Live data from Hacker News

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

ellsberg.substack.com

831–840 of 1001 posts

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

#831
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An id card is a bearer token. You can get an anonymous, cryptographically signed, certified legal bearer token confirming your age only , or identity or whatever by a centralized service, be it government or high trust private organizations who need to verify your identity anyway like banks. With some smarts you can probably make such a token yourself so the root bearer token issuer doesn’t have the one you use to br…

Which inevitably can be deanonymized after a simple law change, mandating the required data to be reported.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/privacypass/about/

Perhaps a system like Privacy Pass would be ideal. Where a verifier generates a verified client a number of redeemable signed tokens for a session, but when presented by a client, the site doesn't know who that token was issued to, but they know they authenticated this person and can verify they made the token. Therefore they get access.

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

#832

Others have said this, I'm sure, but this will move past porn _quickly_. Once there is agreed-up age verification for pornography, much of the professional internet will require identity verification to do _anything_. This is one of the bigger nails in the coffin for the free internet, and this true whether or not you're happy with all the pornography out there.

This is why they are doing it. Goverments wants ID-check before anyone uses the internet. So they pick a topic like pornography to get their foot through the door. It's salami tactics.

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

#833

Others have said this, I'm sure, but this will move past porn _quickly_. Once there is agreed-up age verification for pornography, much of the professional internet will require identity verification to do _anything_. This is one of the bigger nails in the coffin for the free internet, and this true whether or not you're happy with all the pornography out there.

Already in the works: Australia is quietly introducing 'unprecedented' age checks for search engines like Google - https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-07-11/age-verification-sear...

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

#834

That Tennessee law is particularly crazy: > (a) Pubic hair, vulva, vagina, penis, testicles, anus, or nipple of a human body Naked bodies do not harm anyone . This is US puritanism at its peek. Glad the author also pointed out the hypocrisy of treating nudity as more obscene than violence.

Does that also outlaw medical content?

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

#835
post #149

We've had kids accessing an Internet without any working age barriers for over 30 years now. There have been problems, be that grooming, Facebook parties and maybe addiction to TikTok. But being able to access adult content be that sexual or violent in nature doesn't really seem to have had much negative consequences. Sure I wouldn't want my 10 year old to see 2 girls 1 cup - but I reckon it wouldn't be the end of th…

So, you're saying that children/adults nowadays are not negatively affected by early sexual exposure? These are some of the negative effects, what early sexual exposure can cause: - unrealistic or harmful beliefs about sex, intimacy, and gender roles - sex disconnected from intimacy, respect, consent - anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, body image issues - broken families (one parent missing), divorce - problems w…

Wait until you hear what issues the ubiquitous dihydrogen monoxide can cause! https://web.archive.org/web/19961031232918/http://media.circ...

These points would greatly benefit from being put into perspective

You can't seriously think a significant percentage of people are emotionally unstable because they looked up porn of their own will at an age of their own choosing, even if I trust that it can be listed as a contributing factor for some infinitesimal fraction of those with that issue

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

#836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Age verification is easy. Age verification that leaves no record, is anonymous, and not circumvent-able is difficult. In the physical world it relies on the fallibility of human memory. No such luck with replicated databases.

That verification doesn't even exist in meatspace though. We are setting an impossibly high bar to try to weasel out of implementing anything.

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

#837
post #835

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, you're saying that children/adults nowadays are not negatively affected by early sexual exposure? These are some of the negative effects, what early sexual exposure can cause: - unrealistic or harmful beliefs about sex, intimacy, and gender roles - sex disconnected from intimacy, respect, consent - anxiety, depression, low self-esteem, body image issues - broken families (one parent missing), divorce - problems w…

Wait until you hear what issues the ubiquitous dihydrogen monoxide can cause! https://web.archive.org/web/19961031232918/http://media.circ... These points would greatly benefit from being put into perspective You can't seriously think a significant percentage of people are emotionally unstable because they looked up porn of their own will at an age of their own choosing, even if I trust that it can be listed as a con…

You can’t be serious thinking it has NO bad effect on people, especially children.

Would you let your own children watch porn?

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

#838
post #533

Why can’t we just have a meta tag that declares that content on a website is not suitable for minors? Or is it because, as others have mentioned, it’s not really about protecting minors from adult content?

Because then: whose computer is it? If it's my computer, it does my bidding. If a child is currently on the computer, should the computer decide and refuse to work as in "I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that" where the operator (Dave) is deemed a threat to its objective? In this case, the computer's programmed goal would be preventing any minor from seeing content with this tag. It has to decide if you're a minor whenever content is marked as such. If you can't override its programming, it's your computer no longer

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

#839
post #679

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and my point is that the "pick up any book" thing is hiding the fact that selection is in fact seriously limited. And second, underaged kids can not checkout non kid material without adult in the loop. That part is simply not true, the librarian will say no to the child or ask for parents permission.

> hiding the fact that selection is in fact seriously limited If your goal is "prevent children from accessing adult material", it really isn't that limited. > underaged kids can not checkout non kid material without adult in the loop They don't need to. They can read it in the library; that's what libraries are for.

Have you ever been in the library? Cause they really limit minors.

And obviously "adult material" is not referencing cookbooks for housewifes nor antic philosophy nor fantasy books meant for adults.

It does in fact means porn and such.

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

#840

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.

I would call this a "legal overreach". Laws have nothing to do with morals or morality.

In an ideal world, but in this case we're dealing with moral overreach from zealous Christian nationalists.
Post reply on HN