world he didn't want me having my life ruined by, so he went for education over prohibition: "You're too young for porn, because it gives you unrealistic expectations of both sex and relationships. Also it forms addictive habits. You can ask me questions, and I'll keep an eye on your internet usage in case I see anything we need to have a conversation about, but you should stay away from that." Infinitely more effective to a developing-me: now I understood his concerns, the goals, and had a method of recourse if I disagreed.

As an adult, I 100% understand that there's good damn reason to prevent kids from having unfettered access to the internet. Especially preteens and younger: holy crap, youtube is a brain-melting attention-hacking cesspool. Simultaneously, I think it's insanely unreasonable to "walled garden" everything off and call it a day. That's not how the world works, and if that's the chosen method of "safety" then you're just making it so your kids will never come to you with questions during their own exploring while also leaving them unprepared once they're outside of your bubble. I was always insanely frustrated that my mom didn't just talk to me, or when she did, that her beliefs and concerns were always more important than mine. Again, I get it: kids are not always rational, it is the job of the parent to watch out for forms of harm that kids aren't paying attention to, etc--but I still hold a lot of those frustrations as an adult, especially because I never felt like I got to voice them as a kid. So, I just went around them. Constantly.

Post reply on HN