- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- technology@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
laughs in californian
Hahaha… why? You don’t think they wouldn’t pass a national ban if they could muster the votes?
They would. “States’ rights” is bullshit that they start with only when they fail to regulate at the national level. Every time.
first, I think it is easily challenged on first amendment grounds
second, I’m not an idiot and I know how to pirate shit
third, if things continue to accelerate towards disaster I believe CA is the least shitty place to enjoy a normal life (that happens to include porn, for me)
Oregon joins the chat…
Yeah, we have to stop it! Literally pussy, tits and cocks power the Internet use. I wouldn’t use it if it was just reading shit.
Why wouldn’t they pass that in California? California loves monitoring people. Right now it’s mostly with cars (license plate readers, and now digital license plates with tracking built-in), but I really don’t see why they wouldn’t do this. They’re already starting with social media, I would assume porn would come soon after. Yeah, they have something akin to the GDPR, but that’s not at odds with tracking people, it’s just a nod so people don’t notice what they’re up to…
Screw California, they don’t care about privacy at all.
Smells like a slippery slope fallacy to me
Why are they even in war against porn?
/j lust is just the second layer, try doing something about worse stuff like greed or gluttony
Religious extremists that work tirelessly to impose their god’s laws on everybody else.
They’ve actually embedded themselves in US government now, over many years and much effort, and the burning embers of their religious war against the rest of us are finally starting to catch fire in a big way.
They recently took away a person’s right to an abortion. Madness, I know. What will they take away next?
You can’t adopt kids in Tennessee unless you’re Christian. They will deny you for being Jewish.
I wish I was joking, but this is the Christian Nationalist endgame: Nazism.
Because they want to use antiporn laws to restrict books and other media with LGBTQ content.
Because cops like to check ID, and this allows them to check ID more often. I think they want to check my ID at every website, if they could.
Why are they even in war against porn?
First time that I heard that, and I really don’t think it’s a real war. Maybe a tiny quarrel :)
Well, they’re the ones that know which pizza shops have pedophile sex dungeons hidden underneath. So, I guess they’re fighting themselves. (As I typed that out, it occurred to me how true is a statement it was…😝)
Because christians think they can make the rules for the rest of us. And they use scare tactics like, “protect the children”, which they are molesting. Plus, they don’t want anybody to be happy and have any fun. That’s the point of christianity, to make everyone miserable, FOREVER.
FUCK RELIGION
That’s how I try to describe growing up with it when people ask why I don’t to to church or subscribe to any religion.
Aside from the many other aspects of it, even as a child, I couldn’t understand why I was supposed to be so enthusiastically smug that I belonged to this thing that seemed to exist only to impose rules on everything imaginable and that those rules would invariably be against anything even remotely fun or pleasurable. Hell we couldn’t even use most spices; thanks Dr Kellogg.
At age six or so I legitimately perceived it to be sinful to smile or laugh for fear I’d be punished because there would be some arbitrary rule that whatever caused me to smile or laugh was too worldly.
Fuck that. I’ll be miserable and curmudgeonly on my own terms!
It’s nice to be free of all of that. No one should be allowed to join a religion until they are 21.
So USA slowly becoming China now? What’s next VPN users will face jail time?
Too many American corporations rely on VPNs for that to happen. The last thing politicians want is to piss off their corporate masters.
They mostly use self-hosted VPNs, not your regular, everyday VPN like Mullvad or Proton VPN. So they’re not going to ban the tech, but maybe they’ll try to ban the public services.
I already host my own, so they’ll have no power over me. Even if they successfully prevent me from making a VPN, I have other options (SOCKS proxies, SSH tunnels, etc).
Maybe our republicans will develop a strange love for China like they already have with Russia.
Fuck that. My VPN keeps my information safe. It’s a basic goddamn right. There ain’t no way they are taking it without me knowing about it and saying it’s ok. It may not be the best way, but it’s an easy effective way to stop most people trying to scam information.
VPNs don’t keep anything safe, they just make you appear as if you’re in a different location. Your information is secured by TLS, and that works with or without a VPN.
What VPNs do accomplish is improve your privacy. Since you appear like you’re from somewhere else, and you can easily change where that somewhere else is, it’s much harder to track you across sites.
I don’t see how it helps with scams though. Most scams come from data breaches, and they care far more about the data you provide to that service (credit card info, login creds, etc) than where you connect from. It’s more helpful to prevent tracking from the likes of Google and Meta.
Well that’s because identify theft is based on WHERE you live. So VPNs mitigate that information. I am not saying it will stop all, but it helps. And it’s my choice. Not some corporations.
No, you can’t steal someone’s identity with their IP, that’s not how that works, and a regular attacker can’t figure out your IP anyway, unless you visit a website they control. And that info is pretty useless.
Identity theft happens with a breach of some service you trust. So maybe a bank will expose your SSN (or equivalent in whatever country you live in), and they’ll cross-reference that with a breach in a streaming service that has credit card info (includes name, address, etc).
A VPN won’t protect you from identity theft. Like, at all. That’s not what it’s designed for. What it does is three fold:
- moves your IP to a different region
- hides sites you visit from your ISP - make sure you’re using DNS over HTTP as well
- mixes your traffic with others - mostly makes tracking more difficult
None of that has anything to do with identity theft. If your VPN claims it does, then that’s stupid marketing and they’re probably hiding other issues they have (e.g. logging policy), and you should probably use a better VPN.
As someone who has had identity theft happen and hired lawyers to fix it, I’m going to trust those close to the case. My information was definitely compromised. And what won in court? The dumbasses put a location I have never been to. Which was why it was overturned.
I do hear what you say and agree with the fundamentals of your explanation. But my experience has shown that with even your location it can cost you thousands.
I don’t use a VPN and had someone try to steal my bank account. When they tried to scam me, they also used an invalid location. They weren’t trying to steal my identity, just my money, so it’s not quite the same thing.
That said, identity thieves are just as lazy. They usually just buy some compromised credentials on the dark web and go to town opening credit cards and loans and whatnot. They don’t compromise websites you visit to steal your location, it would be much easier to grab that from another breach (just cross-reference one breach with another).
So I’m standing by what I said, a VPN will do nothing to help here. Identity thieves and scammers don’t coordinate with hackers that compromise websites to steal your IP. If they get far enough that they’re pointing you toward a website they’ve created, a VPN isn’t going to help, they’re going after your login creds.
So again, get a VPN to hide your traffic from your ISP, limit tracking by advertisers (limited value, they can track through fingerprints), and appear to be in a different area for things like streaming services. But don’t think that a VPN protects you from fraud, that’s BS. Your best options are to freeze your credit, use secure passwords (password managers are great), enable MFA/2FA, and check your credit every so often (once or twice per year is fine).
You can’t hide forever and eventually you’ll be cornered and will have to fight back. It’s always better to have the initiative in choosing the field of battle. If you hide until you are cornered, it’s your enemy who has that initiative.
Every sperm is sacred, every sperm is great.
If a sperm is wasted, God gets quite irate.
<iframe width=“560” height=“315” src=“https://www.youtube.com/embed/fUspLVStPbk?si=IWt0AROYVAxv_NHq” title=“YouTube video player” frameborder=“0” allow=“accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share” referrerpolicy=“strict-origin-when-cross-origin” allowfullscreen></iframe>
Royce dupont on the truth about god and porn: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeeR38i2QqY
How could American politicians be so against pornography, when so many keep getting caught with prostitutes?
Typical. Rules for thee I guess.
Doublethink is a core tenant
Tenet
And that tenet lives in their heads rent-free.
That filthy dirty freeloading communist tenant tenet!
And kids
They’re against pornography, not prostitutes. There’s a difference, I guess.
They are also against prostitutes. Sex work is work! Criminalizing it only serves to endanger those who are most at risk.
And yet they love the man you cheated on his wife with a porn star.
I suppose that’s one way to generalize an entire country.
Just the people who are enacting these laws
You just answered it… ban pornography. It doesn’t ban prostitution.
It’s entirely about loyalty and institutionalized stratification. Laws are meant to constrain those outside the party, while those within the party are given a lot of latitude.
Bind, not protect, protect, but not bind.
There’s probably a name for this just like the “author’s barely disguised fetish”. Usually when you see politicians campaigning this hard on topics like those, it’s probably because they themselves are doing it
Pornography and prostitution are different.
One is information, allowing you to dream (maybe of stupid things), another is in the physical world.
I don’t want to think a lot of these parallels, but I’ve noticed that people close to actual government bureaucracies are in general very sceptical of imagined things against physical.
Among other things, consuming pornography doesn’t make you feel powerful, while a prostitute is a real human working for you.
Also 30s’ propaganda had traits clearly aimed at, eh, sexually dissatisfied youth.
So maybe it’s just about feeling their own power, and maybe it’s about returning that device of affecting minds. I dunno
when so many keep getting caught with
prostitutessex workers?FTFY. If you’ve ever worked for a living, you’re a prostitute - just like the rest of us.
They pander to the Christian nationalists for their votes. They just want power, they don’t actually hold those values.
Neither do Christians, it’s the Billionaires. Need to maximize reproduction of the slaves.
Because we live in a ravenous corrupt oligarchy barely able to keep the appearance of a functioning democracy.
The politicians who are against it are the vast minority, they’re just extremely vocal and irritating.
because they’re conservative, and that’s a thing cons do for some reason. google “i know it when i see it” to get some history on how batshit insane it gets.
How the American war on porn could change the wat you use the internet
looks slightly annoyed
I’m not particularly enthusiastic about such state laws, but the UK spent the last several years having committed to mandate age verification itself prior to eventually abandoning it, and I didn’t see Voice of America trying to get people in the US riled up about British law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proposed_UK_Internet_age_verification_system
And if I recall, they had some follow-up effort, which I assume is what is briefly referenced in the article.
looks
Yeah.
Implementing the Online Safety Act: Protecting children from online pornography
This is the second of four major consultations that Ofcom, as the appointed online safety regulator, will publish as part of our work to establish the new regulations under the Online Safety Act (2023).
Currently, services publishing pornographic content online do not have sufficient measures in place to prevent children from accessing this content. Many grant children access to pornographic content without age checks, or by relying on checks that only require the user to confirm that they are over the age of 18.
The Online Safety Act is clear that service providers publishing pornographic content online must implement age assurance which is highly effective at correctly determining whether or not a user is a child to prevent children from normally encountering their online pornographic content.
Let alone Spain has already implemented a system for this which is part of a bigger EU effort. https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-builds-porn-passport-to-stop-kids-watching-smut/
Sadly, I don’t think this is going away.
I didn’t see Voice of America trying to get people in the US riled up about British law.
Good. They’re not supposed to.
The purpose of the VoA is to broadcast American news and perspectives to the rest of the world. Their programming is not intended for Americans and for most of its history the VoA was prohibited by law from intentionally broadcasting directly to American citizens. A lot of Americans aren’t even aware the VoA exists because of this. This prohibition was eased somewhat in 2013 to make putting VoA content online easier and to allow Americans access to VoA content if we want it. ie I as an American citizen am allowed to hear what the VoA says but they’re still not supposed to talk to me on purpose.
If you do hear the Voice of America trying to get people in the US riled up about anything, be sure to let us know so that we can make the responsible individuals be in trouble.
Don’t care I just generate my own anyway
A system that needs ID verification to access a site is a problem. What if it’s used for other websites as well?
Then I won’t browse to them any more
Yeah, that could work; however, it would be a hassle. Just remember to save everything important locally.
One step ahead of you, I’m actively replacing all of my online accounts with self-hosted alternatives. My state passed both porn ID and social media ID laws, and I assume they’ll try to add this to anything with age gates (e.g. streaming sites).
So I’m moving my stuff to my personal cloud:
- Jellyfin - I’m going back to buying Blurays and DVDs and adding them to my own streaming service
- NextCloud/ownCloud - still playing with it, but I got Collabora set up for docs and spreadsheets, at it supports calendar sync as well
- Vaultwarden - working on switching from the hosted Bitwarden
- Actual Budget - I switched from Mint -> TillerHQ (hosted at Google Docs), and this is the next step (it integrates with SimpleFIN for bank sync)
All of this is available both over my self-hosted VPN, and over the internet with certain services exposed over my domain (all use LetsEncrypt certificates). So I can access whatever I want wherever I am. I do offsite backups with Backblaze B2 ($6/month/TB), and I sync important stuff to my phone w/ syncthing.
It’s a bit of a pain, but there’s no way my state can take any of that away from me. I’ll be adding more services as I find time, and I’ve got a good system now where a new service only takes a few minutes to spin up. Basically, my setup process is:
- add subdomain for the service to my DNS - could use a wildcard, but I like control and ability to move things around
- add haproxy config at my VPS - just copy/paste like a dozen lines of config
- update Caddyfile on my NAS to handle the new service - again, copy like 5 lines
- add and configure container in my compose.yml
docker compose up -d(to build the new service) followed bydocker compose restartto get Caddy to reload the config
Caddy fetches the TLS certificates, and docker handles setting up the service. Unless I make a mistake. Since everything is in docker, I don’t need any ports exposed except 80 and 443, which is managed by Caddy.
I wouldn’t have bothered if Netflix had kept reasonable rates for ad-free watching, but here we are. And now my state is being a pain, so I’ll probably configure my WIFI with a VPN out of state so I don’t have to deal with the stupid ID verification crap.
This is fantastic. Hopefully, crazy politics will at least have a side effect of all of this self hosted software becoming easier. It’s gotten to the point where companies like Hetzner will maintain nextcloud services for a monthly fee but Caddy is already more intuitive compared to what came before it.
Yup. I’m thinking of making a blog series or something about my setup. It’s a little complex, but the individual pieces are pretty simple, so anyone with time and interest could totally replicate it. Mine would focus on Linux, but since everything is in containers, it could easily be replicated on Windows as well.
Oh, and I’m working from the worst possible setup, I’m behind CGNAT, so I have to go through an outside server to make my internal stuff public. A lot of people can just use their router IP instead, which eliminates the VPN entirely (just port forwards from your router).
This should give the dems all they need.
“You do what you need to do in that voting booth, we don’t judge”.
I hope they have some disinfectant wipes at each booth…
3 boats of Puritans and we still all have to suffer.
First they came for the porn.
And then they got distracted with all the porn they had to audit.
If I was a teenager, I would find a way.
probably just need a VPN. Or a website not hosted in the US lol
PornHub is run by a Canadian company, and the guy looking to be our next PM wants to do the same ID thing. So that might be out too, lol
PornHub is already unavailable in my state because they refuse to comply (at least last I checked), but it’s totally available in the datacenter in the next state over. :)
A side thought: what would the world look like if you needed to be 18+ to make a social media account?
Define social media and then imagine a constant argument of semantics where online communities get destroyed and created based on law suites.
I assume practically the same in terms of child safety. Teens will find a way around or a more underground alternative to hang out with each other online.
To your question: More headaches and invasion of privacy for everyone due to enforcement. How do you enforce it other than state issued ID? It would also exclude a lot of people who either don’t have that ID or don’t have access to it. Then there’s the whole question if whether you want the government to know what media you’re interacting with. For legal reasons the social media company would need to keep evidence on file of your identification, if not report it. Keeping is regardless of whether it’s part of that law, CYA and all.
Luckily we have lemmynsfw.com 🥳
Aren’t they going to have the same issue though?
Papers please: for millions of Americans, accessing online pornography now requires a government ID
And I imagine everyone wants a picture of your ID. Which is horrible on so many levels…
From my cold, dead, lubricated hands!
