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

Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 177 posts

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#91

Post by simion314 »

Sharlin wrote: post #73
simion314 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Which begs the question: Is it true, that there are such games? And how would one defend its availability to the public? Is w#nking off to such content considered free speech? We are discussing blocking of legal content by the payment companies. If they do not like this games or GTA or metal music they should make laws. But they are concerned by virtual incest while in USA cousin marriage is still legal in many stat…

The US is actually an outlier in how taboo it considers first-cousin sexual relations. They’re certainly eyebrow-raising these days, but not considered incestuous in most of Europe or other parts of the world (with China and parts of India being two admittedly big exceptions).

I am not sure, but this companies will block content containing this legal relations, and I seen people in the sims community (not sure their nationality ) demanding EA blocks "step" relations , even if there is nothing illegal or medical wrong about that, just their fragile hearts that the game does not block this.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#92

Post by theshackleford »

xandrius wrote: post #64
dkersten wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the sense that people don’t really use it to buy things with.

Some people definitely do :D

Some extreme minority may. The vast, vast majority do not.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#93

Post by lrvick »

freedomben wrote: post #50
Cantinflas wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the govt going to manage your private keys any time soon? How would that work?

Yes. There are tons of different proposals, but generally speaking the common thread is that the banks (possibly The Central Bank) will keep the keys for you. They will still be middlemen in all transactions so they can harvest data and make sure you aren't buying anything the government doesn't like. They can also do tax enforcement a lot better that way

A key is just a 256 bit number. You can literally create one with paper and dice rolls. They will no sooner figure out who is holding most of these than they will figure out who is holding cash, or the identities of the 25m+ people downloading pirated media right now.

At best they can ask the public to please turn over their private keys, which will go about as well as efforts to stop piracy.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#94

Post by YurgenJurgensen »

jact wrote: post #84

Am I the only one who thinks this is a good thing? Pornography and obscenity should not be protected speech. It’s violence against human dignity akin to hate speech.

You think that a payment processor having arbitrary power to shut down any business they want anywhere in the world for any reason is a good thing because this time you agree with the reason?

Book burners don’t have any morals, they just want to burn books, and they’ll come for yours sooner or later.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#95

Post by WhyNotHugo »

masklinn wrote: post #32
WhyNotHugo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Removing the middlemen is the most obvious solution, but they’re also amongst the most powerful players in the world, so it’s going to be challenging (to put it mildly). See: https://www.taler.net/en/index.html

In some places it’s already more than viable. In Europe it’s baked into the banking system, SCT (SEPA Credit Transfer) lets you move money between any two European accounts with only as much hassle as your bank wants in your way. And EPC QR lets you initiate transfers from QR codes. The biggest annoyance with it is that uptake is quite variable from country to country.

In the Netherlands we have bank cards and IDeal for offline and online payments respectively. Those answer to local legislation, and do direct bank-to-bank transfers.

But if I want to buy online from Germany or some other EU country, I need to use American payment method. Also if I want to buy from China, I need to use an American payment method.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#96

Post by some_random »

jact wrote: post #84

Am I the only one who thinks this is a good thing? Pornography and obscenity should not be protected speech. It’s violence against human dignity akin to hate speech.

I am absolutely sick and tired of people using the word violence willy nilly when discussing things they don't like. "Violence against human dignity" is not real, that is a nonsensical concept. You are not being stabbed in the human dignity. No one's human dignity is being blown to pieces. You are more than welcome to argue that pornography causes psychological damage, but calling it violence and lumping it in with hate speech is not compelling in the slightest.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#97

Post by bitwize »

lrvick wrote: post #93
freedomben wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. There are tons of different proposals, but generally speaking the common thread is that the banks (possibly The Central Bank) will keep the keys for you. They will still be middlemen in all transactions so they can harvest data and make sure you aren't buying anything the government doesn't like. They can also do tax enforcement a lot better that way

A key is just a 256 bit number. You can literally create one with paper and dice rolls. They will no sooner figure out who is holding most of these than they will figure out who is holding cash, or the identities of the 25m+ people downloading pirated media right now. At best they can ask the public to please turn over their private keys, which will go about as well as efforts to stop piracy.

They can prosecute transactions with unregistered keys as money laundering. They may not have the resources to get everybody but they can collect a few scalps pour encourager les autres.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#98

Post by Lerc »

zeld4 wrote: post #27
miyuru wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cryptocurrency as obviously failed I don't think cryptocurrency has failed. Yesterday I successfully payed with crypto when the payment with multiple credit cards failed.

Cryptocurrency is on the way being managed by govt. So it's correct to say cryptocurrency did not fail, but certainly the original libertarian vision behind it is dead.

The libertarian vision was not behind it. It was projected onto it by adopters who thought it was something that it never could be.

Any currency that has any political ideology would require some form coercion to be used by those who do not share that ideology. Fiat currencies carry that coercion implicitly, people who don't like the government generally still use their money because they have little choice.

The underlying principle of Bitcoin was consensus. Agreeing to operate on whatever principles the majority of miners are using. Forks are an integral part of that, people choosing a different path and those who agree with them going that way. The perceived value coming from those who accept whichever fork they chose and what they think it should be worth.

The only real "Stick it to the man" kind of philosophy that came with it was as a rejection of unilateral monetary control. That is the antithesis of consensus.

In an ideal crypto world governments would be the majority of the miners. They would negotiate amongst each other to decide on monetary policy by consensus. That's a long way from happening, with no clear path towards that end in sight.

In a sense that too, is an ideology, the distinction is that the ideology doesn't want to do the thing that it can't. It presents an option, instead of forcing people to use it.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#99

Post by lrvick »

theshackleford wrote: post #92
xandrius wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people definitely do :D

Some extreme minority may . The vast, vast majority do not.

I use it to donate or pay for legal things online I wish to keep anonymous like I would use cash for in person. Most people in the US do not value privacy, but for those few of us that want to purchase online with privacy, or those in heavily censored countries, cryptocurrency is the only option.

Just because few people make use of their rights is not a valid argument for their removal.

Re: Australian anti-porn group claims responsibility for Steams new censorship rules

#100

Post by j-bos »

How does these types of Australian anti-vice groups have so much global sway, and yet Australia leads the world in gambling addiction and accessibility? Presumably they'd be interested in both vices, but seem to only wield power over one. *edited for clarity of question
Post reply on HN