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

61–70 of 177 posts

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

#61

Post by Peroni »

cryptonector wrote: post #59
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 pe…

>You can insist on retail vendors accepting legal tender by law

That's a common misconception. In most jurisdictions retailers can set their own payment policies.

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

#62

Post by welshwelsh »

Diti wrote: post #41
Acrobatic_Road wrote: post #26

If only we had some kind of purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash that would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution.

How do you get that electronic cash in the first place without going through a financial institution? Possibly by trading with someone who already has electronic cash, I guess – but how do I know I’m not laundering the other person’s money, and/or financing terrorism or CSAM with my fiat money?

Ideally your employer would support paying your salary using electronic cash. Or you can offer goods and services in exchange for electronic cash.

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

#64

Post by xandrius »

dkersten wrote: post #53
xandrius wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Some people definitely do :D

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

#65

Post by fkyoureadthedoc »

baobabKoodaa wrote: post #46
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.

[flagged]

They certainly say they don't sell any PII data, but definitely do, at a minimum, sell de-identified aggregate transaction data. I wouldn't be surprised if there's some data broker that can buy and deanonymize data from them.

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

#66

Post by arprocter »

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.

I just checked and my statement says 'Steam', not what specific game was purchased

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

#67

Post by js8 »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #56
js8 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, it's not the same thing. Legalizing prostitution still involves real people which can be harmed during the act; replaying depictions in media does not.

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

#68

Post by freedomben »

> This is likely far from over: Collective Shout is no doubt feeling emboldened by a second public success in its efforts to police content on Steam specifically. The games I saw removed from Steam in this wave all featured risible content and suspect quality, but Collective Shout has a broader anti-pornography, even anti-expression remit that it has demonstrated in the past.

Yes indeed, a huge success like this will give them a big boost in motivation and funding for many, many years to come. IMHO we need to regulate away the credit card processing companies ability to discriminate like this, and while we're at it we should stop letting them heavily tax the entire economy

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

#69

Post by gjsman-1000 »

js8 wrote: post #67
gjsman-1000 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No, it's not the same thing. Legalizing prostitution still involves real people which can be harmed during the act; replaying depictions in media does not.

If they consented and signed up for the job, you’re now disinterested in their consent? You’re now saying they can’t consent to this?

And besides, it’s not like OF stalkers exist.

Post reply on HN