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

E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

foxcarolina.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 172 posts

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#71

Post by stickfigure »

hattmall wrote: post #44
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I strongly disagree with this NC law, and others, your analogy is a bad one. As a society I think we've accepted that some things (cigarettes, alcohol, sex, etc.) should be restricted from children. That's a far cry from requiring ID every time I go to the grocery store. But, as long as I've been alive, you have had to show ID to purchase alcohol, and the sky hasn't fallen. Again, I think these types of laws ar…

You had to show ID to buy porn magazines, go in a strip club or even the adult video rental room. It's pretty insane that we have no check for an unlimited amount of free porn with all kinds of extremes. It fucks up a lot of kids (and adults). Showing porn to a random kid on the street would have you catch a charge if not something worse, but somehow on the Internet it's just fine?

> It fucks up a lot of kids (and adults).

That which is asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#72

Post by egypturnash »

This news article on a Fox affiliate site only mentions Pornhub. Did this originally link elsewhere?

edit: e621 is certainly doing this; this is from their front page right now:

Dec 31st: Due to the current legal situation in North Carolina and the uncertainty surrounding it, we will be blocking access to e621.net from North Carolina until we can consult with our legal counsel on this matter. We did not come to this decision lightly and we will do what we can, as we can, to rectify and remedy this situation so that we can restore access to those users that are affected by this matter. We sincerely apologize for this inconvenience and will have an update as soon as possible.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#73

Post by whatshisface »

hattmall wrote: post #67
whatshisface wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Based on the growth of some "romance boutiques," who seem to be able to open chain stores anywhere, the liability is nil.

They allow kids to go in?

To be honest, I don't know - but the billboards are everywhere and not subtle at all.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#75

Post by brucethemoose2 »

nostromo wrote: post #66

Wow, this moronic bill passed nearly unanimously. It's nice to see bipartisanship on display in North Carolina when it comes to the stupidest ideas. > Any commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes material harmful to minors on the internet from a website that contains a substantial portion of such material shall... That's a ridiculously vague standard. Google and Bing both distribute…

Perhaps its an example of horseshoe theory?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

US State legislators tend to be more politically extreme these days, AFAIK.

Or just good old "save the children," I guess? Where either party is afraid to make themselves look bad.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#76

Post by Gigachad »

brucethemoose2 wrote: post #36
dymk wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an incredible source of tagged training data - meticulously detailed and hand maintained

There's in fact a Stable Diffusion model trained on most of e621. Uh not sure what HN's linking rules are, but look up Furtastic. Though I understand and respect furrydom, I'm not a furry... But in its niche of generating anthropomorphic people, I still find the model to be incredible. Its got to be one of the most extensively trained, tagged and coherent SD 1.5 finetunes out there, which doesn't even surprise me TBH…

I'm not usually impressed by generated images. But the furry models are astounding. Right now my best signal for something being AI is that it's incredibly detailed by doesn't have a signature.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#77

Post by stickfigure »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #39
mjevans wrote: post #14

What if you had to show Government ID whenever you entered a grocery store, a library, a movie theater? What if you were tracked each time you consumed a video, a still image, an audio clip, or even a text message? What if the government kept a record of any or all of those checks? What if they arranged for third parties to commercialize that data so they could 'legally' end-run any restriction on domestic spying wit…

While I strongly disagree with this NC law, and others, your analogy is a bad one. As a society I think we've accepted that some things (cigarettes, alcohol, sex, etc.) should be restricted from children. That's a far cry from requiring ID every time I go to the grocery store. But, as long as I've been alive, you have had to show ID to purchase alcohol, and the sky hasn't fallen. Again, I think these types of laws ar…

At least here in the US, we don't legally restrict minors from having sex (with others of the same age). The other two are physical goods with well-studied and proven health effects. Porn is not like these things.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#78

Post by sapphicsnail »

sqrt_1 wrote: post #41
ethanbond wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean a town in Tennessee recently outlawed homosexuality in public. I can easily see this being applied to anything with LGBT material, sexual or not. That said, yeah, I get the motivation. I put this in a similar category as the regulatory response to Airbnb/Ubers of the world: it seems like a better outcome may have been possible if the companies didn’t totally and flagrantly shirk their social obligations to beg…

I don't think a town in Tennessee recently outlawed homosexuality in public, They just added: "No person shall knowingly while in a public space engage in indecent behavior, display, distribute, or broadcast indecent material, conduct indecent events, or facilitate any of the foregoing prohibited acts." Problem was that the referenced indecent statue definition included homosexuality, which was then removed from the…

What do you think the intent of the ordinance is? My aunt recently moved to Tennessee and as a trans woman, I am terrified of stepping foot in that state. It is clear we are not welcome there.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#79

Post by brucethemoose2 »

734573457 wrote: post #62
samstave wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reddit had a lot of dark subs and users for a very long time, and they kinda just swept it all under the rug. /r/spaced*cks, ViolentaCruz, others I cant recall, and the infamous /r/cannibals controversy with a reddit founder and CEO. Yeah, weird times - not its many bots - and interestingly, in the last year, a boatload of .in India subreddits for various aspects of their culture (like IdianMotorcycles, Weird train b…

This is true but I do wonder if this is where the interesting part of the question around platforms lies. Dark stuff aside, reddit has a lot of porn period. If challenged, I wonder if they would be able to compromise by introducing an age-verification requirement for specific subreddits. Since otherwise it seems like they'd either have to just outright block traffic from places with similar laws or go the imgur route…

Reddit being full of porn is an open secret. I bet its not something they advertise to banks and investors.

I think they would purge rather than confirm the presence of it in any way.

Re: E621, Pornhub, and others block North Carolina residents

#80

Post by maxbond »

User23 wrote: post #63
maxbond wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [P]eople across the political spectrum think porn is addictive, psychologically damaging, and leads to sexual dysfunction. I think everyone acknowledges it can be, but it's a pretty distinct cohort that holds it necessarily is. Definitely not that it inevitably leads to sexual dysfunction, that's just patently untrue. Most adults consume pornography, and for the vast majority of them it isn't a problem. Every adult…

> Most adults consume pornography, and for the vast majority of them it isn't a problem. Got a source for this? Because everything I look at suggests that much like alcohol, a relatively small number of habitual users account for the vast majority of consumption.

Not to hand. That's my belief from my observation. I looked for statistics for about 10 minutes, but didn't really find good information. I suspect this area is under researched. Happy to look at any sources you want to link.

Both of these can be true, however. I imagine most adults sometimes drink alcohol too. Personally I might go weeks or months without watching porn, it's not something I generally do everyday. People who do would blow my usage out of the water (which, to be clear, is fine, you do you).

As a thought experiment - we all agree that lots of people watch porn, right? So if it leads to addiction or sexual dysfunction at even a rate of 1% or 2%, that would be an epidemic. If there are tens of millions of porn consumers in the US (which I think is very conservative), we'd expect hundreds of thousands of people to develop issues.

So - where are they? Do we have a source for that?

Post reply on HN