
UK porn bill: Throwing our privacy out with the bathwater - piadista
https://plsignore.com/digital-economy/
======
Havoc
The tech behind the UK filter is a steaming hot pile of S anyway.

oh sure it'll filter po.rnhub.con but reddit.com/r/nsfw nope. I suspect a
horny 16 year old can figure that one out

Also...the whole "type your credit card number into this sketchy looking
barebones site" tactic for verification just screams amateur hour

~~~
Smithalicious
> I suspect a horny 16 year old can figure that one out

To be fair, I think that's a really high bar. Never underestimate the
ingenuity of horny teens.

~~~
bsder
[https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-01-23](https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-01-23)

[https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-01-24](https://dilbert.com/strip/1996-01-24)

~~~
Smithalicious
Those who fail to learn from Dilbert are doomed to repeat it

------
mruts
"Making sure the children in our society do not regularly stumble upon
damaging material while browsing the internet, is something we can all get
behind."

Well I can't. Most boys get their first exposure to pornography at maybe
10-12? It's natural and doesn't cause any problems. It's crazy that sex is so
vilified in our society. And I don't think anyone even understands why.

~~~
billpg
We're not talking about peeking at the underwear section any more. How about
teenage boys looking at incredibly violent porn with the women presented as
enjoying it.

~~~
mruts
I mean, a lot of women do enjoy it. Human sexually is incredibly diverse.
There's not one shred of empirical evidence that shows that looking at sexual
material is damaging or affects life outcomes in any way, shape, or form. And
honestly, people don't really seem to care. They just have this puritanical
morality for others, while at the same time engaging in these behaviors in
private. It's total bullshit.

~~~
billpg
The women in porn aren't enjoying it.

Also, that Nigerian prince isn't going to give you millions of dollars.

~~~
mruts
I know women who have said otherwise. In fact, one of them is my wife.

------
toyg
In 30 years, this law will look as silly as the censorship of Clockwork Orange
and the likes.

In the meantime, somebody will make money in VPN services.

~~~
mhh__
The more sinister thing is that many ISPs seem to basically shadow ban VPN
websites e.g. you don't even get a Christianity bait message like pr0n site or
4chan(...)

~~~
Nextgrid
I wonder what's the incentive there. I know ISPs in the UK have to block
certain sites (involved in copyright infringement) but as far as I know no VPN
services are included in there.

What do they gain by banning VPNs considering they already comply with the law
by blocking direct access to forbidden websites?

------
prepend
I understand why you would require only adults to produce porn. Child porn is
exploitative and destructive and one of then worst things in digital spaces.

But what is the reasoning behind limiting porn consumption to adults. This
seems like an odd restriction that is taking away agency from children and
families.

The age limit and type of porn varies significantly among parents that I know.
None restrict porn of their 17 year olds. Everyone has a story of blocking
their 10 year old.

The sheet cost of checking everyone’s id on a big section of the Internet
seems to dwarf any expected benefit. It would be cheaper to hand out free
pihole devices for every parent in the UK that just black holes porn and give
an 800# for parents to get tech support.

In my country some places passed laws requiring grocery stores to check
everyone’s id for alcohol purchases. It adds 10-30 seconds to every grocery
trip and every incentive in a while causes a frustration. A friend’s 80 year
old mother was denied being able to buy cooking wine because she didn’t have
her id. It is so frustrating and an example of how society could improve, even
in a small way, lives of citizens.

------
foobar_
People have a hard time suspending believe when watching porn.

------
DanBC
Interesting that the article mentions GDPR, and then launches into behaviours
that are forbidden by GDPR

> But how could it be cheaper? well here is where it starts to get
> interesting. The second professional could, for example, employ a cheaper
> way to get your ID sent to them, maybe it gets sent via a third party.
> Another way to cut costs is advertising, they could get your consent to use
> your drinking habits for marketing purposes. Now we can just replace
> “shopkeeper” with “online porn publisher”.

