this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2024
546 points (98.4% liked)

Memes

52318 readers
738 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 89 points 2 years 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 45 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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 15 points 2 years 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 2 years ago

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

[–] VaultBoyNewVegas@lemmy.world 58 points 2 years 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 22 points 2 years 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 2 years 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 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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 2 years 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 2 years 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 2 years 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 2 years ago

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

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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 24 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Small government, right CPC?

[–] Phil_in_here@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 years ago (1 children)

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.

Well yeah, one of them involves standing up to corpos and the other one would require actually talking to your kids, and conservatives are nothing if not cowardly, so

[–] unreasonabro@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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 2 years ago (5 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 6 points 2 years 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 2 years ago

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

John Oliver did a bit on it 2021

[–] Valmond@lemmy.mindoki.com 2 points 2 years 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 2 years 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 2 years 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 2 years 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 15 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

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

[–] abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 2 years 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 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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 10 points 2 years ago

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

[–] gitgud@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago
[–] bruhbeans@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] BreakDecks@lemmy.ml 4 points 2 years 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 2 years 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 ›