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

221–229 of 229 posts

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#221

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

devilbunny wrote: post #219
pyuser583 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have strongly explored such options, and decided against this approach.

I would be interested to know why, if you don’t mind sharing.

Not the parent but I raised 5 and spent lots of time with their educators.

A school board meeting comes with limitations on what can be communicated. It often isn't a good fit to introduce new factors because there is no time learn and evaluate them properly.

School boards are commonly composed of non-technical people. They will be limited in their ability to judge the risks that are presented. Besides time, they'll need to have access to (and trust) qualified people of good judgment. It's a lot of prequalifiers.

And all of the above aside, school board positions have recently become appealing to agenda-driven bad actors. If they happen to be on your board, whatever you present will be viewed thru the lens of their agenda. Good outcomes tend to starve in that environment.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#222

Post by ndriscoll »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #216
ndriscoll wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They linked the law right there. Yes. > $10,000 per instance when the entity retains identifying information in violation of Section 129B.002(b); $10k per instance . If you have 1M users and retain their info, you're potentially facing a $10B fine. The sites that were protesting these laws were saying they're concerned about such retention, so no doubt they're glad to know that they and their partners are banned from…

That seems like it'd be easy to avoid if you're a small operator. Set up some embarrassing porn site, scrape user details and sell them to a separate company (likely controlled by yourself). Then close the porn business as soon as there's any chance that you'll face investigation and instead work on getting individuals to pay you for not publishing their embarrassing kinks.

I'm not sure that criminal extortion is a great strategy to avoid civil fines, but I suppose as an individual you should just avoid giving your information to any business not large enough to have a CCO.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#223

Post by pyuser583 »

devilbunny wrote: post #219
pyuser583 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have strongly explored such options, and decided against this approach.

I would be interested to know why, if you don’t mind sharing.

I know the school board members and local reporters. It’s a small town. Everybody knows everybody.

School board meetings are already filled with too many folks putting on partisan displays.

I think the message would be combined with other messages, and would not make anything better.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#224

Post by devilbunny »

pyuser583 wrote: post #223
devilbunny wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be interested to know why, if you don’t mind sharing.

I know the school board members and local reporters. It’s a small town. Everybody knows everybody. School board meetings are already filled with too many folks putting on partisan displays. I think the message would be combined with other messages, and would not make anything better.

That was why I said “before it starts”. I wouldn’t put it on the public agenda for that reason, at least until you had discussed it with the members privately first.

Edit: but in a small town I could see why you would be extra-cautious.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#225

Post by [deleted] »

devilbunny wrote: post #224
pyuser583 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the school board members and local reporters. It’s a small town. Everybody knows everybody. School board meetings are already filled with too many folks putting on partisan displays. I think the message would be combined with other messages, and would not make anything better.

That was why I said “before it starts”. I wouldn’t put it on the public agenda for that reason, at least until you had discussed it with the members privately first. Edit: but in a small town I could see why you would be extra-cautious.

[deleted]

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#226

Post by TZubiri »

anigbrowl wrote: post #170
codedokode wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be not very reliable because kids could take parents' card under some excuse (I want to ride an electric scooter, they allow only adult users so I need a card).

If they can do taht they can probably make copies of their parents ID too

I'm not an expert but it would be helpful to look into the similar field of gambling. I read that there's lots of teenagers that are gambling and presumably they would evade controls in the same way, use parent's credit card or get them to fund a wallet of sorts. And maybe steal their parent's ID and use that for verification.

High tech verification that requires the ID to be photographed along with a facial verification largely solve this problem I believe, but I imagine kids go to gambling sites that are either unregulated or loosely regulated in some sketchy jurisdiction (which can be accessed with VPNs even if banned in a country.

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#227

Post by pixxel »

stego-tech wrote: post #189

What's worse is that combined with the ruling in Mahmoud v Taylor, age verification can now be justified against anything considered "adult" or "pornographic" in nature - including LGBTQ+ storybooks, information on abortion or sexual health, discussion about HIV, or even just political dissidence if a state wants to reach particularly far. "Adult content" is nebulous and vague on purpose , and one party is taking adv…

[dead]

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#228

Post by mariusor »

AngryData wrote: post #213

This is just "Papers Please!" for the digital world. Does your cable TV or satellite box require ID verification for skinimax shows? Didn't think so. Do you want to submit your ID to every other site and user profile? Because that is where this is obviously going. This is a bullshit law that won't help anyone while harming millions, kids see most porn on non-porn websites anyways.

Are you sure it doesn't? Don't you need a contract with the cable company to get cable in general?

Re: US Supreme Court Upholds Texas Porn ID Law

#229

Post by nomel »

ndsipa_pomu wrote: post #214
nomel wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's silly to think that any VPN isn't spying on you, for profit or for government compliance.

It might help short term profit, but ultimately a VPN company relies on their customers trusting it, so spying is likely to hurt them - once a reputation gets trashed their customers are going to switch. Government compliance depends on which government has jurisdiction, so it makes a lot of sense to avoid authoritarian jurisdictions. e.g. NordVPN was originally Lithuanian, but is now based in Panama due to its priva…

> It might help short term profit, but ultimately a VPN company relies on their customers trusting it

I read that as, the best long term financial move would be to secretly work with the government. ;)

Post reply on HN