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

Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

ellsberg.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#341

Post by breadwinner »

noosphr wrote: post #313
al_borland wrote: post #10

All these ID check laws are out of hand. Parents are expecting the government, and random websites, to raise their kids. Why would anyone trust some random blog with their ID? If these laws move forward (and I don’t think they should), there needs to be a way to authenticate as over 18 without sending picture of your ID off to random 3rd parties, or giving actual personal details. I don’t want to give this data, and…

If you need an id to buy porn irl why wouldn't you need one to buy it online?

Because 'online' is the entire planet, including sellers in foreign countries. Would you like to have "digital borders" between countries, where data has to show some sort of passport to cross the border?

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#343

Post by tiahura »

Eavolution wrote: post #218
ViktorRay wrote: post #196

This article is incorrect. The Supreme Court’s ruling only applied to obscene sexual material. It doesn’t apply to sex scenes within artistic works or sexual content in general. There’s a test used to determine whether sexual material is considered pornographic. It’s known as the “I know it when I see it” test. More info on this test here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it More specifically here…

Who defines an artistic work? If I produce a porn film, why isn't that my artistic commentary on sex? Laws cant be this subjective because subjectivity implies subjectivity in ruling which is objectively awful.

The jury

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#345

Post by 38 »

al_borland wrote: post #10

All these ID check laws are out of hand. Parents are expecting the government, and random websites, to raise their kids. Why would anyone trust some random blog with their ID? If these laws move forward (and I don’t think they should), there needs to be a way to authenticate as over 18 without sending picture of your ID off to random 3rd parties, or giving actual personal details. I don’t want to give this data, and…

VPN.

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#346

Post by hackyhacky »

everdrive wrote: post #46

Others have said this, I'm sure, but this will move past porn _quickly_. Once there is agreed-up age verification for pornography, much of the professional internet will require identity verification to do _anything_. This is one of the bigger nails in the coffin for the free internet, and this true whether or not you're happy with all the pornography out there.

This doesn't sound so bad. I would much prefer to have discussions about politics, technology, or religion safe in the knowledge that I am not inadvertently communicating with a minor.

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#348

Post by recursivegirth »

M95D wrote: post #213

A more effective solution would be to implement HTML tags for explicit sexual content (or any other kind of child-sensitive content) and allow the OS or browser to authenticate the user before showing that content, if parental controls are enabled. Legal obligations and responibilities become very clear: the site has tags - it's ok. No tags - guilty. It also allows for very fine-grained delimitation of sexual content…

I like this, already got face ID built into our devices including PCs these days... tap into that. That curbs the whole issue of sending your identifying information to third party websites.

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#349

Post by raincole »

stego-tech wrote: post #310

[flagged]

> These people will never actually ban pornography

Not sure how one can say that with a straight face when there are US states that literally block pornhub, but okay.

> If this was actually about porn on the internet, they'd be demanding Playboy get shut down, or PornHub. They're not

...

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#350

Post by CPLX »

andrepd wrote: post #306
CPLX wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The “freedom” of the early internet was bullshit, because it just meant “freedom to make money” and “freedom from having to deal with the consequences of your products on regular people.” It most decidedly did not mean “freedom from corporate hegemony” which is how we are where we are now, where children are matched with pedophile groomers[1] and delivered endless advertisements for freelance porn practitioners for p…

> which is how we are where we are now, where children are matched with pedophile groomers[1] and delivered endless advertisements for freelance porn practitioners for profit. Yes, which is why we are not in the early internet anymore and fully into surveillance capitalism, algorithmic social media.

Exactly. And the early internet lead directly here. Which is why going back makes about as much sense as picking up your baby and dropping it on the floor again.
Post reply on HN