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

Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 121 posts

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#111

Post by belorn »

skhunted wrote: post #107
belorn wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am going to make an interpretation that you think age restrictions are good public policy in general, and asking why others disagree. In the edit you say that "we all appear to agree that age verification is an acceptable goal", but I would disagree with that. I find age restrictions to be good public policy in general if-and-only-if the target of the restriction has a clear cost that is shared socially. Abuse of t…

The vast majority of the people I've interacted with don't think hardcore porn should be viewable by children. Those who disagree and welcome to advocate for changing of the law in this regard. It is indisputable though that age verification laws regarding porn have been in place in the country for many decades. The internet is not special in that such laws/social mores do not apply. Such is my opinion.

In my country (Sweden) we do not have a specific age restricting law regarding purchasing porn. What we do have a generic law that forbid any film in cinema and TV broadcast from being viewed by children under 7, 11 and 15 years old if viewing that film is considered harmful for that age group. What is harmful is then delegated to a government department of censorship.

A funny thing however is that the department of censorship was closed down in 2010, being at the time one of the worlds oldest with a creation date of 1911. With the closure, the above law has no longer any practical effect but the cinema industry and TV broadcast still volunteer to honor it to some degree.

Historically, the department of censorship focused mostly on violent movies, but a famous examples was the cartoon Darkwin Duck which was deemed too violent for viewing by children. Teenage violence was often connected back in the days with violent scenes in specific movies.

Public support for government censorship is currently in minority. The vast majority of people seems to think that publisher, cinema owners, parents and schools do a better job in deciding what should be viewable by children. Occasionally a specific film or game jumps into the news (like GTA 5), but they tend to die down fairly fast. Porn discussions also pop up once in a while, but they die down similarly fast since support for a return of government censorship is really low and the political parties generally know this.

The only specific law about porn we do have is displaying of porn towards people without their consent in a way that can be seen as off putting. This target behaviors like people sending nudes to others without their consent.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#112

Post by ralferoo »

magicalist wrote: post #69
ralferoo wrote: post #52

I am certain that Pornhub isn't doing this because they actually care about PII. However, I can think of a number of reason why they are taking this stance: * They don't want the work to do the verification to be their problem, and to be legally responsible when (not if) it goes wrong. * They know that age restricted devices are few and far between, so this is just an effort to kick the can down the road another deca…

> I am certain that Pornhub isn't doing this because they actually care about PII > They don't want the work to do the verification to be their problem, and to be legally responsible when (not if) it goes wrong. That's literally caring about PII. Quite a bit more than the state legislative sponsors of and "think of the children" advocates for these laws, too.

I guess I didn't phrase that quite right. My meaning was that I'm sure they don't actually care about protecting the privacy of your PII. I'm pretty certain that they'd sell it if they had the chance and/or use it to sell adverts.

In fact, I'd hazard a guess that the only reason they have the ability to block users from certain states is because they already had that information as it made their data more valuable to advertisers. They're probably already sharing information down to the city or district level with advertisers.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#113

Post by inemesitaffia »

bitcharmer wrote: post #101
nickpeterson wrote: post #56

Just make the law also apply to gun websites and watch it disappear.

I will never understand American culture. Titty visible - bad, dead schoolkids - ok. In many ways the country is spiralling into Gliead-esqe state from Handsmaid Tales and I can't stop watching it.

Autobhan speeds

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#114

Post by cykros »

In other news, residents of these states are reminded of the fact that Pornhub is perhaps among the most vanilla porn and above board porn sites out there compared with the likes of heavy-r, motherless, efukt, and no doubt far more depraved content a simple click away, and under the radar of these morality crusaders.

Don't assume that just because Pornhub doesn't include scat, drugged, zoophilic, voyeur, nonconsentual, and other more frowned upon content that it isn't still entirely available if you're foolish enough to let your kid on the Internet without monitoring.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#115

Post by shrimp_emoji »

cykros wrote: post #114

In other news, residents of these states are reminded of the fact that Pornhub is perhaps among the most vanilla porn and above board porn sites out there compared with the likes of heavy-r, motherless, efukt, and no doubt far more depraved content a simple click away, and under the radar of these morality crusaders. Don't assume that just because Pornhub doesn't include scat, drugged, zoophilic, voyeur, nonconsentua…

The Internet is for porn.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#116

Post by shrimp_emoji »

bitcharmer wrote: post #101
nickpeterson wrote: post #56

Just make the law also apply to gun websites and watch it disappear.

I will never understand American culture. Titty visible - bad, dead schoolkids - ok. In many ways the country is spiralling into Gliead-esqe state from Handsmaid Tales and I can't stop watching it.

> In many ways the country is spiralling into Gliead-esqe state from Handsmaid Tales

After having more progressive abortion and trans care laws than Europe (where parties like the "Christian Democrats" in Germany rule), how exactly?

The Republicans want to performatively participate in their moral panic by asking for (stupid) age verification; meanwhile, the Democrats control tech and media, AI stonecolds prompts with "Trump" as "dangerous content", they want to ban everything off the Internet they don't like, and would oppress free speech with Canada's new hate speech laws if they could.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#117

Post by justsomehnguy »

hunter2_ wrote: post #76
phendrenad2 wrote: post #49

Why not allow liquor stores and other establishments that check IDs anyway issue a digital certificate that you are of age? Here's my ID, here's my pornhub account name, here's a service fee, digitally attest to the fact that I proved that I'm of legal age. Seems like the real motive here is deanonymization.

When someone of age consistently buys liquor for minors, they'll eventually get caught in many cases, due to the likely rambunctiousness of inexperienced drinkers. Would the same be true here?

> they'll eventually get caught in many cases

Can you share how exactly 'caught' and in how much 'many cases'?

I'm exceptionally skeptical this works for any settlement bigger than a 1000 people.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#118

Post by shrimp_emoji »

skhunted wrote: post #73
nhinck3 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence that this was a problem?

Providing access to hardcore porn to people regardless of their age is a problem.

It's not a problem unless you're a puritanical retard. It's actually one of the things that makes life worth living, like guns and liquor and trucks.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#119

Post by skhunted »

shrimp_emoji wrote: post #118
skhunted wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Providing access to hardcore porn to people regardless of their age is a problem.

It's not a problem unless you're a puritanical retard. It's actually one of the things that makes life worth living, like guns and liquor and trucks.

We don’t let children buy guns, drive trucks, or drink liquor. I suppose we are all puritanical retards.

Re: Pornhub prepares to block five more states rather than check IDs

#120

Post by Ferret7446 »

prirun wrote: post #91

It's really sad to me that our politicians (and other people pushing for this kind of regulation) think that viewing naked people online, even having sex, is more damaging to "the children" than seeing people's guts splayed out all over the place on TV and video games, heads chopped off with blood spurting everywhere, getting limbs chopped off, using machine guns to kill people, seeing kids severely bullied at school…

I think the people who support this (for the children) also support preventing children from seeing violence.

(And I agree that seeing either is bad for children, I just don't think requiring age verification actually helps in anyway.)

Post reply on HN