71–80 of 229 posts
[flagged]
This is just the beginning. Edit: really confused as to why this simple statement is flagged
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not unless that newspaper is "more than one-third sexual material".
So pornhub needs to see how many terabytes of content they host and use AI to generate 2x more terabytes of cat pictures and add them to a compliance tab on their home page now? Seems annoying but not impossible to do. Edit: I am happy to build a cat pic to porn ratio audit company if anyone is interested. I want to participate in the funniest regulatory process this will create
I don't understand how this makes sense.
Somehow you have to provide an ID to watch porn in Texas, but a 10 year old kid can go to specs.com and just lie about their age and view imagery of a controlled substance. My wine club just delivers wine without verifying my ID, so a 10 year old child could just do the same with a parent's credit card. I don't understand how this makes sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But what counts as obscene is not well defined. Forget newspapers you could have to age gate Wikipedia
What counts as obscene has been defined for a while. And I don't think Wikipedia would count as obscene by the Miller test. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_test . Whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards", would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest, . Whether the work depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct or excretory fun…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"...and if we let gay people get married soon people will be marrying their dogs!" I do think there are legitimate reasons to not like the bill, but what you said is classic slippery slope
Because .... ITS A SLIPPERY SLOPE, that the republicans in charge and religious right wing have shown they are perfectly OK with pushing for, shit its funny how project 2025 is like 60% implemented and people are still acting like its all some conspiracy and this weird religious right wing shit isnt actually happening
To be clear, I support all of those things, but the point I'm making is that saying it's a slippery slope is a bad argument because A) the next steps are often based on opinion and not fact and B) what one person sees as a slippery slope another person sees as progress and growth.
I'm not arguing in favor of this Texas bill (I have pretty mixed feelings about it honestly). I'm just saying the argument the first person made is a bad argument.
I know it's unlikely to happen because of America's (misguided IMO) extreme distaste for digital government ID, but it seems like the current solution (people uploading pictures of their driver's license to porn websites) is worse in every possible way.
I'm more interested in the downsides of not having ID verification. We have an entire generation of humans raised with effectively no verification going back 30 years now. So what is the data? Why is a high barrier so important that every adult has to annoyingly climb over it with all sorts of friction?
One consequence that concerns me greatly is that men in the generation you're describing routinely choke their sexual partners. I remember a decade or two ago, when I thought it was ridiculous that porn might teach people to be abusive - I regret to admit that I was catastrophically wrong. ( https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/sep/02... )
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One consequence that concerns me greatly is that men in the generation you're describing routinely choke their sexual partners. I remember a decade or two ago, when I thought it was ridiculous that porn might teach people to be abusive - I regret to admit that I was catastrophically wrong. ( https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/article/2024/sep/02... )
[flagged]