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

US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 229 posts

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#81

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

yupyupyups wrote: post #59
cchance wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its bullshit a kid can buy a vpn without an ID for 3$ and skip any restriction, and even without that 90% of international porn sites, so the law fixes nothing but opens a slippery slope, whats next a law saying US needs a "Great Firewall" to protect the children from international deviancy. And it also just opens the possibility for centralized ID verification services being breached and tieing identities to their m…

Kids don't go through the hoops to buy and install a VPN just to access porn. If they were not exposed to it in the first place, which is very easy without a VPN, then they wont have the interest to get one.

> Kids don't go through the hoops to buy and install a VPN just to access porn.

When I hosted a Minecraft server, I routinely got DDoS'd by gradeschoolers. I have little doubt they could be tunneling thru a VPN in short order - because they did that too.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#82

Post by [deleted] »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #70
Workaccount2 wrote: post #38

I'm more interested in the downsides of not having ID verification. We have an entire generation of humans raised with effectively no verification going back 30 years now. So what is the data? Why is a high barrier so important that every adult has to annoyingly climb over it with all sorts of friction?

One consequence that concerns me greatly is that men in the generation you're describing routinely choke their sexual partners. I remember a decade or two ago, when I thought it was ridiculous that porn might teach people to be abusive - I regret to admit that I was catastrophically wrong. ( https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/sep/02... )

[deleted]

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#83

Post by [deleted] »

yupyupyups wrote: post #59
cchance wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its bullshit a kid can buy a vpn without an ID for 3$ and skip any restriction, and even without that 90% of international porn sites, so the law fixes nothing but opens a slippery slope, whats next a law saying US needs a "Great Firewall" to protect the children from international deviancy. And it also just opens the possibility for centralized ID verification services being breached and tieing identities to their m…

Kids don't go through the hoops to buy and install a VPN just to access porn. If they were not exposed to it in the first place, which is very easy without a VPN, then they wont have the interest to get one.

[deleted]

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#84

Post by linotype »

superfrank wrote: post #77
cchance wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because .... ITS A SLIPPERY SLOPE, that the republicans in charge and religious right wing have shown they are perfectly OK with pushing for, shit its funny how project 2025 is like 60% implemented and people are still acting like its all some conspiracy and this weird religious right wing shit isnt actually happening

"IT IS A SLIPPERY SLOPE! First we gave women rights, then black people rights, and now we're trying to give trans people rights and rights to illegal immigrants!" To be clear, I support all of those things, but the point I'm making is that saying it's a slippery slope is a bad argument because A) the next steps are often based on opinion and not fact and B) what one person sees as a slippery slope another person sees…

We’re already sliding down the slippery slope. Claiming I’m arguing in bad faith is just helping the people that are pushing us down it. A slippery slope isn’t a bad thing if it involves people getting more rights.

I also think it’s somewhat ironic that my simple statement that started this conversation has been flagged. Free speech really is done in the US.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#85

Post by ceejayoz »

giarc wrote: post #16
ceejayoz wrote: post #3

So how broad is this? Can a state now require you to verify your age and identity to read a newspaper they don't like?

Not unless that newspaper is "more than one-third sexual material".

There are quite a few legislators who'd consider an episode of Will and Grace to be entirely "sexual material" because it depicts gay main characters.

Ezekiel 23:20 isn't, though, of course.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#86

Post by lesser23 »

Eric_WVGG wrote: post #25
jimbob45 wrote: post #22

You already have to show ID to see rated-R movies in the US. I don't see how this is any different.

The movie theater doesn't keep a database of who's been watching their movies. [edit] and that doesn't just mean “okay jimbob is a dirty dirty boy.” It’s also a handy way to create a registry of whatever the handlers think is the target perversion du jour. [edit][edit] … and it's not even the government who's keeping that database, it's pornographers. Regardless of your political leanings or trust in the gov't, can y…

I understand the sentiment and agree but the practicality is a different story.

Not many people pay in cash (though, for now, it's still possible). 99.9% of people carry a tracking device in their pocket, and it's a junior engineer level task to correlate transaction data to an ID via any number of methods.

So while it's not "built in" at a movie theater it's child's play to figure out who's watching what, when. Effectively, it's the same thing as requiring an ID to watch porn in that light. Similarly Google has shown (repeatedly) it's absolutely trivial to figure out who a person is via tracking. Then, it's absolutely trivial to determine a person and their porn preferences.

I can see both sides. The parents are ultimately responsible for their child's media consumption. But, a company also has a duty to ensure they're not violating any rules. The "Are you over 18" pop ups are there for legal reasons. I think that this ruling simply codifies what has already existed and provides a way to make it harder to bypass (without a VPN).

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#87

Post by threatofrain »

yupyupyups wrote: post #59
cchance wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its bullshit a kid can buy a vpn without an ID for 3$ and skip any restriction, and even without that 90% of international porn sites, so the law fixes nothing but opens a slippery slope, whats next a law saying US needs a "Great Firewall" to protect the children from international deviancy. And it also just opens the possibility for centralized ID verification services being breached and tieing identities to their m…

Kids don't go through the hoops to buy and install a VPN just to access porn. If they were not exposed to it in the first place, which is very easy without a VPN, then they wont have the interest to get one.

Many VPNs are free iOS apps that vacuum your data. They are consumer-level download-tap-tap easy.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#88

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

khy wrote: post #39
giarc wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not unless that newspaper is "more than one-third sexual material".

So a site just needs to generate enough content until its under that threshold?

> So a site just needs to generate enough content until its under that threshold?

No. That alone is highly unlikely to prevent performative lawsuits from state attorney generals. Especially (but not limited to) AGs who are intent on satisfying their culture war kink.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#89

Post by derbOac »

jimbob45 wrote: post #22

You already have to show ID to see rated-R movies in the US. I don't see how this is any different.

Putting aside the actual differences between that and this, I guess I don't think that should be required by the state either.

If an individual theater wants to do it, sure, but I don't agree with the state requiring it.

There's something sort of hypocritical about wanting to give parents more control over decisions about their children while simultaneously taking it away.

If I have a mature child who wants to see an acclaimed art film that is R rated for whatever reason, why shouldn't I be able to make that decision? What's the next step? Verification on blu-ray players?

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#90

Post by surgical_fire »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #70
Workaccount2 wrote: post #38

I'm more interested in the downsides of not having ID verification. We have an entire generation of humans raised with effectively no verification going back 30 years now. So what is the data? Why is a high barrier so important that every adult has to annoyingly climb over it with all sorts of friction?

One consequence that concerns me greatly is that men in the generation you're describing routinely choke their sexual partners. I remember a decade or two ago, when I thought it was ridiculous that porn might teach people to be abusive - I regret to admit that I was catastrophically wrong. ( https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/sep/02... )

I don't particularly enjoy it, nor does the wife.

But if erotic choking is consensual amongst two adults, what exactly is the issue?

Are we to start policing how people enjoy fucking?

Post reply on HN