- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
- cross-posted to:
- europe@feddit.de
You must log in or register to comment.
The majority of those are coming across it accidentally
Source: teenagers caught in the act by their parents
I used to accidentally find nudie mags in the woods with my friends. Why didn’t these guys do anything for me and my forest safety?
Kids these days will never get to experience the joy of finding woods porn.
Gen Z here. Only “age-inappropriate” things I found in the woods were condoms and syringes :(
When we were kids, we used to collect paper to get money for school trips and such. For us it was minly to find porn and find out who has a LOT of porn at home.
Wait, people would just give you their porn to recycle or whatever you did with the paper to turn it into school trips? You’d figure they’d be a bit more discreet in how they got rid of their porn, like hiding it in a box in the woods.
They didn’t give a fuck. People who had porn back then had A LOT of porn. I assume they had multible subscriptions to get porn weekly. I assume, i can’t remember they kinda hid it under some newspaper, but if you have one newspaper for every 10 porn magazines, it’s kinda hard to hide.
WTAF - I thought it was just us that struck gold. I mean, the magazines were sort of damp (from the forest!! From the forest!!) but we COULD not believe our luck when we found that motherload in the forest.
Who leaves it there though? And it was always years out of date.
Is there a jazz mag fairy we weren’t told about? “You need to behave now, otherwise the porn fairy won’t leave a 1984 copy of Readers Wives in the elderberry tree!”
Well as I say nature provides
Outside the box solution: don’t age restrict access to porn. Every teenager is going to get it anyway.
Couldn’t agree more if I cared to try.
Methinks this is much more about controlling and surveilling adults than “protecting” children from porn. If it was ever really about the latter at all.
It’s about the latter but it doesn’t have to work, just looks like you took action to solve a Daily Mail agenda…
Teenagers would get porn before the Internet. Before printed porn they’d carve it into cave walls. The “fertility goddesses” they find all over the neolithic are probably porn.
Back in the days before the internet they just cranked their hog to this.
The majority of those are coming across it accidentally
We’ll… I mean… it doesn’t exactly accidentally come out of you. You have to be touching it for some time.
Lonely Island would beg to differ
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
I swear dumbarses like this live in a bubble. Who in their right mind would give their identity documents or bank cards to a porn site? If the UK government enacts this silly legislation it just means UK residents will use non-UK sites.
Some people really need a reality check.
This is just a step in the path to try again to make VPNs illegal there.
You giving them far too much credit. They really are that thick.
Anyway it’s irrelevant, because as with most of their stupid new laws it’ll never come into effect because they won’t be in office by the time it’s supposed to be enacted. It’s just meant to appeal to their voters, so that they get some donations. They know it’ll never actually happen.
They’re saying next year for this, which I assume that means about a year away, andthe latest the election can be held is January 2025. But realistically it’s probably going to be in 6 months.
So either this is going to be around for all of 2 months (assuming that it isn’t delayed), or it’s never going to happen, and I’ll put money on it never happening.
I hope so, but I wouldn’t count on it if I was still living there.
There’s also the risk that any age verification implemented will end up being bypassed by anyone with access to a VPN
I’d bet there’s already a significant amount of people doing this in places besides the UK.
Government can’t get enough of seeing what people are doing, including what they’re wanking off too - no privacy for the masses.
Want to jerk off without being cucked by the government? With Nor…
RAID SHADOW LEGEND
Are you a gay person, a pirate, or an assassin, or a gay pirate assassin, then you need nord VPN
Pornographic content that consists only of text is not covered by today’s guidelines.
Ao3 users can’t stop winning.
I always thought that it’s Erotic Literature and not Text Pornographic… Since text isn’t graphic.
Since text isn’t graphic.
Sounds like someone’s never seen ASCII porn before.
I wonder if one could make a renderer that translates ascii characters into squares of solid colours. Colour depends on the character.
Zoom out far enough and you have a bitmap.
Your text renderer already does that. It’s why ascii art works in the first place. The blocks are just smaller than the characters.
There are tools that faithfully convert images into ascii art to the point where they just look like the images with zoomed out enough.
Congratulations, you’ve just invented digital images.
Hey, you could make a
religionencoding out of this
Its amazing how excluding the smut tag practically drops at least 50% of the stories, sometimes more depending on the fandom
There’s also the risk that any age verification implemented will end up being bypassed by anyone with access to a VPN. When I ask, Whitehead admits that there’s no “silver bullet” when it comes to online safety. However, she says the measures are still worthwhile if they can help stop children from accidentally encountering adult content.
It sounds like they have absolutely no idea how to implement this law in anything approaching an effective manner. I suspected lend up getting scrap like everything else.
They wont have anything but a minimal budget to even research this properly, let alone employ the staff or setup the systems to manage it properly.
I realise China monitors a lot more than porn and their population is much much larger however they have between 20 and 50k working on it. Even if you cut down the scope you are still looking at thousands of employees to do this properly.
Too true.
I actually used to work for a branch of the British government and their philosophy was never spend any money, especially on maintenance.
So I would not be surprised if you’re right. Also the ICO are completely toothless, I don’t think they’ve ever actually done any legal enforcement. It’s their fault that all the websites have the stupid cookie pop-up warnings. Somebody asked him if that would be acceptable under the law and they said yes, even though it’s clearly ridiculous and clearly violates the law, but that set the precedent. They set a precedent on Twitter. Idiots
Isn’t the cookie warnings because of the EU?
Eh? The cookie popups are because prior to that point websites were just doing whatever the fuck they wanted with no disclosure, as bluntly as the requirements for cookie disclosure have been implemented.
Don’t worry about it, they’ll just use AI to do it…
accidentally encountering adult content.
The way that works in Germany is that the BPjM has an index of iffy stuff and the big search engines are required to use it as a blacklist. Same general reasoning as it being completely legal to sell porn in a shop but you gotta keep it under the counter, or in a separate 18+ section, and not advertise it publicly.
The “fine unless by accident” thing is btw backed by developmental psychology roughly speaking if kids are old enough to seek stuff out, they’re old enough to deal with seeing it. The rest is media competency and discussing that porn is not a documentary movie is something for sex ed.
just ban eye balls
Finally
So the website aren’t actually blocked but they won’t come up in search engines?
Yep. Though there’s also a difference here between “not suitable for youth” and “right-out illegal”, and with porn sites that latter one can get problematic because those “I promise I’m 18” banners don’t even begin to be enough age auth. OTOH the law only cares about sites actually targeting Germans (as in: They’re in German). Things that you won’t find on google but aren’t illegal as such e.g. include pro-ana forums. Also note that German law makes a difference between erotica and porn, lots of stuff you see on the net would actually be completely fine but the sites don’t bother distinguishing.
It’s always only DNS blocks, easy to circumvent by setting your dns to 1.1.1.1 (cloudflare) or 8.8.8.8 (google) instead of whatever your ISP configures it to.
As far as porn is concerned, after years of paper shuffling, they managed to block de.xhamster.com (but not any other subdomain), xhamster reacted pretty much within hours by setting up deu.xhamster.com. I kinda expect them to give up. Maybe instead make sure that xhamster.desi is on that search engine blacklist? IP blocks are not an option because overblocking.
kinox.to is blocked because piracy, as well as Russian state media because EU sanctions.
Oh man, just so I’m safe what other urls are they trying to block? Be specific, I want to make sure I avoid them all.
XD
This is the best summary I could come up with:
UK telecoms regulator Ofcom has laid out how porn sites could verify users’ ages under the newly passed Online Safety Act.
The regulator is consulting on these guidelines starting today and hopes to finalize its official guidance in roughly a year’s time.
The measures have the potential to be contentious and come a little over four years after the UK government scrapped its last attempt to mandate age verification for pornography.
“The majority of those are coming across it accidentally and stumbling across it on the web.” Ofcom’s press release cites research that suggests nearly eight in 10 children have seen “violent pornography depicting coercive, degrading or pain-inducing sex acts” before turning 18.
Once the duties come into force, pornography sites will be able to choose from Ofcom’s approaches or implement their own age verification measures so long as they’re deemed to hit the “highly effective” bar demanded by the Online Safety Act.
“Age verification technologies for pornography risk sensitive personal data being breached, collected, shared, or sold.
The original article contains 975 words, the summary contains 168 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Let’s just waste some more money to appease some bigots who have illegal seed behind close doors, right? Coz normally that’s exactly what happens…
Who have illegal seed behind closed doors
Please elaborate
Why don’t they just announce that they’ve done it?
It’s only bigoted “religious” nosey busy body hand ringing type idiots that care, and presumably they won’t ever try and access pornography themselves anyway so how are they going to find out? Right?
Unless of course they do, but that would then require them to admit that they attempted to access it.
Problem solved.
Hyper religious conservatives that seek to control others’ access to regular pornography are projecting. They are into the super fucked up porn, and going on the offensive about age verification policies is 1000% guilty mind mentality.
I remember in college someone was doing some study on the difference between men who do and don’t watch porn.
They had to cancel the study because they couldn’t find any men who hadn’t.
They would find more if they asked them in front of their partners lol
Will be as successful as last time
I’m torn on what to think about the uks stance on technology. Like one one hand they’ve been forcing apple to be normal. But on the other hand they love trying to restrict porn in the most ridiculous ways.
The EU forced USB-C not the UK.
The UK is no longer a member of the EU.
The Idea that the UK is claiming the successes of the EU after Brexit is amusing.
I don’t think the UK did.
Opie kind of just assumed that the UK was responsible
Yeah that is why I said “idea”. I can certainly see some people from the UK stealing EU valor.
Guess that goes to show just how little I know about the UK and EU.
What did they do to apple?
Made phones require a USBC port and I also believe they also tried to pass some pro right to repair bills.
From my understanding that was actually the EU and the UK just fallowed suit because we’re dependent on EU supply chains.
Basically the equivalent of shouting “yeah right” at the back of the crowd.
The government and the courts are different things and they don’t like each other.
The UK government and the EU courts. Yes. Very different things
And the UK courts. The UK courts don’t like the UK government either, mostly because they keep on committing crimes. They won’t stop.
The current UK government are basically Posh Fascists (Notice the anti-demonstration legislation, sending people asking the UK for asylum to Rwanda and sending surveillance planes to help Israel with what the UN has deemed a Genocide in Gaza) so this is hardly surprising.
The Conservative wing of the Tory party has been well and trully buried by the UKIPers that invaded the party back in the Brexit Campaign days and all that’s left leading that party are people with a Fascist outlook on the world and the learned posh manners that you get from the very expensive private education institutions (curiously and with no irony called “Public Schools”) in that country.
They’re called public schools because anyone could attend them as long as they paid the cost. They were the alternative to private schools which were for nobles or religious training etc that you couldn’t buy in to. Comprehensive schools, free schools for anyone, came a lot later.
Same kind of “public” as the The Ritz: anybody can spend a night there as long as they have the 400 quid a night to pay for it.
Not sure what The Ritz is but that sounds public to me. The access is not restricted by any other mean than paying for the service.
The Ritz is a luxury hotel in London and that sentence I wrote is often used as an illustration of what “public” means in the sense with which it’s used in “public school” in the UK (no other nation whose language I know uses it like that and I can actually speak a number of them).
It’s also a great illustration about how de jure can be the opposite of de facto and of how one can mislead without outright lying by picking a rarelly used meaning of a word of a commonly used expression and thus produce an expression with an alternative meaning which is still naturally understood by others as meaning its most common meaning - thus allowing the making of claims which are strictly speaking true, whilst most people will semantically understand them differently. This is probably the main verbal deceit technique used by the English upper classes.
That said, in the UK “public school” has been so long used to mean what in other countries would be called “private school”, that all Brits nowadays understand it as meaning a “privatelly run and managed school with paid tuition were access is open to anybody who can pay (theoretically as some have subtle filters beyond mere cost)”, but all non-Brits need to be expained that in a British context this combination of words means something else than what it does in the rest of the World, which is why I point this out.
Thanks for explaining. I can see how it can be considered public (by my own argument) while still not being public in the sense everyone else (myself included) would understand it.
Removed by mod
We should abolish online porn entirely.
A reduction in incels will reduce the number of white supremacists.
Because, historically, prohibition of [x] has been a highly effective strategy with no downsides whatsoever.
Why do you hate people having control over their own body so much?
Porn creates misogynistic incels.
I think the misogynistic incels came first
Porn addiction can also turn people into incels.
You keep saying this, do you have a source?
Replace porn with water and you can easily see why this is a bad take:
You: Water is bad and should be banned. It causes [bad thing].
Me: You’re saying that a lot, have a source?
You: Google “harm from water.”
In reality, all that search shows is that porn can cause harm. And no one is going to be surprised by that fact, it’s a well known issue. You know what else causes harm when misused? Any prescription medication, anything you buy from a grocery store, literal rain. Pick something, and I can show you how it can cause harm.
But what I asked for, is a source to your “porn causes incels” claim. If you don’t want to provide a source, that’s fine. Just be aware that you’re immediately going to be mocked with comments such as:
Your source is that you made it the fuck up.
Holy loaded (pun intended) search phrase, Batman! 🤦
No it doesn’t
Yeah I don’t think so. Got a source for that?
Ok Dr. Kellogg. This was not true about masturbation/eating meat in 1852 and always confuses me when people try to bring back this type of thinking.
If you want a good look into this fun type of insanity here is a 600 page book: https://archive.org/details/plainfaorold00kell/mode/2up
Fun quote from that book: “In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement, and preventing the recurrence of the practice in those whose will-power has become so weakened that the patient is unable to exercise entire self-control.”
There are troll look at their profile, just ignore the idiot
How would that reduce the number of incels?
“Trust me bro”
It wouldn’t
So you want an increase in rapes?
Sex is a big part of life.
Porn is just an extension of that.
Anyone who needs violent porn as a “sexual release” to avoid raping women belongs in a mental hospital. The entire idea of catharsis is nonsense and counterproductive.
ah so you’re advocating for a large increase in funding to all mental health services and enabling counselling and therapy for every person in the country. How do you fund it?
Tax the rich
If you ban bank heist movies like Ocean’s Eleven, people will stop robbing banks
It’s a casino heist movie, you uncultured swine.
Super obvious troll is super obvious
30 day ban. Don’t make accusations just because you disagree with other users.
No, my accusation is based on reality, unlike this here ban I apparently have. Are you 12 or something
Removed by mod
No, not it’s not. And not even just for the lulz of having access to porn.
You wanna know why? For the same reasons that decriminalisation of drugs is has potential upsides, and for the same reasons why repression breeds kinks.
People are going to try to get porn anyway. If you force young people (or people who can’t provide ID) to resort viewing porn illegally, then it is infinitely easier for them to go browsing for porn in places that will let them find really illegal porn.
In other words, would you rather have your kids watching main stream porn, or would you like them to potentially end up on the dark web?
