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

401–410 of 1001 posts

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

#401

Post by lelanthran »

afavour wrote: post #361
cultofmetatron wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I think your comment would be well served by adding some reasons why.

Because kids are impressionable and easily manipulated.

It's why there is an age of consent that no kid can waive.

It's why kids aren't allowed to do lots of things, like vote, drive, drink etc.

There needs to be a compelling reason to make an exception for one politically charged thing that comes with irreversible physical changes.

There also needs to be a compelling reason why that decision cannot be deferred until age of majority.

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

#402

Post by heavyset_go »

api wrote: post #41
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…

Devils advocate: parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device. I run a pi-hole that blocks ads and porn, but that’s way beyond the technical capability of probably 95% of people. There are some commercial products but they are expensive and also take time and at least a little tech ability to set up. … and of course…

> Devils advocate: parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device.

I'm going to have to upload 3D models of my face and pictures of my ID just to use the internet because... some people don't like the idea of other people's kids using the internet?

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

#403

Post by raincole »

jay_kyburz wrote: post #281
gxs wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was a thread on reddit asking the other day what about the modern world bothers you the most I actually considered this question and after thinking about it, despite everything going on, I think it boils down to lack of privacy as my biggest gripe in the modern world It’s such a tough concept to explain to the if you don’t have anything to hide crowd, but if someone wants to disappear, I don’t care if for good…

I don't feel as strongly about privacy because "community" is what holds civilisation together. Its nice to have a little space, and to have your own thoughts and opinions, but not at the expense of civilisation. People should not be able to use privacy to evade responsibility or debts. We always need to balance freedoms with responsibility. Final thought is that this is precisely why government and politics is not a…

> I don't feel as strongly about privacy because "community" is what holds civilisation together.

Dude I'm sure most people are okay with their neighbors knowing their names and addresses. We're talking about the governments and megacorps here. Theses are not "communities" in any traditional sense.

> small transparent governments

No developed country has that. Not EU and definitely not the US.

> If you don't trust your government

No one should 100% trust their government.

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

#404

Post by educasean »

tolerance wrote: post #227
_bent wrote: post #149

We've had kids accessing an Internet without any working age barriers for over 30 years now. There have been problems, be that grooming, Facebook parties and maybe addiction to TikTok. But being able to access adult content be that sexual or violent in nature doesn't really seem to have had much negative consequences. Sure I wouldn't want my 10 year old to see 2 girls 1 cup - but I reckon it wouldn't be the end of th…

[flagged]

Let's blind all kids. Anyone who is opposed must believe that a non-zero chance of a child seeing two women have sex and eat turds is normal and healthy.

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

#406

Post by heavyset_go »

pear01 wrote: post #394
heavyset_go wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pornhub did it in protest[1], hope this helps. [1] https://www.abc4.com/news/tech-social-media/pornhub-blocks-a...

The bills still passed so what's your point? The protest failed.

That you have it backwards, because you do. Pornhub preemptively blocked states that were considering implementing ID rules, and states are not actively blocking Pornhub.

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

#407

Post by lelanthran »

afavour wrote: post #375
cmilton wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I completely understand the slippery slope concept, we ban all kinds of things for under 18s based on morals. Why couldn't these be any different? How else does a society decide as a whole what they are for or against. Obviously, there should be limits.

The question is always “whose morals”. I think society as a whole is in agreement that minors are better off without access to pornography, for example. But the arrangement OP is outlining is one where a minority are able to force their morality on a broader population that doesn’t agree with it.

You might be wrong there. While the majority does not oppose homosexual relationships they are against affirmative transgender treatments for minors.

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

#408

Post by beejiu »

dymk wrote: post #386
beejiu wrote: post #381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because youths don't have developed critical thinking skills and HRT is an invasive medical treatment!?

Zero kids are getting HRT without their parents consent, don’t spread transphobic FUD

It's not about the kids of their parents, it's about other parties that are promoting or encouraging HRT to other people's kids.

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

#410

Post by heavyset_go »

khazhoux wrote: post #370
stego-tech wrote: post #310

[flagged]

You’re right that they consume porn, but plenty of them still want to ban it, and not just because of LGBTQ. It’s all about moralistic virtue signaling by immoral people.

The irony of course are stats like these.

From "Data Finds Republicans are Obsessed with Searching for Transgender Porn"[1]:

> So far in 2022, more than 300 anti-LGBT bills have been proposed across 36 states – at least one third of which are directed at trans youth. This surge, especially in anti-trans legislation from Republicans, stands in stark contrast to a startling fact.

> Republicans love transgender porn, a lot.

> With more than 4.7 Million transgender porn related Google searches each month (per Ahrefs.com), do Republicans represent those searching most? The answer seems to be a clear yes.

[1] https://lawsuit.org/general-law/republicans-have-an-obsessio...

Post reply on HN