141–150 of 172 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 'internet tax' will not last, either, I fear. Loads of VPNs are simply, someone other than the local ISP gets your data. Mullvad seems trustworthy, as an exception to this, and who else? And even then, Mullvad faces issues from websites and censorious countries trying to block it and bother its users all the time.
What about a VPS and ssh -D ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> In my 20s I was promiscious and lived what I saw in pornography, only later in life I learned about normal sex. News flash. That is normal in your 20s and always has been .
Only for the last few decades, this has almost always been a taboo across all of humanity, this high level promiscuity you speak of. Hardly a normative experience across space and time.
Humans, for the vast majority of the time they existed, were largely free range. Lots and lots of sex. I assure you, hunter gatherers were not monogamous suburbanites who attended their white Christian church.
The choice citizens have now is between an 'internet licence' (submit ID's to myriad sites), or an 'internet tax' (VPN). Super annoying! Given Australia doesn't even require Age Verification on porn sites (only on social media sites), the incentives hint this was strongly supported by legacy media (90% of Aussie media is owned by two companies, Newscorp and Nine Entertainment). The internet licence will make it diffi…
> Given Australia doesn't even require Age Verification on porn sites (only on social media sites) Am I only one who sees loophole in creating a social media site, which will be a porn site first? FaceHub or Pornbook.
While I'll immediately believe their complaints about political shenanigans and publicity stunts going on in the EU commission, this post very obviously intentionally ignores good-faith efforts at building out privacy-preserving age verification using ZKP. They're laying into a strawman - with gusto - when they attack age verification methods that are objectively worse than the commission's best proposal. It's hurtin…
Privacy-preserving good-faith efforts requiring a Google/Apple account and a phone passing Play Integrity (or an iPhone)
While I'll immediately believe their complaints about political shenanigans and publicity stunts going on in the EU commission, this post very obviously intentionally ignores good-faith efforts at building out privacy-preserving age verification using ZKP. They're laying into a strawman - with gusto - when they attack age verification methods that are objectively worse than the commission's best proposal. It's hurtin…
Privacy-preserving good-faith efforts requiring a Google/Apple account and a phone passing Play Integrity (or an iPhone)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, because law-abiding companies can't offer tools to circumvent the law. As the article says, all this means is that law-abiding porn sites (that, for example, respond to requests to delete CSAM and revenge porn) will go bankrupt and everybody will be driven to sketchypron.xxx instead.
So radar detectors for cars don't exist?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Yes. Sending your government issued id to random porn sites is asking for your identity to be stolen. Ah, so you don't understand what's being proposed. Let me clear that up. The implementation proposed by the EU does not involve your government issued id, but rather an openid style handoff to a trusted government entity, where you verify your identity with your government, followed by a handback along with a proof…
A lot of disgusting legal porn exists. Revenge porn is just boring amateur porn that doesn't have consent attached. Both parties may or may not have knowledge of it and someone decides to share after the relationship ends. It's part of their relationship, its a real event that shows a moment of closeness and its an expression of real love. It doesn't interest me but to find you think its so disgusting sounds fake. Pe…
Hello! I think it's incredibly disgusting. Uploading intimate videos of your partner (past or present) is an absolute breach of that individual's privacy and trust. Additionally, it absolutely is NOT legal. I think it's quite alarming if someone doesn't find it disgusting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why don't they do things that are within their control. Such as mandatory site filtering options. So the same place you pay your bill, you can also set which sites you want to be blocked by an "admin" password. Or are they afraid that people will add tracking.facebook.com to the block list? The chances of the kids stealing the admin password are about as likely as the kids stealing your age verification password that…
Parents dont want to be the "bad guy" or parents in any real sense.
I’m not arguing for either side, just pointing out a reality of the situation.
I wish there was a honest discussion, I am with them about parents not giving a shit and pushing away responsibility. The idea of supervision in education institutions is good as well. The kids in my family were well protected and supervised, they got into contact with hardcore porn at the age of 6 when other kids had access to smartphones and exposed them to it. I would like to see a honest discussion about the impa…
Why don't they do things that are within their control. Such as mandatory site filtering options. So the same place you pay your bill, you can also set which sites you want to be blocked by an "admin" password. Or are they afraid that people will add tracking.facebook.com to the block list? The chances of the kids stealing the admin password are about as likely as the kids stealing your age verification password that…
I have suggested publicly in the past that there should be a set of community blocker bots that are transparent about what they do and do not block and they are easy to fork and change for this sort of thing. And parents can choose which level of blocking their networks adhere to.
Of course they could just block all things sex for the moment -
But parents have not demanded this.
I imagine that way back in the day when if the porn via cable boxes was enabled by default, many parents would not have chosen to just give their kids one in the living room and one in their bedroom, many houses put one in every room of the house.
And yet they know that these phone devices can bring up porn and many worse things - and they just hand them over with an unlimited data plan like its nothing.
Many years ago, some parents could argue they did not know there was naughty things on the telephone like connected to the computers, but today's parents grew up with the porn on the internet and most partents just give them unlimited anytime access to all the things.
If the zealots riling up the churches and mom groups and such truly believe that porn is proven scientifically destruction to the children, why are the parents not in trouble for giving these devices to the kids? Like giving a car and alcohol and unlimited ammo to what 90% of kids?
I do believe part of the problem has been non-great options for blocking. (I have heard there are more options today than there were when I researched this a bit 10 years ago - back then disney circle (too expensive) and an open source dns poisoning thing I couldn't figure out how to setup)
But I think we also need to be honest that all parents know the porn is there (and worse, they know they have cameras on these devices and things like snap have been around so long everyone knows there are worse things that can be done with these devices) - and yet people have not demanded non-camera, all adult blocked devices, in fact they have been buying them up and paying premium prices to provide unlimited 24/7 access.
So the few people who are getting their ego stroked by the choir for saving the children, it would seem being in their bubbling is preventing them from seeing the reality of the people's choices, and providing better alternatives and education.
It seems every year each group needs a boogie man to raise money and get the likes and shares before campaign season. It's a shame they are willing to slay the rights of people just to get some temporary popularity - and likely knowing it's not going to fix the thing, but it is going to cost time and money for many - but they don't care about the masses.