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

851–860 of 1001 posts

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

#851

Post by [deleted] »

solarmist wrote: post #688
PathOfEclipse wrote: post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

[deleted]

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

#852

Post by vidarh »

Brendinooo wrote: post #608
sophacles wrote: post #577

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

“Sky wizard” is a bright red flag for a bad-faith argument, so I’m not going to do a bunch of research for you. Search around for voices of people who have struggled with porn addiction. If you think it’s a purely religious thing, you’re mistaken.

Having followed this space for ~30+ years, I've yet to see any research that shows more than marginal and subjective effects at any kind of scale. Including in meta-studies. Sure, some people can struggle with addiction to porn, just as they can to chocolate and almost anything else. We don't respond with age verification to the vast majority of those other things.

Since I haven't brought up "sky wizard", perhaps if you have any actual evidence of harm you might show me?

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

#853

Post by AlecSchueler »

pnt12 wrote: post #849
AlecSchueler wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is, and that's why we teach our children about nutritional health and, in some places, regulate things like school dinners and products aimed at children. What point are you making in relation to the topic at hand?

And does Utah have a strong sex education curriculum, to teach children about it? I assume no - it's just a ban on sinful behavior.

Let's hope they are also exploring the avenues indeed.

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

#854

Post by loeg »

pnt12 wrote: post #846
int_19h wrote: post #829

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The guy behind this website is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Wilson_(author)

Thanks for the link. It's surprising how much credit is given to a charlatan, even in hacker news.

It's one guy spamming the same link over and over.

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

#855

Post by [deleted] »

solarmist wrote: post #690
RajT88 wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

[deleted]

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

#856

Post by cmh89 »

ndriscoll wrote: post #797
cmh89 wrote: post #617

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> posted this in another thread, but how are parents supposed to set up content filters for social media sites that allow pornography? Reddit's posts are ~40% marked nsfw, and they host hardcore porn of all types on the same domains as discussion forums for minecraft and roblox. https://www.cisdem.com/resource/block-reddit.html It's called being a parent

You're kind of missing the point here. Parts of reddit are fine. Kids should be able to participate in forums about children's interests. The problem is a site is comingling children's forums and porn in a way where filtering is unreasonably difficult. It's reasonable to demand that a company that's in the business of hosting forums dedicated to children's topics (e.g. /r/teenagers or /r/roblox) and also hosting foru…

>You're kind of missing the point here. Parts of reddit are fine. Kids should be able to participate in forums about children's interests. The problem is a site is comingling children's forums and porn in a way where filtering is unreasonably difficult.

I'm not missing the point at all. Reddit is a product. Your job as parent is to evaluate whether or not a product is appropriate for your child.

You know that Reddit doesn't have parental controls. If you can't trust your child to not go onto the NSFW subreddits, you should block Reddit so they can't access it. Sometimes you have to tell your child 'no' and they don't get the thing they want. The other thing you could do is write Reddit and advocate for parental controls.

It's absurd and entitled to believe that I should have to jump through hoops because you want your child to have access to a website that it sounds like is inappropriate for them. I personally think Robolox is terrible for kids. Should Reddit install a parental consent form to make sure that parents who don't want their kids to consume Robolox content can't access it? Where does it end?

>It's reasonable to demand that a company that's in the business of hosting forums dedicated to children's topics (e.g. /r/teenagers or /r/roblox) and also hosting forums dedicated to porn needs to do it in a way where the two can be effectively separated or understood by filtering software.

It's not reasonable to expect a company to filter content based on your personal understanding of porn. If a product doesn't meet your needs in terms of parental controls, be a parent and say 'no'.

>The solution to Cartoon Network airing programs for children and adults isn't to block the channel entirely; they just need to correctly label their adult programming so filters will work.

Again, you should write Reddit and ask for these parental controls. I'm fine with that. It's when you pass laws making me jump through hoops that a problem exists.

>n reddit's case, they already mark threads and subreddits as nsfw so it'd be trivial for them to put that onto a separate domain. Even 4chan puts their hobby boards on a different domain from porn and /pol/, and they're not even trying to appeal to children, banning anyone that mentions they're under 18/in high school/etc.

And those are the companies choices. I'm not opposed to parental controls, but if parental controls don't exist, don't pass laws to force them to.

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

#857

Post by AlecSchueler »

int_19h wrote: post #836
AlecSchueler wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a strawman no? You're trying to colour my argument by associating it with another one. There are some notable differences though. If I play a violent video game then no one is actually being shot. If I watch a woman being choked and ejaculated on by 20 men calling her a worthless slut whore in a porno then I'm watching that genuinely happening. It's more akin to letting children watch videos from actual warzon…

So, would you be okay with the same kind of porn if it was all 100% simulated (but realistically enough to be indistinguishable from real stuff)?

That's an interesting point and thank you for raising it.

Indeed I would not.

I think it does come down to a moral issue then, which is related both to the core messages communicated and to the audience.

In terms of violent media I can think of 3 ways of categorising it: A) media with a moral message abut the use of violence (self defence, save the innocent) B) purely whimsical (something like Doom) and C) explicitly brutal material.

Of those three only the first two have popular reach. It's easy for children to understand and it provides a structure for parents to use to educate their youngsters.

When I compare that to pornography I feel that the stuff that would fall into category C is what the norm is, what's popular on the major channels. Therfore it takes on a difference socially for me.

We need way way better education on what healthy sex looks like and why respect for women is important. But I honestly believe that we've passed a sort of critical point and do therefore support the introduction of age based restrictions.

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

#858

Post by AlecSchueler »

anigbrowl wrote: post #685
AlecSchueler wrote: post #594

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Yes I agree with what you're saying and thank you for calling it out. It's just that I've had many similar discussions to this in many different environments and it's easy to become jaded.

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

#859

Post by themitigating »

rchaud wrote: post #737
themitigating wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Proposed and enacted are a big difference. A single lawmaker can suggest or put forward a bill for anything. The majority voting to make it law is a huge barrier

it's aggregated though,because data is only valuable in volume. Showing ID every time you visit a site is significantly more identifiable at the individual level.

I was only replying to state the huge difference between proposals for a law and one passing. For example when judging a political part.

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

#860

Post by WeylandYutani »

tristor wrote: post #780
LeifCarrotson wrote: post #769

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a constitutional republic that got taken over by a 51% attack that, thanks in part to FPTP elections, they've leveraged into a supermajority.

> It's a constitutional republic that got taken over by a 51% attack It's a state that was literally created to be a place for Mormons because they were a persecuted religious minority ran out of every other state and it was a huge desert wasteland nobody else wanted. It's only due to huge influxes of immigration, especially from the South, that Utah is... checks notes only 85% white and 60% Mormon. So it's like less…

Persecuted because Mormons refused to respect American laws.

Yes if someone starts a cult that does illegal things they don't get to claim religious freedom or cry about persecution.

Post reply on HN