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

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

kslnewsradio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

681–690 of 1001 posts

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

#681

Post by themitigating »

otabdeveloper4 wrote: post #250
themitigating wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about people in Utah who don't want this? You don't like porn don't use it. You don't want your kids to watch it, stop them. Restricting the freedom of everyone is unacceptable

> You don't like racism and homophobia then don't visit these sites. Restricting the freedom of everone is unacceptable Nno no no bros, not like that. (I'll show myself out.)

Racism and homophobia aren't banned so what is your argument?

If you don't like racism or porn sites don't go to them.

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

#682

Post by dclusin »

rgavuliak wrote: post #552
brightball wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s such a strange dichotomy in these conversations. 1. Porn shouldn’t be available to kids and it’s on the vendors legally to ensure that. 2. Porn should be unrestricted, it’s up to parents to do something about it. What I can’t understand is if the people in camp 2 are so unashamed of the porn advocacy then why is age verification such a big deal? If it’s not a big deal then verifying your age shouldn’t phase y…

Because when buying alcohol, you can for the most part (outside of online purchases, but even then the courier can check an ID upon delivery hypothetially) verify it fairly easily. With online porn, the scale and complications doing it put a much bigger burden on the providers. Additionally porn has a much bigger stigma than alcohol, so keeping record of what you watch, especially if you're into something more niche…

I recently bought age restricted materials online and had to upload a picture of my photo id with a selfie to a 3rd party verifier. Similar to what crypto currency verification goes through.

I think the underlying disagreement/debate is whether or not these initiatives are in good faith. Any implementation of this is going to be imperfect and a motivated person will probably be able to get around this. So the debate, I think, is, if we implement this are we going to incrementally improve it? Or is it just a pretext to point to and say, hey look, this can never work perfectly, so we should ban x, y, and z.

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

#683

Post by pclmulqdq »

throwaw12 wrote: post #524
sophacles wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about: If you don't want your kids to see it, that's on you. Either accept that you are a shitty parent who can't raise children to your satisfaction, or get better at parenting. Don't force consequences on me just because you are incompetent.

How about: dissolving all labor unions, schools and governments? You do parenting and education yourself, protect yourself and your kids from any kind of harm outside. If you can't do it, just admit you are incompetent and don't force consequences of paying taxes on me

Sounds good to me, honestly. Or rather better than a system where moral busybodies seem to think they can get me to attach my name to porn consumption.

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

#684

Post by chippy »

taylodl wrote: post #160

The funny thing is the minors know how to use a VPN to get around this law whereas the many older users don't! So, in Utah the minors will be able to access porn and many of the adults will not! Good job Utah!

It's a myth that "prohibition doesn't work" which is one of the roots of this type of thinking. It does actually work (e.g. reduce alcoholism, increase health) but it also leads to the increase in organized crime which became much more of a problem.

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

#685

Post by anigbrowl »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #594
Aachen wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why this got a downvote. I was going to say that this shows only reports without estimating the proportion of unreported rape over time (I tried for the last ~10 minutes to find it myself but no dice), but it's a constructive comment.

It got a downvote because I was speaking against pornography in a heavily male and internet dependant environment.

I didn't vote either way, but your argument assumes causality without considering other factors (like lower social stigma for reporting rape and higher social expectations of police responsiveness). In general, it's much easier to repot rape and sexual assault and have the report taken seriously than it was 10, 20 or more years ago.

I think you should consider the possibility that your argument was deficient instead of making assumptions based on tropes. Communities are not monolithic and HN is less monolithic than most. For example, I differ strongly from you in not believing in censorship in the name of protecting youth, but I also differ from a lot of people here in saying that tech companies have massively failed to deal with the distribution of CSAM.

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

#686

Post by newswasboring »

vxNsr wrote: post #420
newswasboring wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s probably about as dangerous to minors as sitting the minor in a room while 2 consenting adults have sex, or taking that minor to a strip club. I think you have not seen the average porn online these days. Its way, way more extreme than this.

More likely they have not had sex or been to a strip club. Whenever I see people argue that porn is just like sex they always turn out to be minors or young adults who have only ever experienced porn and not intimate relationships.

That feels like a cruel assumption to make. But I think that says more about me than them.

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

#687

Post by Retric »

scarface74 wrote: post #649
Retric wrote: post #623

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s perfectly possible to limit the state to only specific areas, we don’t let it set up arranged marriages for example. As to that specific example, I trust my own judgment for who my kids would be reared by more than I trust a bureaucrat with the same role.

It very much restricts people who want to marry more than one person from doing so and until a few years ago, the government restricted marriage to heterosexual couples.

The state doesn’t recognize such unions, but it doesn’t prohibit them either.

So you can’t have multiple marriage licenses, but you can legally hold a public polygamist civil ceremony followed by “cohabitation.”

Granted people want the legal befits of a recognized marriage rather than the state to treating it as two actors preforming a ceremony as part of a play. But such distinction are relevant when you say something is banned.

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

#688

Post by solarmist »

PathOfEclipse wrote: post #679
wakannai wrote: post #328

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…

> 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. It turns out, a mother's nipple has a far different effect on an infant than a young adult female nipple does on a teenage boy. If this is difficult for you to grasp, then you should consider stepping away from this conversation, as there is clearly nuance here that the average person can easily understan…

If your moral code dictates what other people can or cannot do with their own lives in their homes then I contend that your moral code may be corrupt or severely misguided.

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

#689

Post by firstlink »

wakannai wrote: post #328

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…

Not exactly on-topic but: it appears this bill carefully defines "the Internet" as the global packet-switched network (!) but then fails to define "website", which is used (as "internet website") in the actual law. This isn't necessarily a drafting error because laws must always have undefined terms, but it is rather odd. I'm perennially concerned at the conflation of these two concepts, internet and www, because it makes it easier for malicious actors to seize personal domains and generally gatekeep the internet for use by the (commercial) web.

Anyways, back to debating porn.

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

#690

Post by solarmist »

RajT88 wrote: post #384
taylodl wrote: post #190

An identity provider can make verified age one of the claims on an OAuth token. It removes anonymity, but at least you don't have to provide your personal details to everybody on the internet demanding age verification. You provide those details to your trusted identity provider, they provide the claim of your age to the website. With that in place we can easily make beer, liquor, marijuana and tobacco sales on the i…

> but at least you don't have to provide your personal details to everybody on the internet demanding age verification. I think some of the aim of these bills is to shame people into not consuming vice.

More than some I’d guess.

If they though they'd get away with it they would mandate public lists of who does these things.

Post reply on HN