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

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

ellsberg.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 1001 posts

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

#771

Post by ojosilva »

kfajdsl wrote: post #219
root_axis wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, but it seems like things are already moving in this direction. For example, FL has a similar state law regarding pornography, and the response from many porn sites has been to comply or block FL IPs rather than fight it up to the supreme court. I guess someone will do it eventually, but I suspect there is an assumption that they'd be wasting their time and money to do so.

Yeah I don't think a business is going to try to force the issue when a geoblock is simple to implement. If it happens, it's probably going to be some kind of advocacy group pushing it.

Until someone files suit on the commonly known ineffectiveness of geolocating IPs to try to force ID checks instead.

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

#772

Post by evilsetg »

andsoitis wrote: post #136
api wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devils advocate: parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device. I run a pi-hole that blocks ads and porn, but that’s way beyond the technical capability of probably 95% of people. There are some commercial products but they are expensive and also take time and at least a little tech ability to set up. … and of course…

> parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device Tough luck, I say. If you’re going to bring humans into this world, you better do a great job at it and not externalize responsibility or create a nuisance for others.

Every human being creates nuisance sometimes. The only winning move in your game is not to live.

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

#773

Post by [deleted] »

VBprogrammer wrote: post #275
al_borland wrote: post #10

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…

The slippery slope from here to banning under 18s looking at websites discussing suicidal thoughts, transgender issues, homosexually and onto anything some group of middle age mothers decide isn't appropriate seems dangerously anti-fallacitical.

[deleted]

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

#774

Post by kvgr »

al_borland wrote: post #10

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…

Everybody will get a chip implant for 18th birthday. Solved ;)

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

#775

Post by esperent »

realusername wrote: post #686
nikanj wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And honestly, with the advent of AI spam everywhere, I'd be quite happy to visit a version of the internet where everyone is a certified real person

You already have that with Cloudflare checking almost every single website on earth, as you can see, that doesn't work.

Clicking on pictures of motorcycles, while annoying, is a very different thing than having to show your ID.

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

#776

Post by continuational »

andsoitis wrote: post #136
api wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Devils advocate: parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device. I run a pi-hole that blocks ads and porn, but that’s way beyond the technical capability of probably 95% of people. There are some commercial products but they are expensive and also take time and at least a little tech ability to set up. … and of course…

> parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device Tough luck, I say. If you’re going to bring humans into this world, you better do a great job at it and not externalize responsibility or create a nuisance for others.

Remember that everything you have is the result of other people bringing humans into this world.

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

#777

Post by briandear »

The EU is far ahead of Texas on this. Spain is launching a “porn passport” system (Cartera Digital Beta) using government-issued digital ID to verify age, and France has already attempted something similar. Under the EU’s Digital Services Act, platforms—including porn sites—must implement age checks for EU users regardless of where the site is based. And this isn’t being led by “conservative Christians”—Spain’s Socialist PM Pedro Sánchez is pushing it. I know we’re talking “America” here, but this isn’t some puritanical American concept.

This article overreads the Supreme Court’s decision. It upheld a narrow Texas law requiring age verification to access adult content, applying intermediate scrutiny and emphasizing in-state regulatory authority. It didn’t grant states power to prosecute across borders, nor did it change existing limits on state jurisdiction.

The argument relies on a stack of fallacies:

Post hoc — assumes the ruling causes harms that depend on future, hypothetical laws.

Slippery slope — claims this leads to extraterritorial prosecution, which the ruling doesn’t support.

Appeal to fear — frames state level regulation as existential threat without legal basis.

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

#779

Post by esperent »

hattmall wrote: post #665
kelnos wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flip it on its head. An age verification requirement might stop your 12-year-old from accessing a porn site headquartered or hosted in the US, but it will do nothing to keep your kid from finding porn on any of the thousands (tens of thousands? more?) of websites hosted in various other countries who don't care about this sort of thing. These sites are (or will be, if US-based sites become inaccessible) just as easy…

It's not about blocking it all. It's about blocking some, removing the monetary incentives to entice children from major players. It's about stopping some of the addiction and damaging effects. Just like we limit alcohol but kids still drink, or vape etc. They still do it, but it requires more effort and that barrier can be a very real barrier to addiction formation.

> It's about stopping some of the addiction and damaging effects

I used to think this was a valid point, but I read something that changed my opinion completely. Pornhub, plus other large sites, have a lot of attention on them. They're a long way from perfect but they do self police, probably far more than anyone here knows, because they don't want to get banned. If you get rid of them, you're boosting smaller and far nastier sites that don't self regulate anywhere near the same amount.

To state it simply, if you block Pornhub, curious children will still find porn, but it'll be far worse.

It's not the same as banning sale of physical items like cigarettes. It's more like if you banned cigarettes but then all the children went and got black market cigarettes that are 50% asbestos.

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

#780

Post by BoiledCabbage »

mixmastamyk wrote: post #727
poly2it wrote: post #517

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When did you grow up?

Why is the comment downvoted so much? Am GenX.

Not having access to the internet during childhood 30-40 years ago is very different than not having access to the internet as a child now.

I think most people are taking your description of your experience being positive as a recommendation - one that is very unrealistic in modern times.

Post reply on HN