Anyone know if this is true or not?
So how does this tie into what’s happening now? Part of Vought and Project 2025’s plans are to remove Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA). This law currently protects platform holders, providing immunity for any content uploaded to said platform that third-party users created.
By removing Section 230, platform holders, like Steam, would be liable for any “illegal” content uploaded to the platform, as opposed to those creating and uploading said content. If Steam were found guilty of hosting this content, the company could be hit with huge fines. Therefore, Steam, Itch, and many other platforms would likely place a blanket ban on any adult content, mitigating any risk of fines or other legal action. This, as pointed out on Reddit, would affect all forms of user-generated content, including fan art, mods, and videos, not just games themselves.
Seems like a deceptive headline.
The real takeaway is: Project 2025 guy also wants to do the platform-level censorship thing, but by removing legal protections (Section 230) instead of using payment processors.
Yeah I started to read comments on other sites and theres a LOT of speculation on this. But the actual article is pretty small. Thanks for breaking it down even further.
Hear me out: what if repealing section 230 would end up killing our social media monoculture, since it would be impossible for these platforms to operate. Instead, what if people had to host their content themselves, you know, like we did back in the day, when the Internet was fun.
LLMs would be liable for every hallucination.
But how do you enforce it? When the internet crashes out into millions of websites again? When the people who made it happen are the people bad ones and they only go after messaging they don’t like?
I don’t know when you’re talking about, but it probably wasn’t self hosting, unless you’re talking about like original internet stuff. GeoCities, for example, was not self-hosting. It was hosting your content on their platform.
Who’s going to host a place where you could be sued millions of dollars because someone posted libel on there? Not your next door neighbor.
The wild runaway success of Gmail proves that federation as a concept is currently not understood by the masses. I have lots of faith but little hope that more learning will be done on a large scale.
I mean, I kind of guessed this way back when Collective Shout pushed their action.
I actually had a comment removed here on Lemmy when I brought up how this was “US politics/elections affecting your life as gamers”, because the mods insisted it was purely an Australian action, and my comment was off-topic. But we live in a global online world. There’s no way that US politics wouldn’t have a huge effect on this type of censorship.
It is as it always was: Even if you have no interest in politics, the politics are interested in you.
Ordinary people should adopt politics as a hobby, if only to have agency about which type of politics thrives or dies. I would much prefer sex-positive media to proliferate over sex negative, because the latter will take away my hentai games and manga. Furries, queers, and genuine perverts, all of them should have a shared interest of putting conservative values into a pine box, with a bit of stake and garlic.
No matter how you measure it, global sexually repressive puritanism always traces back to the US.
There are a lot of people that are capable of suppressing women without the US just fine. Just have a quick look at the Arabic peninsula, or the Taliban.
Western securely repressive puritanism, maybe.
This is Iran in the 1970s, before the US started providing weapons, training, and funding to groups like literally the Taliban.
Wow, I’ve never seen this before. I don’t mean this in a derogatory way or anything, but they look like people.
They still are, they’re just people that are repressed by a theocracy now.
It’s why iran has so many educated women and is weirdly technologically powerful for a theocratic regime. Iran in the 70s was modern. Inshallah the people of iran will be freed from the tyranny of theocracy.
But yeah, iran is what should scare you the most because their collapse was fast and unexpected.
deleted by creator
Fiction has been an enemy of power since writing began
x for doubt
Since there are downvotes, what are the earliest fictional texts and what did they do in regard of power?
Gilgamesh literally becomes king. He changes the power paradigm to put himself on top and thats the oldest text we have.
What came first, kings or the stories about kings?
I think kings came first, and the story supported their power.
Completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
Even if, why shouldn’t something doubtful be pointed out?
But in this discussion it’s relevant. That White Jesus, do we believe that it is facts? Power is using fiction to create a following first. Then those followers prevent an opposition from forming.
Now why are stories about sex told? There seem to be many reasons but one could be to encourage people to have sex. So the opposition tries to make people experience reality with other people while Conservatives try to keep them in their fictional, isolated world.
In other words, fiction is not only an enemy but also a friend of power.
Calling it now: What we currently know as “Project 2025” will reveal itself to be the largest conspiracy of this millenium. The push for internet ID verification “to protect the kids” in UK, US, Canada, EU, Australia is 100% a collective effort. Fuck this timeline, we will not comply!
The English speaking world should be isolated. Rupert Murdoch made it sick.
No he didn’t, he doesn’t have that kind of power. Not even close.
A bunch of idiots decided to listen to lies.
I know this is not going to be well received here, but we as a society do need to do something to prevent children from being able to access pornography. We are just now getting research showing the detrimental effects of social media and internet pornography on developing children’s brains. There hasn’t been concrete evidence until recently, and now we know. Things do have to change.
However, this needs to be done with as little information as possible collected and distributed. Zero-knowledge proofs should be used to establish that a person is above a certain age without telling the site what their age actually is. This can be done, however I do imagine they are going to skip past all of that and just go to collecting all the information possible.
No one is saying that kids should be able to access pornography. People are saying that it shouldn’t be the states job to raise your children for you.
Effectively blocking pornography for everyone in the country unless you dox yourself to shady websites is not the answer. The answer is developing the tools and simplifying processes required to stop children accessing these things on the device and local network level and putting those tools in the hands of parents. Doing this is almost certainly orders of magnitude cheaper than trying to police the internet
The Great Firewall of Britain is a frankly stupid concept.
People are saying that it shouldn’t be the states job to raise your children for you.
This logic does not hold up in most other cases. We stopped selling alcohol and cigarettes unless you dox yourself to shady gas stations and stores. Parents should be able to stop their kids from being able to buy that shit, why should the stores have to do more work to enforce it? You’re seriously going to inconvenience all the adults that can legally buy it just to prevent kids from being able to buy it? Why can’t we keep our cigarette vending machines? Surely it’s cheaper just to have parents control their kids, rather than manage every single store in the country.
The internet is different, and it’s currently the wild west. Because it’s different, it’s also possible to prove your age without doxing yourself (like I mentioned with zero-knowledge proof). It is possible to prove you are over an age without telling anyone anything about yourself. Unlike being required to give your drivers license/ID card to buy alcohol or cigarettes which gives all of your information to every person you hand it to.
Not all parents are going to have the know-how to lock down a child’s internet access. They may need to use 3rd party tools, many of which would cost money. Does it really make more sense to have parents try to secure every place a kid may access internet pornography rather than securing it at the source? Again, if done correctly, it can be done privately and securely. I am not advocating that we give our ID to every sketchy internet site. I am advocating for a widespread secure and standardized solution. That makes more sense than to put all of the onus on the parents.
It’s your job to keep your kid from cruising porn on the devices you own
What about the devices you don’t own?
And regardless, how are parents that struggle to setup their email going to keep their kid from accessing porn? What would you have them do? Install a 3rd party software? Setup a local DNS filter? Prevent them from using devices that can access the internet? When it is as easy as googling “naked girl” how on earth are parents going to stop them from access it. The answer? The aren’t. There is nothing even the most diligent parent can do to stop them from accessing it while it is so readily accessible.
You haven’t demonstrated what harm comes from googling naked girl and seeing boobs.
If you want devices with parental control you will need to pay for them.
Devices like school computers already have such. This won’t stop a determined person from borrowing their friends phone and googling naked girl but that is a reasonable trade off honestly.
I don’t want to turn the entire Internet into 1984 so your kids doesn’t see boobs until he’s 18
You haven’t demonstrated what harm comes from googling naked girl and seeing boobs.
I cannot, since I am not a researcher. The research is out there though.
If you want devices with parental control you will need to pay for them.
If it is definitively negative, parents should not have to research, install, and pay for such restrictions onky to be easily avoided on another device.
I don’t want to turn the entire Internet into 1984 so your kids doesn’t see boobs until he’s 18
I don’t have kids. This about an entire generation and all future ones. Have you read 1984? While sueveillance is a part of it, it’s largely about authoritarianism and the control of reality itself. Being ID’d for a porn site is not that. 1984 is already happening, and the porn has nothing to do with it. Regardless, you have made no comment on the idea that I want it done with zero knowledge proof. The site would know nothing about you except you are over 18. There is absolutely nothing 1984 about that
I’m all in for banning pornographic content but if their intentions is anything else than that then I am all against it.
FYI: I have no idea what the hell is going on, I don’t follow the news, I just randomly opened lemmy then stumbled upon this post, I didn’t read the whole article, just a paragraph or 2.
