this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
501 points (98.5% liked)

Memes

45581 readers
1 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] joyjoy@lemm.ee 77 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The "trustworthy" porn companies are unwilling to serve to regions that require them to store government IDs.

Source: All the good porn sites blocked my state.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 43 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Because that’s like them having to become HIPAA compliant. The amount of work with the potential of breaches and lawsuits isn’t worth it by any means.

Also, I can’t recommend Mullvaad enough as a VPN. I’m on the east coast of the US and can exceed 1gbps down with a connection in Sweden, or max out my bandwidth on servers closer to me.

[–] perishthethought@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Mullvaad

Or Mozilla VPN if you want to use the same tech and also support our friends at Mozilla.

[–] kautau@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

That’s true, Mozilla VPN is mostly just a wrapper around mullvaad, so basically giving mullvaad their standard vpn rate and Mozilla another 5 dollars

[–] ursakhiin@beehaw.org 16 points 1 year ago

My hot take was "the notoriously hackable companies are now trusted to not get hacked"

[–] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 56 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm not worried about pornhub/redtube/xhamster/xvideos/chaturbate/only fans leaking info but more someone hacking in. There's a potential goldmine of blackmail/sextortion material from seeing what fetishes someone has.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even if they do need to authenticate some digitalid, there's no need to store it and there's no reason for it to link to an individual person.

This is a very dangerous idea as is.

[–] platypus_plumba@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And this won't even stop kids from finding porn. I think it is based on good intentions but they are too proud to say "yeha, maybe this has more cons than pros"

[–] Gabu@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

It's obviously not based on good intentions... how can you be this naïve? If a conservative says "but think of the children", you know fully well whatever they're proposing is not for the wellbeing of children.

[–] exocrinous@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

When a conservative says "think of the children", what they mean is "think of the queer kids that will be outed to their parents and sent to conversion therapy".

[–] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago

Does anyone have a copy of Mike Johnson’s ID? His son is in for a lot of notifications.

[–] exocrinous@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago

Also porn history is a really good clue to figuring out someone's sexuality and gender identity. And useful to conservatives for demonizing queer people as sexual deviants. I 100% believe this is an indirect way of harming queer people by outing them and their sexual interests.

[–] explodicle@local106.com 2 points 1 year ago

I'm hoping it happens to everyone all at once. Then another wave of sexual liberation can begin.

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Damn it! I come to Lemmy to laugh at US politicians saying stupid things! If the CPC win the election I fear c/memes is going to have more Canadian Content.

[–] wise_pancake@lemmy.ca 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Small government, right CPC?

[–] Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 16 points 1 year ago

To be clear: climate change requires individual responsibility. Keeping your kids off legitimate online pornography websites is too big for citizens to handle on their own and requires government intervention.

[–] unreasonabro@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

that this is not enough of a dipshit statement to exclude him from everybody's good books is... like, what's the point

if you cannot plainly see that this is the most retarded suggestion it is possible to make under capitalism, it can only be because you have paid attention to no world event since like 1750

the plastics recycling lie (it's just been shown that plastics recycling does not work, can not work, and that the oil companies have known this, lied about it, and then made money selling additional recycling-related products since like the 70s) is so recent and yet still walks out there, with his bare face hanging out, and says this shit

[–] Toast@feddit.de 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I've never heard that plastic recycling straight up doesnt work but it sounds like something the oil companies would do. Do you have a link to a documentary or something about that matter?

[–] PilferJynx@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Basically it costs too much to recycle most plastic. It's just so much cheaper to sell it to impoverished countries that will either burn it or dump it somewhere.

[–] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Maybe if we could solve for plasma arc gasification plants to turn garbage into clean energy. But not presently

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 2 points 1 year ago

I bet he knows about the very high leak probability, for him it's just another tool to subdue people (he'd love to have the leak himself to leverage power).

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 2 points 1 year ago

I bet he knows about the very high leak probability, for him it's just another tool to subdue people (he'd love to have the leak himself to leverage power).

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 2 points 1 year ago

I bet he knows about the very high leak probability, for him it's just another tool to subdue people (he'd love to have the leak himself to leverage power).

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 2 points 1 year ago

I bet he knows about the very high leak probability, for him it's just another tool to subdue people (he'd love to have the leak himself to leverage power).

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Remember: to conservatives, private companies can do nothing wrong.

[–] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah it's not the Porn companies I'm worried about, it's the companies the porn companies use to store the data. Even if they don't leak it, someone ~~can~~ will break in, either a bad actor or the government themselves because, let's be frank, having a list of porn users and what porn they watch is going to be irresistible if they want to spark a scandal based around, say, rival politicians or activists.

[–] init@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I trusted my government to protect my info, and now I have LifeLock for life because of several breaches on their part. If data is stored, it is virtually certain some portion of it will get leaked.

[–] Xyloph@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 year ago

And here I was thinking banning flipper zeros was the top of our government stupidity

[–] gitgud@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago
[–] bruhbeans@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

This is interesting. This incident resulted in the Video Privacy Protection Act. I wonder if you could apply this to streaming providers who sell your watch history to advertisers.

[–] darkevilmac@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 year ago

I guess they were getting tired of doing well in the polls and wanted to shoot themselves in the foot a bit just to remember how it feels.

load more comments
view more: next ›