361–370 of 457 posts
We don't even have to dive into content aggregation/recommendation algorithms to realize how terrible this is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I stand by what I actually wrote: that they did everything feasible to remove and report illegal content. I mean they didn't even do that. Wasn't their enforcement team pretty small? The original op-ed said it was ~80 people. In any case it was inadequate. > but rather an effort to prevent said content from being uploaded in the first place. PornHub chose a model that made it impossible for them to deal with their…
>Businesses don't have the right to make compliance optional or inadequate if it doesn't work for their business model. They have to pick a business model that can be compliant. Not to be snarky, but isn't the the SV business model. Facebook 'are not a publisher', because editors cost too much. Uber are 'not an employer', because proper benefits cost too much..etc ad infinitum
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the same crap as the ad-pocalypse. Journalists with an agenda use a disingenuous tactic, if they have a problem with a person or entity, they'll call up their sponsors, business partners, vendors, etc, and say "we're writing an article on X's platform which has been found to have (controversial material framed in a negative context), are we to believe that you're supportive and would your company care to comment…
It's easy to criticise the article in general terms, but what specifically did you find problematic with the article itself? Go ahead and have a read, I'll wait. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/04/opinion/sunday/pornhub-ra...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the same crap as the ad-pocalypse. Journalists with an agenda use a disingenuous tactic, if they have a problem with a person or entity, they'll call up their sponsors, business partners, vendors, etc, and say "we're writing an article on X's platform which has been found to have (controversial material framed in a negative context), are we to believe that you're supportive and would your company care to comment…
It's easy to criticise the article in general terms, but what specifically did you find problematic with the article itself? Go ahead and have a read, I'll wait. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/04/opinion/sunday/pornhub-ra...
https://newrepublic.com/article/160488/nick-kristof-holy-war...
I've never heard a good argument against prostitution. The arguments that I hear are against trafficking, rape, child molestation; which are all non-sequiturs: true and valid statements that do not support the argument itself. Can anyone here argue against prostitution per se? I'll listen.
> true and valid statements that do not support the argument itself How about the argument that if prostitution is legal, it's possible for an illegally coercive (trafficked) business to pose as legitimate; whereas if prostitution is not legal, any appearance of prostitution can warrant scrutiny.
Some people offer things for sale which they don't have any right to sell. That doesn't imply that those who do have that right should be prevented from exercising it just to make things easier for law enforcement. You do more direct harm by unjustly prohibiting the activity than you stand to (possibly) prevent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think of it the other way around. Sex workers can finally go “legit” via OF and can stop fucking random people.
On the street, sex workers compete with the local availability and even the most expensive workers are limited by time alone. On the internet, the have (had?) to compete with the prettiest and best people in the business and these people can have far more customers. So I honestly doubt that there is much mobility between these two jobs.
A friend of mine did exactly that. She isn’t rich but she can pay her bills.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Think of it the other way around. Sex workers can finally go “legit” via OF and can stop fucking random people.
Most of them can’t do nearly as much as of when fucking people full time, and most of that part can’t even make a living on OF. It is unlikely “the other way around”, considering insights available out there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I stand by what I actually wrote: that they did everything feasible to remove and report illegal content. I mean they didn't even do that. Wasn't their enforcement team pretty small? The original op-ed said it was ~80 people. In any case it was inadequate. > but rather an effort to prevent said content from being uploaded in the first place. PornHub chose a model that made it impossible for them to deal with their…
>Businesses don't have the right to make compliance optional or inadequate if it doesn't work for their business model. They have to pick a business model that can be compliant. Not to be snarky, but isn't the the SV business model. Facebook 'are not a publisher', because editors cost too much. Uber are 'not an employer', because proper benefits cost too much..etc ad infinitum
I totally agree with you, it is. Responsibility is a barrier to scaling and other selfish goals, so their "clever hack" is to try to be as irresponsible as they can get away with.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best argument "against prostitution" is the moral argument against consuming it: you don't and _can't_ know if the person you're paying for is too poor or too wasted to be able to choose to participate, or if they're being threatened with violence into participating by a pimp, for example. Coerced sexual activity with another person is r-pe (as opposed to, say, working at Burger King, which might be coerced by th…
Do you think enjoying the product of all coerced labor is wrong, or only sexual coerced labor?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If there really are minors on there, I'm glad they're being forced to clean up their act. Downvote me all you want for feeling that way.
How old does a person have to be to start deserving blame for their choices of sexual activity? Can you come off anonymous and let me know?