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

Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 177 posts

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#51

Post by bhaskara2 »

Aerroon wrote: post #44
NewsaHackO wrote: post #11

Is there anything that can be done with the weaponization of the payment system? Cryptocurrency as obviously failed, but is there really no possible recourse when every traditional payment method seemingly colludes to not take the business for whatever reason?

Why can't governments do it? Have a digital cash. Something that works like cash that the government runs. They already handle physical currency, so why not digital? Add in some really heavy handed rules that government can't use it to spy and maybe it will work. Also, these people really should be shamed for their censorship.

congrats you just invented CBDC (Central Bank Digital Currency)

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#52

Post by rs186 »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #11

Is there anything that can be done with the weaponization of the payment system? Cryptocurrency as obviously failed, but is there really no possible recourse when every traditional payment method seemingly colludes to not take the business for whatever reason?

Need some hard evidence of "cryptocurrency failed". Two counterexamples that I can think of, as someone who doesn't even pay close attention to it:

* PornHub has been only taking cryptocurrency for payment for a while, and they seem to be doing ok

* The US just passed GENIUS Act with somewhat bipartisan support -- probably not even imaginable one year ago

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#53

Post by dkersten »

xandrius wrote: post #36
NewsaHackO wrote: post #11

Is there anything that can be done with the weaponization of the payment system? Cryptocurrency as obviously failed, but is there really no possible recourse when every traditional payment method seemingly colludes to not take the business for whatever reason?

In what way failed? Because it's like saying P2P failed because the big corps don't like it and try their best to stop it, while still existing for quite a while.

In the sense that people don’t really use it to buy things with.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#54

Post by Sharlin »

tmaly wrote: post #10

It seems like we need two things. First, some type of universal standard to id the country of legal residence of a user. Second, some type of way to know what laws a company needs to comply with to operate in a jurisdiction. There are too many laws across different jurisdictions that makes it really challenging for companies to offer goods and services.

The entire point is that this has nothing about complying with laws. It’s an entirely arbitrary, extrajudicial power.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#55

Post by freedomben »

whatshisface wrote: post #35

One of the reasons that credit card companies have an incentive to keep this stuff off people's statements is that they sell your credit card histories on the data market, and would not want you to have a strong reason to want to stop them.

Hey that's a pretty interesting thought actually. I hadn't considered that, but "follow the incentives and assume rationality" is generally (in my experience) the best way to try and understand why people do what they do. This theory definitely makes a lot of sense from that lens.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#56

Post by gjsman-1000 »

js8 wrote: post #34
ted_bunny wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also an ideologically motivated misframing. It ignores any arguments about the actual harms of this sort of media and pretends it's all about pearl-clutching.

What are the harms of pornographic media? To me it seems pretty clear that they help reduce sexual violence (why risk jail if I can safely indulge in a fantasy), and I wouldn't be surprised that countries with pornographic bans are more misogynistic.

This is like arguing legalizing prostitution prevents rape; and actually, it should be mandatory to allow it for that purpose.

If we had a brothel in every city and in the back of every gas station, surely this would work out better for everyone.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#57

Post by welshwelsh »

tmaly wrote: post #10

It seems like we need two things. First, some type of universal standard to id the country of legal residence of a user. Second, some type of way to know what laws a company needs to comply with to operate in a jurisdiction. There are too many laws across different jurisdictions that makes it really challenging for companies to offer goods and services.

We need exactly the opposite: it should be impossible to determine the location of an Internet user. The fact that a user's IP address generally reveals their country is a massive flaw in the design of the Internet.

The only way to circumvent jurisdiction-specific laws is to make them impossible to enforce.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#59

Post by cryptonector »

NewsaHackO wrote: post #11

Is there anything that can be done with the weaponization of the payment system? Cryptocurrency as obviously failed, but is there really no possible recourse when every traditional payment method seemingly colludes to not take the business for whatever reason?

Not really. You can insist on retail vendors accepting legal tender by law, but these things are online, and online it means every payment can and _will_ be tracked. As with everything you do in public, online payments can and _will_ be used against you (in the labor marketplace, in court, in... everything, to control you and your habits). More people will accept or insist on policing of your and their habits than people who will resist it.
Post reply on HN