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

Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

t4t.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 411 posts

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#381

Post by mid-kid »

Atotalnoob wrote: post #35
t4t wrote: post #10

The biggest piece of feedback I think I have gotten from posting here is that the nsfw content is a bit shocking which I get. Sorry about that. My guess is that if you just scrolled twitter or whatever by new exclusively unfiltered you wouldn’t have that different an experience. On the one hand I do think there is something interesting about the rawness of this network but also some sort of smart nsfw filtering is cl…

You probably shouldn’t show NSFW to non-logged in users. Otherwise you could run afoul of various laws, since technically minors can access it

All you need to sidestep those laws is a little prompt that asks you if you're 18, you don't need to require a login. Unless you're talking about recent US laws.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#382

Post by Atotalnoob »

cynicalsecurity wrote: post #76
dang wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't post in the flamewar style to HN. We've had to ask you this more than once before. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Answering to a person who calls topics related to trans people not safe for children is now regarded as starting a flamewar (whatever this means), nice.

Trans people aren’t NSFW, please reread what I said.

I said the NSFW text content. Not trans people.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#383

Post by jncfhnb »

WhyIsItAlwaysHN wrote: post #362
jncfhnb wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most of these trans women are interested only in people similar to themselves. IE, queer, non binary, trans That sounds kind of odd to me. I don’t have any experience or insight to people’s experiences here but I would assume that most trans people are trans because they want to be the opposite sex, not because they want to be trans specifically. This statement here suggests they’re identifying as trans more so tha…

This is talking about sexuality, not gender identity. Who you want to have sex with is not determined by your sex or gender. It is correlated, but not determined (as in more cis men are bi and straight than gay, thus a random man is more likely to be bi or straight than gay). In this case, she's talking about her preferences which can be any identity, sex etc. For example, a trans person may prefer to date other tran…

An individual person can do whatever they want.

It sounds surprising to me that trans people broadly prefer trans people is all.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#384

Post by dbmnt »

m00x wrote: post #268
wjbolles wrote: post #74

If you've created a service with that many users, that could be a target for malicious actors, and also hosts NSFW content, you may want to look over this article and protect yourself by forming an LLC. https://denise.dreamwidth.org/91757.html

LLCs won't protect you completely. That's a myth.

Parent didn't say anything about complete protection? An LLC does offer some level of protection, albeit mostly liability protection (as implied by the name, Limited Liability Company), and in this case I would be more worried about the need to defend against overzealous law enforcement requests. I'm not sure an LLC really helps much in that context. It's more about being able to afford a good legal team.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#385

Post by jart »

numpad0 wrote: post #371
jart wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone should set up a website with nothing but LLM generated content, to troll these officials.

GP mentioned NCMEC, those guys don't care if it's generated or not. Anything aligns their preference gets labeled as "nonconsensual child pornography" and they come after your hosting, DNS, payment, visas, so on. Consensus or IRL children aren't their concerns.

Well LLMs don't generate their precious blackmail material so there's no legal reason to hand anything over.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#386

Post by numpad0 »

jart wrote: post #385
numpad0 wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP mentioned NCMEC, those guys don't care if it's generated or not. Anything aligns their preference gets labeled as "nonconsensual child pornography" and they come after your hosting, DNS, payment, visas, so on. Consensus or IRL children aren't their concerns.

Well LLMs don't generate their precious blackmail material so there's no legal reason to hand anything over.

Ultimately they'll flashbang you on a Sunday morning, put you on a no-fly list, and circulate warrants, at least until you add heavy geoblocking and start framing them right so they'll be the socially awkward side. They won't ask you for a list of clientele, they can look that up, they're after contents.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#387

Post by itake »

svnt wrote: post #335
itake wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> just forcing people to use VPNs Does this really even work? The law isn't "if the user's ip address appears to be from this state, then you must require id". Properly enforcing georestrictions like this costs money and destroys businesses, but that is kinda the point.

I’m sorry but business success aside, how else do you propose to do it? Require them to go outside and take a panoramic video including their face that somehow also captures third-party information about the date and time and then feed it into geoguessr?

Couple thoughts:

1/ if the company can’t meet the regulations, it can’t exist.

2/ if there is wiggle room of “as long as you tried your best, then it’s ok”, then requesting gps location, nearby wifi nodes, and banning traffic from data centers, then that would be better.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#388

Post by itake »

moate wrote: post #351
azernik wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It provides plausible deniability. "We did our best, judge"

It's not even plausible deniability, it's literally "how are we supposed to know what location people are in other than ISP?" That's the de facto determinate of location online. The government hasn't taken the position that a bar checking driver's licenses to confirm someone's age provides "plausible deniability", but rather that they're doing their part to comply with the law, even if some users are going to use fak…

1/ block data center connections / require users to connect via a residential IP, not cell phone.

2/ request GPS location from the device.

3/ request WiFi location from the device.

4/ require billing address to be out of state. (States collect sales tax based on billing address, not where the service or product is bought. So I think this is fair.)

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#389

Post by ETH_start »

robertlagrant wrote: post #301
ETH_start wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 100% bullshit. The parents themselves are responsible for letting their children browse the internet unsupervised. The culture of over-reaction to danger that has taken over the political domain is creating a nanny state where it's impossible to avoid crosssing red lines and doing something wrong. It's paralyzing society by instilling inaction as the only safe path.

> The parents themselves are responsible for letting their children browse the internet unsupervised. Unless you never let your child near any slightly older child with a phone, you as a parent cannot individually control this. > The culture of over-reaction to danger Which is it? Is it that parents haven't protected their children enough, or that children don't need protection from watching pornography?

>Unless you never let your child near any slightly older child with a phone, you as a parent cannot individually control this.

You have to not let your child near any older child with a non-child-safe phone. This is the parents' responsibility.

Re: Show HN: I built an active community of trans people online

#390

Post by ETH_start »

itake wrote: post #259
ETH_start wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 100% bullshit. The parents themselves are responsible for letting their children browse the internet unsupervised. The culture of over-reaction to danger that has taken over the political domain is creating a nanny state where it's impossible to avoid crosssing red lines and doing something wrong. It's paralyzing society by instilling inaction as the only safe path.

> The parents themselves are responsible Parents give their kids access to guns and we all know how that ends. If we can't hold parents accountable for their children's violence, I seriously doubt we can do anything about parents failing to parent their kids on this topic. What are we going to do? throw the single mom with 2 jobs and 5 kids in jail because she didn't pay $20/mo for parental controls on her kids devic…

>throw the single mom with 2 jobs and 5 kids in jail because she didn't pay $20/mo for parental controls on her kids devices?

If she wants to have children out of wedlock or with a man who are not financially capable of being a provider, then she and her children should bear the consequences of that, not everyone else who know has to have government take over the internet and mandates identity disclosures for perusing adult content.

Post reply on HN