this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
245 points (97.7% liked)

politics

19169 readers
6341 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
outrageousmatter
aidan
jordanlund
HLMenckenFan
little_cow
245
Pornhub disables website in Texas after AG sues for not verifying users’ ages (thehill.com)
submitted 7 months ago by Rapidcreek to c/politics
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 42 points 7 months ago (2 children)

stupid republicans. they were convinced that by putting the squeeze on pornhub they could dictate how that site operates when

  1. this isn't the web 1.0 anymore. websites have been able to geoblock content for at least 20 years now

  2. vpns exist. it's not going to stop people in texas from still visiting the site, nor is it the only free streaming porn site and

  3. unless a credit card or drivers license is required, age verification is easy to get around. "this content is restricted to adults 18 and over (21 in utah). by clicking yes you acknowledge that you are of legal age by penalty of perjury. are you 18? (yes) (no)". I was on adult sites at 16.

this law proves these people have no goddamned clue how the internet works.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago (2 children)
  1. Lads its only Texas

They're used to being blocked by little desert theocracies around the world. Another one isn't a big deal

[–] FutileRecipe 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)
  1. In addition to Texas, Pornhub has reluctantly blocked site access for people in other states with age-verification laws including Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, Utah and Virginia.

Ref: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/03/14/porn-texas-shut-down/72976270007/

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What the fucks an Arkansas

[–] FutileRecipe 4 points 7 months ago

What the fucks an Arkansas

  • Capital City: Little Rock
  • Population: 3.068 million people
  • Area: 53180 square miles
  • GSP: $166 billion per year
  • Unemployment Rate: 3.4%
  • Median Home Sale Price: $120560.

Kagi Knowledge powered by Wolfram|Alpha

[–] Ensign_Crab -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)
  • 4.1. people in red states don't matter.
  • 4.2. Democrats in red states deserve it for being outnumbered.
[–] [email protected] -2 points 7 months ago

Yes

[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago

3 isn’t even true. Any child capable of reading has the ability to input their parents info, meaning a bypass for this stupid law is in every single home across the country that has an adult in it.

[–] FuglyDuck 39 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I suspect that the next step was going to be to require PH et al to turn over usage metrics along with the identities of the people using the platform.

This would give them a very good idea of how many texans are LGBTQ, or into interacial... or whatever else they don't like.

[–] DoomBot5 26 points 7 months ago (2 children)

They won't do that. It increases the risk of finding out how many Republican representatives watch gay and incest porn.

[–] FuglyDuck 11 points 7 months ago (1 children)

watching is fine. Making it... well it's not really gay if the dicks don't touch, right?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Even if they do touch, you can tip your hat and say “pardon me sir” in a 10 second window after the incident to cancel it out.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago

Additionally, you can come in prepared by saying "No homo" which protects you during the whole act.

[–] Buddahriffic 2 points 7 months ago

Even better, they could sit on that info until someone steps out of line or is in their way, then leak it to erode their support.

[–] [email protected] 36 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Fuck Paxton

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

I was so happy when the texas republican party turned on him and were going to charge him with all kinds of corruption. Then the shitheads double thought and remembered that corruption is just what republicans do... no charges..

[–] misterundercoat 12 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Might want to check if this guy has stock in Nord VPN

[–] TK420 1 points 7 months ago

Nah, just appreciates basic access to the internet.

[–] Jas91a 12 points 7 months ago

Here have a gun kiddo but don't you look at some balls unless you're of age

[–] [email protected] 10 points 7 months ago

I can confirm the authenticity.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Texas residents who visit the site are met with a message from the company that criticizes the state’s elected officials who are requiring them to track the age of users.

The company said the newly passed law impinges on “the rights of adults to access protected speech” and fails to pass strict scrutiny by “employing the least effective and yet also most restrictive means of accomplishing Texas’s stated purpose of allegedly protecting minors.”

“Attempting to mandate age verification without any means to enforce at scale gives platforms the choice to comply or not, leaving thousands of platforms open and accessible,” the message said, adding that “very few sites are able to compare the robust Trust and Safety measures we currently have in place.”

“Until the real solution is offered, we have made the difficult decision to completely disable access to our website in Texas,” the company said, first reported by the Houston Chronicle.

Paxton released a statement on March 8, calling the ruling an “important victory.” The court ruled that the age verification requirement does not violate the First Amendment, Paxton said, saying he won in the fight against Pornhub and other pornography companies.

The law asks users to provide government-issued identification or public or private data to verify they are of age to access the site.

The original article contains 398 words, the summary contains 215 words. Saved 46%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] MrNesser 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Thousands of texans just yelled YEeee awwww schucks

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

As a Texan, I find this funny and authorize the upvotes.

[–] Suavevillain 6 points 7 months ago

How about getting parents to do their job when it comes to monitoring their child's internet content? There are enough parental control tools out there.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

yes they so, they ask nicely lol