Live data from Hacker News

Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

ellsberg.substack.com

751–760 of 1001 posts

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#751
post #216

How exactly do these laws work if the servers are hosted outside of the US?

They don't, of course. These laws aren't here to protect children. They're just a step on the road to one of their (conservative Christian) goals: banning pornography entirely in the US.

Sounds like a great reason to set up a Great Porn Firewall and demand ID of anyone attempting to gain access to any IP outside of the USA

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#752
post #12

A bit off base. He's basically having a meltdown over what's actually a pretty narrow ruling about age verification. First, he claims the Court "nullified the First Amendment" for sex writing, but that's just not what happened. The Court explicitly said adults still have the right to access this stuff—they just need to show ID first, like buying beer. That's not "nullification." Second, Ellsberg acts like any sex sce…

It's a foot in the door law. First they just "ask for ID", then they "save it permanently for warrants", then they "must upload all ID to Texas' ID servers and a list of all pornography viewed" to protect the children from known deviants. These sorts do not stop at "ID verification", they want to morally control every aspect of your life down to your bedroom activities.

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#753

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might not be pushing for it, but certainly your fellow conservative Christians are. The problem with moralistic thinking is that it's stupid and it blows up, and we've known this for hundreds of years. What you view as moral means fuck-all. I don't particularly care if you think something is degenerate, and in fact by using a term like degenerate I respect you less as a person. So when morals are used as the sole…

No, some of them are. More evangelicals than my crowd. Morality bears directly on what we consider to be a just society, so I don’t care if you don’t care. You’re broadening the scope beyond this particular issue, where I’m guessing I agree with you. It’s not virtuous to act right because the state makes you, but the question of what we require and preclude is defined by our moral frameworks at some level. I’m not su…

[flagged]

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#754

All these ID check laws are out of hand. Parents are expecting the government, and random websites, to raise their kids. Why would anyone trust some random blog with their ID? If these laws move forward (and I don’t think they should), there needs to be a way to authenticate as over 18 without sending picture of your ID off to random 3rd parties, or giving actual personal details. I don’t want to give this data, and…

[deleted]

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#755

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This goes against the very ethos of the early web. We should not be normalizing any form of this extreme moral overreach.

Its also to little, to late- the smut is in the LLMs now and they can generate whatever the user wants - locally. So good luck censoring that.

Easy, now every site hosting LLMs weights requires age verification.

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#756

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re getting downvoted, likely because the people downvoting you dont realize that Project 2025 explicitly calls for the complete outlawing of pornography and the imprisonment of anyone who produces it. They also frame transgender ideology and LGBTQ+ educational materials as falling under “pornography”, essentially calling for these to be banned.

Here's the quote about their plans for transfolk: > Transgender people will see their existence denied and their rights stripped away under Project 2025. The authors equate "transgender ideology" to pornography, calling for it to be outlawed. While the far-right policy agenda cannot directly ban transgenderism, it aims to do so indirectly by labeling it as pornography, and then outlawing pornography itself - effectiv…

That's a piece on a third party site. Do you have an original source for the quote?

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#758
post #506
post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They wont allow minors to take out porn. Simply, they wont and it would be illegal for them.

You can read a book without taking it out.

Meaning anyone taller than 4’ can reach tedious essays about porn.

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#759

Earlier quoted context omitted.

normalization of what I view as degenerate sex acts Those "degenerate sex acts" were normal enough when the Bible was written that they were included in the Bible. Most of our ancestors would regard modern Americans as hideously prudish.

Something being normal doesn’t make it right. Obesity is normal. Shoplifting has become normal in many places. People getting drunk is normal. Normalcy doesn’t equal moral rectitude. Why do the opinions of my ancestors bear on that, and which ones are you talking about? Most of the ones I can think of, unless you run back to the days of tribal europe, would see the culture today as hideously liberalized. Regardless a…

[flagged]

Re: Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

#760

There was a NYT article a couple weeks ago about Chinese morality police doing mass arrests of erotica authors, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/28/world/asia/china-boys-lov... ( "Chinese Police Detain Dozens of Writers Over Gay Erotic Online Novels" ) [note article contains large images of erotica novel covers] But you'd *expect* that of the PRC; the US, wow, has it ever fallen fast and fallen hard.

[flagged]

If that were truly the goal we would either need a great firewall style internet filter or blocks on devices available to minors, since nothing about this approach works for websites outside of the US jurisdiction.

If you read the article there is a direct quote from Vought, one of the chief project 2025 architects, about how this is really a path to banning pornography. Which the project 2025 folks believe includes any discussion of lgbtq+ lifestyles.

Post reply on HN