Lawmakers across the country (United States) are trying to protect kids by age-gating parts of the internet.

10 points

This is the best summary I could come up with:


“It does seem like a very clear backlash to not just tech, but to any sort of movement towards allowing young people to make their own decisions based on the information that they can access,” Jason Kelley, activism director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), said in an interview earlier this month.

France has proposed similar age verification restrictions on porn in the past, leading its data protection agency, CNIL, to investigate the security of current services on the market, determining that many were “intrusive” and for new, safer models to be developed.

Over the last few years, more than a dozen states, including many that have implemented age verification bills, have passed resolutions identifying porn as a “public health crisis,” arguing that it encourages violence despite little research backing these claims.

“I think progressives had the idea that they wanted to regulate Big Tech without fully appreciating the degree to which they were playing with fire,” Evan Greer, Fight for the Future director, said in an interview with The Verge earlier this month.

The American Civil Liberties Union sued to unravel the language related to pornography and ultimately won in 1997 after the Supreme Court decided that banning the material would infringe on the First Amendment rights of adults.

Without more pushback, age verification bills, just like the ongoing book bans taking place in schools, will continue to fuel the right’s censorship fire all at the expense of speech protected by the First Amendment.


The original article contains 1,875 words, the summary contains 245 words. Saved 87%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

permalink
report
reply
30 points
*

And the UK

Fucking idiotic, thick as two short planks bunch of pricks, the lot of them. Cunts.

…politicians I mean, not the children. They’re cool.

permalink
report
reply
22 points

Also, it’s never ACTUALLY about parental rights and protecting children. Plenty of parents want their kids to grow up believing that there is nothing inherently sexual about a naked body, or about women, but their perspective and rights never seem to be considered.

Think about how the reactionaries in control of many US states banned Drag Queen story hours and the like from libraries and schools, saying that it should be up to parents if they want their kids to go to them, only to then classify all drag shows as obscene and restricted to 18+.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

UK “children” are just future UK “people” so how can they be cool?

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

The Scots and Welsh are included and theyre pretty cool.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Honestly man as a dad of 3, this applies to the children too.

I love them, but they are indeed

Fucking idiotic, thick as two short planks bunch of pricks, the lot of them. Cunts.

permalink
report
parent
reply
116 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
57 points

An internet devoid of unacceptable “deviations” from gender and sexuality too. Given the effort to erase trans and gay people from public spaces, this seems like a parallel effort to destroy their digital ones too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-67 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
66 points

Not just any rant, a blatantly discriminatory one!

You DO see the contradiction where you claim to not care about somebody’s sexuality, yet get offended when you hear about it, right? And what’s worse, you don’t just get offended, but you turn around and directly insult those people by insisting they have a mental illness!

What you’re really saying is that you’re so offended by someone else’s harmless actions that you wish they would disappear.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

can cis people put pronouns in their name

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Literally the entire point of pronouns is defeated if people don’t know what pronouns a person uses (and this applies to more than just trans people too), so there is some use for people that put them in their name.

Beyond that though, even if there’s no need to say or publicly display something, that doesn’t mean one shouldn’t say it, and it definitely doesn’t mean one should be forbidden from saying it. There’s no need for people to tell me about their hobbies, or wear t-shirts or put up bumper stickers with messages on them, or put up religious symbols everywhere. Perhaps I’m tired of seeing messaging for political candidates I don’t like, and wish they’d keep their preferences to themselves, or perhaps I don’t care if people are married, they could just keep it between themselves rather than wear some rings to tell the world about it. But you know what? If I were to support making it illegal to say and show and wear an express such things, especially on the internet where the stakes are even lower, I’d be closer to the leader of something like the Taliban or North Korea, than to a good citizen of a democracy.

Even if you think saying/displaying/supporting something is “attention seeking”, well, people have a right to do that. To try to restrict that would be to restrict the right to free speech itself, because you cannot communicate with someone without first getting their attention.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

You seem like a pretty solid poster except for this one pretty bad take. Don’t let dramatic internet discourse and a few attention grabbing media personalities or allies shape your viewpoint for an entire group.

I know you probably already know this but I don’t want good posters leaving Lemmy because of silly disagreements or pet peeves. There are annoying people pushing toxic discourse on any issue. Generally people will live and let live if you don’t personally attack them. Someone specifying their pronouns isn’t attention seeking behavior (usually) it’s just a courtesy. Your comment is just begging for the kind of responses that will require you to give people the kind of attention you claim to hate giving them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

I get downvoted a lot too. But after reading this, I think the downvote buttons might actually mean you’re right, because there are a lot of retards on lemmy who drool their way through life and have no idea what they’re talking about.

Because you’re right. I can tell by the downvotes. The more you get, the fighter you are

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Personally, i am all in for that.

I really don’t think you are, because most people don’t realize how broad things will get. While right now, the targets are trans and gay people, people who write and pass these sorts of laws don’t want to stop there. When I said “deviations”, I wasn’t just speaking about ‘us queers’, but also about men with long hair, women with flat chests, literally anyone who doesn’t mould themselves into the right wing’s view of “Man” and “Woman”. I don’t think you want the colour of your shirts policed, or for cops to come in and throw a woman out of the restroom because she wasn’t “feminine” enough to someone.

I really don’t give 2 shits if you’re trans or gay or whatever. Just keep it in front of you. No need to put your pronouns in your name, or put a trans flag everywhere.

If you don’t care, then why does it bother you so much to see them merely existing in public or online?

I’d like to suggest that you ignore pronouns or pride flags since they clearly don’t appeal to you, but like many things in life, what doesn’t matter to you might matter to one of the other 7 billion or so human beings on the planet with you, and putting the pronouns in the bio or displaying a pride flag actively communicates safety and creates a welcoming atmosphere, while also helping us find like-minded people and make friendships.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
41 points

I love how this “sticking it to big tech” is also funded by big tech. The general goal of someone like Facebook with this legislation is pass a bunch of rules that only large companies like them can comply with, and watch mastodon instances and other attempts to detrown them end in FBI raids and more regulations.

permalink
report
reply
29 points

Not to mention none of this will actually protect children. When I was 14 I told an adult online about my life and they helped me make it through some rougher periods until I got to 18. I know the internet is highly imperfect but I think gate keeping kids out of it will just lead to more underground abuse and abuse that they don’t find was abuse until they are adults.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

The people who wrote this bill want people like you to suffer

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

Exactly, they don’t view children as people, they view them as objects and extensions of their parents/guardians.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yes, I remember how it went when I was a kid. Internet probably is the only reason why I’m not joining army of warmongerers or died in Ukraine.

To be fair it seems some adults need to be protected from some kids, but it is their adult problem.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points

Think of all the extra info we can sell if we card everyone!

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Bourgeois governments gonna bourgeois

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

There is no Porn Big Tech big enough to be able to afford this legislation. From the article:

As recently as May, only a quarter of people trying to access Ford’s site even clicked the link to verify their age and only 9 percent of those users completed the process. Ford said it costs his company around $1.50 per person to verify their age, and there’s no promise that those who follow through will buy anything. Pornhub’s response has been far more aggressive, blocking all traffic from some of these restrictive states rather than paying the extra cost.

Remember it is part of the GOP’s published plan for 2024 and beyond to ban pornography.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

There should be something to this. A lot of parents keep their children off of the internet, but having young children accessing ‘most’ of the internet is a bad fucking idea

Parents, monitor and limit your kids online. I know it’s hard as fuck, I know other kids will think it’s weird that your kid doesn’t know the new tiktok thing. Do it anyway

permalink
report
reply
2 points

I genuinely think that children’s ease of access to pornographic content is a serious and unprecedented threat to their well-being. This is why I think it was a mistake to normalise kids having unlimited access to internet-enabled mobile devices, and why I think having the family computer in a public-ish place is smart. It doesn’t even necessarily have to result in your kid being socially impacted, if you just limit their time on it but still allow them some autonomy. I had friends growing up where their router shut down automatically overnight so they couldn’t use their phones when they should be sleeping, but they were still just as hip and cool as anyone else.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Probably because they used mobile internet. At least that what I did.

hip and cool as anyone else.

See. Seeing pornography doesn’t make children uncool.

unprecedented threat to their well-being

Actual threat to their well-being is content about quantuum physics and astronomy. Both topics can cause existential crisis.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I mean, why? What is the unprecedented threat?

And I think you have a misunderstanding of how isolated teenagers were from sexual content before the internet, magazines weren’t exactly hard to get. Even before then, we’ve literally been making porn in every form of media since we were painting on cave walls.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

What is the unprecedented threat?

The ease of access of it now, and the extreme shock value of a lot of what even shows up on homepages of major porn sites is unique compared to the pre-internet days.

we’ve literally been making porn in every form of media since we were painting on cave walls. Porn ≠ erotic art or even sexually explicit material. Children should not have their first exposure to genitalia through media made with the express purpose of sexual gratification.

Part of allowing people to develop, evolve, and mature their sexuality on their own should involve preventing formative experiences from being based on fantasy.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 16K

    Monthly active users

  • 12K

    Posts

  • 551K

    Comments