The European Commission preliminarily found Pornhub, Stripchat, XNXX and XVideos in breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) for failing to protect minors from being exposed to pornographic content on their services.
I am once again asking why a non-European website (pornhub) should have to care.
If you want to censor stuff so bad, then hop to it. Why are you asking people outside your borders censor themselves?
That’s not how the internet works.
The onus is on the users. The parents are the ones who have to figure out a way to ensure what their kid’s devices can access, or that they are educated enough not to seek it.
If kids are willfully seeking porn, then it ain’t anybody’s business to stop them. Exploring and enjoying your sexuality is part of growing up, and “moral” whackjobs shouldn’t get to decide how people grow up.
Protecting the kids should be about providing useful information, contraception, and official aid against predators.
I’m pretty liberal but nobody’s kids need to watch anyone get tied up and anally fucked while they scream.
I get your point about regular stuff, but there is a fuckton of irregular stuff
And you bring that up bcz you think that’s specifically what OP was referring to?
If we don’t have to do anything about China wanting Tienanmen Square being suppressed then we don’t have to do anything about any foreign nation suppressing anything of ours. And if we do have to care about one, why do we not have to care about the others?
Hey EU (and all other regulatory agencies interested in “protecting the children”), how about you provide information to parents on how they can setup their own blocking tools, like DNS. You can do this for free, today, right now and actually get the results you supposedly want.
It’s a precursor to a digital ID.
Because China and Russia will use bots.
Back to magazines and dvds?
The real crime here is while the EU is trying every angle to error your privacy, that time is not being spent on real issues. You are being sold out by the very people put into positions of power to serve you. If the data supported their goals, I would be there with them, but the data is very clear on the matter and the it indicates we are in for big issues with all these IDs being stored by centralized targets.
Minors accessing porn on their own is not a real problem, and hurts no one.
Teenagers beyng addicted to porn is a real problem.
Porn addiction is so astroturfed by evangelicals, that whatever actual addiction for porn there is have been drowned out by endless amount of “if you ever thought about wanting it then you’re an addict, please find jesus”.
Teenagers being addicted to anything is a real problem. Prohibition doesn’t work.
All addiction is a problem. Hyper- focusing on porn addiction without any objective data on how much addiction of porn is occuring in teenagers and then trying to clumsily legislate away porn in response is bad governance.
If porn addiction is occuring at the same rate as gambling addiction, alcholoism and drug addicition then the problem is not likely to be any of those things individually but likely to be something else.
this is more of a parent involvement problem. the world will continue being scary and have millions of harmful things. it’s up to parents to prepare their children to survive and adapt to this world
Is it? Is there research on it?
Actually yes. Tons of research. For both teen and adults.
But you could have googled that yourself instead of choosing to be a fucking idiot about it.
Do you imagine this is a good way of addressing any addiction issues?
So we should force companies to deal with that? Not parents?
None of this stops teens who want to find porn from finding porn.
But not my fuckin problem!
porn should be behind age of consent not behind 18; being allowed to fuck someone but not see media of sexual things is total bullshit
and not as a law. this is not the government’s job at all. prohibition doesn’t work. the only solution is proper sex ed
just because it’s harmful to the self (according to dubious claims) doesn’t mean that people should not have this freedom. people’s freedom is more important than prevention of them harming themselves.
Whoever’s currently responsible for the kid should be responsible for watching them and keeping them out of shit they shouldn’t be getting into. Expecting everyone else to put up with this privacy invading shit is fucking stupid.
The smart people never enter politics and so rational solutions like yours never see the day of light. Plus, it is more about collecting your data and control than protecting anyone.
true
deleted by creator
And that’s how it begins. Soon they’ll start asking everyone to provide ID to access the internet.
If they want to know who I am they can already ask my ISP, I don’t see why they need to also have a copy of my driving license.
Exactly. Chat Control being rejected is a minor victory unfortunately. There are VERY powerful actors and organizations behind the scenes for these policies.
I think they realized chat control wasn’t going to work, but do not abandon the watch post, they will be back with a different approach.
Chat control is absolutely going to work with some time, they can just propose it every week. It can afford to fail 100 times, it only needs to pass once - it’s not like these people run out of money. Depressing
There are VERY powerful actors
God, I fucking hate this timeline. You know you’re talking about Zuckerberg in that way, right? It’s disgusting that he ought fit such an eery description.
I suggest that instead of age verification for kids, we do parenting verification licences for anyone wanting to have kids, before they have kids and then don’t raise them.
Some might be upvoting this in cheeky irony, but I see this as a modest proposal.
This position deserves a longer form article & widespread publication, and numerous calculations & studies detailing how much more ethically beneficial this would be for society. Would it not be more efficient to curb idiocy among the masses by regulating people’s choices in population control than conducting intimate mass government surveillance? Would it not be a higher ethical stance to give people the illusion of choice by making them work for the privilege of birthing, maintenance, and management of another human being?
Counterpoint: it is cheaper and cost-effective to dehumanize and control the masses with the technical advances we have today
, and-also, to hell with ethics. Think about it. If car manufacturers would be made responsible for designing cars to identify bad actors, we wouldn’t have to deal with the inevitable consequences of people who gain their driving licenses but bend the rules anyway. We could do with discarding licensing altogether because it’s not perfect. Only by singling out and reprimanding each person for their faults with the conviction of a Walmart micromanager and the ruthless efficiency of Palantir surveillance - can we create a more perfect bubble of safety for society.~(I don’t have time to even pretend to cough up statistics, k thx bye)~
Ah, the classic dichotomy: privacy vs eugenics
It’s not eugenics if you just confiscate them at birth. This is already being done with severely unfit parents
One: that’s not what was suggested. OP said parental verification/authorization before birth.
Two: you’re proposing something like residential schools instead. Which, even if you don’t agree constituted genocide, was still pretty bad.
I’m not advocating for our government’s insane privacy-violating measures. Just pointing out that OP’s proposal is worse. There’s got to be better ways to protect children than “police state” or “genocide.”
I cannot believe the downvoting coming your way for this.
On one - how the abuse of this cannot be foreseen by the most clueless person is beyond me.
On two - are people under the impression that the current child welfare system is adequate for the children that are currently in it? What about that system makes them think it would be suitable to increase the number of children in care.
Fucking mental.
Yeah, I almost wrote a whole counterpoint on how horrible the current child welfare system is and how nearly every trained professional agrees that breaking up families should only be the last resort in the most extreme circumstances, but I had a feeling this thread wasn’t the target audience for that particular reality.
I’m not proposing anything, I’m saying that if you’re a drug addict or a violent criminal, this already happens so it’s not that far-fetched.
Rather than going to residential schools, these children usually go to relatives who can actually take care of them, or if that’s not an option they might go to the admittedly not ideal system we already have for children whose parents are dead or just completely absent.
Didn’t know about Stripchat. Sooo … thanks, EU?
I wonder why the EU didn’t find the parents of the kids to be in breach of whatever relevant child “protection” laws there are? I guess they are okay with the porn websites raising the kids. Maybe the EU can make PornHub to start a chain of day care centers?
I would trust porn stars more than Conservatives to raise children properly
no one should be in breach
just because a freedom enables harming of the self does not mean that it should be taken away
Agreed. I was making a tongue in cheek comment about the absurdity of this whole thing. In my opinion, the parents are more responsible than the porn sites, but no one should be punished because young Peter managed to see a boob.
And what do you think happens when big platforms have to introduce age verification? People will just go to smaller unregulated sites which may inadvertently be worse because of malware risks and unregulated content. You just can’t take the porn out of the internet, people always find a way
Yep, this is already happening with Pornhub in The States.
