Pornhub just purged all unverified content from the platform

Because we've seen this so clearly with fake celebrity porn?

And those are folks with the actual resources to go after it in courts.

> In most cases, the people with the motive an ability to make machine-generated porn of a particular person will be relatively easy to find.

I just find this incredibly difficult to believe, unless this "ban on user content" extends to a ban on general computing. And maybe that's where we'll end up, but I think that's a much more malicious result than generated porn. Or maybe anonymity will disappear online, which I find fairly scary, but is another clear thrust we're seeing.

Also - What about the absolutely bonkers industry that will be consent based generated porn? We're already headed that route now with 3d scanning of actors/actresses, and lord knows - I think a lot of folks in the porn industry would be happy to get digitally imaged and then not have to actually engage in the physical process of making porn.

---

I think this is a real and genuine ethics question that we don't have good answers to right now.

I don't really have a problem with PH pulling down anonymous user content (hell - private company, they can make their own decisions) but I also don't really think it's going to stop this kind of behavior, and it certainly doesn't untangle complex social questions around what's right and wrong in this space.

I will say - I think we're undergoing another sexual revolution right now, it's just more subtle because it's less about what folks do or wear in public, and more about what folks do in private.

I'm not entirely sure how you legislate on this topic either - What's art? What's porn? can you really "Know it when you see it"? What if you unintentionally make imagery that just resembles a real person?

Those are all questions that depend on social context at the time they're legislated on, and they set a tone going forward.

Basically - My whole point is that this is not some clear win, and again - I'm not entirely sure there's a win anywhere in this discussion. I think this is just PH skirting around the issue for monetary reasons because they happen to be big enough at this point that they can do without anonymous submissions.

I will say - I'm fairly sure any "it's simple and this will solve it!" response is utter bullshit.

Ive personally taken dozens of reports where people were 100% sure and disgusted, even from some moderators who were supposed to know more about this - and it turned out the people were all over 18.

anecdotal indeed.

I'm sure we can find stories on both sides of this argument.

I lived in South East Asia for a while and the cell phone footage of sexual interactions between middle school students is what I reported. These are girls wearing middle school uniforms embroidered with the school's name on the shirt [1] which indicates that the woman is under 18.

Nobody would bother to replicate the uniform for 2 minutes of shaky cell phone footage. It was underage material. Plain and simple.

[1] - https://favpng.com/png_view/t-shirt-t-shirt-school-uniforms-...

My own ex-girlfriend's photographs were uploaded to XHamster by her ex-boyfriend along with a copy of her passport. She's 17 in the images. Took us over a year to get them taken down.

To these commenters: are you unaware of the issue of child porn, revenge porn, stolen content* and videos of actual rapes being uploaded to Pornhub, and Pornhub making money off of this content? If you are aware of this (the core issue), you should be grappling with these issues rather than ignoring them.

Sure I’ll answer your questions, but you go first & answer mine :)

Agree that jail is better, if that’s an option I’ll take it. But if the options are “let a company make money off rape/cp/etc” or don’t let them do that, I’ll take the latter.

> scale.

This is the error. The problem isn't scale. If YouTube has 500 hours of video uploaded per minute and some other site has only one minute of video uploaded per minute, the smaller site is no better able to handle it, because they don't have proportionally any more staff than YouTube.

The actual problem is marginal cost.

If you have a Walmart store, it probably costs over a million dollars to construct it, and takes in several million dollars a year in revenue. A $10,000 fire suppression system may be expensive, but it's manageable. And if there are a thousand Walmart stores all over the country that each need a $10,000 fire suppression system, that scales just fine. You have a choice between an unsafe Walmart and a safe Walmart whose proprietors make slightly less profit.

The marginal profit from hosting a given video is pennies. That means any solution that costs more than pennies isn't a choice between unsafe and safe video hosting, it's a choice between having video hosting and not having it. Scale has nothing to do with it; greater or lesser scale doesn't save you from a cost that exceeds your entire margin.