https://github.com/HelloZeroNet
https://github.com/HelloZeroNet/ZeroNet
perhaps it was too good?
Check the 2023 keynote for Microsoft's Ignite AI conference. Microsoft plans to move ALL compute into the Azure cloud, meaning that they are planning for a future where even your OS in a cloud server.
The GOV's of the world will be on the heels behind the curtain making sure this all passes.
The future is sneaker net.
The only time politicians ever see children is when they can use them as a soapbox to push an agenda.
The ironic thing is many people who decry forcing these companies to verify age, would be fine with such age verification restrictions on Insta or TikTok.
From your own source:
> A government spokesperson said VPNs are legal tools for adults and there are no plans to ban them.
As someone with kids I care deeply about the harmful stuff my children will get exposure to. And I'm worried about this as a negative influence, especially to boys, much more than I'm worried about smoking, vaping, drugs, guns, and most other things. This can absolutely wreck your relationships, and it's just not practical to control on a family level. Over 25% of teenagers have ED and it's going up. That can't be good. And for girls it can lead to risky or overall degenerate behavior due to changing expectations and influence.
So many people here pretend like there's no problem.
Or maybe they think that the proposed solutions are worse than the problem.
Because children are the only ones who use VPNs?
We will never get our privacy once this is widespread. Laws are too easy.
The agency that issues your documents can give you a digital copy that is cryptographically bound to the secure elements in your device.
When you want to prove your age to a web site it uses a zero knowledge proof (ZKP) based protocol to prove to the site that the documents bound to your secure element show that age. Nothing but the fact that they show that age and that they are bound to your element is disclosed to the site.
The ZKP proof protocol communication is just between your device the site. The government that issued your ID is not involved, so they don't know where you have used the ID or even if you have used the ID.
BTW, this is not limited to age. It can be used with any data on your ID. For example if German political forum wanted to verify you were German before allowing you to post you could use this system to disclose to them that your ID has "Germany" in the country field and that would be all that is disclosed.
For those outside the EU, Google has released an open source library for implementing things like this [1].
You are correct.
That said, please tell me which online age verification mechanism doesn't store such PII and/or is immune to hacks/breaches/data thefts.
Please only reference those mechanisms that are actually in use, not hypothetical or experimental mechanisms that are not used for such a purpose.
No rush. I'll wait. Although the actuaries say I'll likely only live another twenty years or so.
And is limited to just a subset (albeit one of significant size) of the folks subjected to such "age verification."
I feel like this narrative is counterproductive. Sure, it is true that some people advocating for this are doing it out of ulterior motives, but it certainly isn't true for all of them. Telling the people with legitimate concerns that they don't actually care about children is going to push them into the camp of the people who want to take advantage of their concern. In order to actually prevent the kind of damage that these censorship systems can inflict, there probably needs to be an actual discussion about the problem these systems are ostensibly designed to address.
People have to remember this is a political issue and politics is about coalition building. Insulting large swaths of the general population as being nefarious liars isn't a great way to build coalitions.
On the contrary! Look at Qanon. They've essentially taken over the Republican party. They not only insulted the bulk of the population, Qanons want them dead. It worked fine.
And large swaths of the general population are nefarious liars who don't actually care about children. If building coalitions requires ignoring that fact, then we're not going to build coalitions. The real world isn't HN, where you're expected to assume good faith at all times, regardless of evidence to the contrary.
This seems to be working okay for the current administration? Among the issues Trump ran on was demonizing a large swath of the population and vowing some nebulous form of revenge.
Today the internet in Russia is utterly broken. A VPN or a DPI bypass tool isn't something nice to have — it's an absolute necessity, especially if you communicate with people in other countries.
That’s not true. Sometimes they see kids for sex. I mean, isn’t this what Epstein is all about?
Focusing on how it makes pornographers almost as poor as average workers is almost an advertisement for internet censorship; I may have to call my rape a "grape," but at least a pornographer will have a bad day.
Being against porn is an issue for the base, politicians don't actually care. When you swallow their arguments whole, you've already lost.
We are getting hit from all sides. You will be tracked and it will be used against you.
It's just that right now, though everyone is tracked, only a few people get watched. So even today, the algorithm is already picking out the people who should be watched. It's just that currently the government doesn't always do it on the up and up.
This should be adopted by many other countries
I'm sure you don't. Feel free to disconnect from the internet though, I don't mind. Also, I wouldn't compare the freedom to have porn with the freedom to have slaves, but it's a cultural difference, right?
Break the narrative abroad and after the frogs are acclimated turn up the heat at home.
No matter how many $x's you conquer, there's always another $x around the corner.
- anthropogenic climate change
- institutional racism
- healthcare availability and affordability
- gun violence
But, I think my comment stands with regard to existential threats, as well, but at scale (so, education and social movements are key).
Resilience and coping skills to better deal with the compromises and hardships required, be it refraining from things we enjoy because it fights climate change or dealing with violence from the state to make our voices heard.
Introspection to strengthen our beliefs, ethics, behaviors, and understanding of the world and different viewpoints.
Ingenuity to come up with solutions to these existential risks.
These are all vitally important at scale.
Stronger people brings smarter choices and less vulnerability to external influences (especially the malicious kinds).
No amount of individual resilience can restore the lost privacy, the lost users & revenue for various sites (including some that have very little to do with porn), the lost websites (including some that have very little to do with porn), the lost dignity for sex workers and queer people...
Do I really need to go on?
Like, this is a governmental action that changes the rules for entire categories of content and websites. How can you think that any degree of individual action or attitude can compensate for that...?
Put simply: You've all been asleep at the switch while the US-side Internet has been systematically under attack by pornscolds trying to implement Chinese-style censorship, this article's author included.
It only hurts real users.
It's clear that the HN crowd is a bit of an echo chamber. Somehow, these messages of warning are not getting to people who need to hear them in order to stop voting against their own interests.
Well, now I think about it, people vote against their own interests on all kinds of issues. So I suppose this one doesn't have to be any different?
I can’t do it alone and I wouldn’t try alone. We need to stand the fuck up and start fighting for our lives, our futures, out world.
But until that day comes? There’s literally nothing for me to do.
And to be clear: I’d happily die for a cause to give my life some meaning. Because as it stands working the rat race is meaningless.
This isn't actually true. What is true is that there's nothing we can do that is effective, spectacular, and will yield rapid change. But history shows that there's a lot we can do. Even recent history. The people in power now are a specific and stark example of that. Nothing about their rise to power was sudden or accidental, it's the fruit of decades of determined, hard work. And it worked. So look long term. You build the future one brick at a time.
There are lots of ways to fight. Certainly many ways that I suspect you would consider pointless or misguided, such as joining up with like-minded people and agitating, lobbying, etc., or getting involved with the local government, joining the school board, whatever. Also many ways that just aren't your thing. All of that is normal and good.
You don't have to be an activist of any variety in order to stand up. Just living your life as best and honestly as you can, becoming a part of your community in whatever facet you can, and avoiding supporting (financially and otherwise) companies and other organizations that use their wealth and power in ways you disagree with is, honestly, also standing up and fighting. Maybe even the most important way, on the whole.
"Whatever you do in life will be insignificant but it is very important that you do it because you can't know [its real meaning]."
It's not a bad cause, allowing children to watch pronographie's, but may I suggest some causes one might find more satisfying? 1) cancer 2) cheap and pollutionless energy 3) reliable food supply
Most people aren't voting against their interests, they're voting for the least-bad option based on whichever issues are most important to them. Often that means they have to vote against what they want on one issue, to vote for something they want on a different issue they care more about. There is no way to vote for every issue someone might want, so there will always be to make this complaint no matter what the outcome is.
Wealthy donors express their political desires by funding politicians who become dependent on their continued financial support.
The voter gets just enough small wins on these wedge issues to keep them somewhat happy. The wealthy preserves the status quo since that’s how they became wealthy in the first place. Our democracy ossifies in the face of new challenges.
If voters across the spectrum viewed campaign finance reform as a key issue, we might have some hope in changing things.
1. To hurt "others". In particular, LGBT (focus on the T) and minorities. When there are minorities in our family!
2. As an extension of (1) - To cut all forms of social nets and gut education. Social nets they actively rely on! And the education systems their own family participate in!
It's not about a better America tomorrow, it's not about taking care of their children's future (who, I should add, are now unemployed because of government layoffs). The "identity" of their "identity politics" is an utter contempt for other human beings being allowed to exist.
There's no discussion of economics. There's no discussion of history. There's never numbers brought out or thoughts on short-term vs long-term policy. It's never how we can improve the lives of Americans or tackle the debt or recover foreign relations or police effectively.
Politics is exclusively about hate. Border "invasion", trans "pedos", Haitian "dog eaters", middle eastern "terrorists", Chinese "communists", gay "weirdos", union "thieves", "emotional" women, "socialist" educators.
Actual policy discussion is so far from the norm and stays in places like HN, but the boots-on-the-ground reality is so far from what we pretend it is in forums like this, it's like a different planet.
TL;DR We appear to be seriously lacking in leadership and organization.
This advocates a:
( ) technical
(*) legislative
( ) market-based
( ) vigilante
...solution to control explicit or controversial content online. It won’t work. Here’s why:
Why it fails:
(*) Can be bypassed with basic tools (VPNs, mirrors, alt accounts)
(*) Users and creators won’t tolerate the restrictions
(*) Requires unrealistic global cooperation
(*) Censors legitimate content (art, education, etc.)
(*) Lawmakers don’t understand the tech they’re regulating
(*) Platforms may quietly ignore or undermine it
(*) Trolls and bots will weaponize it
What you didn’t consider:
(*) Jurisdiction conflicts across countries
(*) Encrypted and decentralized content sharing
(*) Abuse of takedown/reporting systems
(*) Privacy and free expression concerns
(*) Content filters are always one step behind
And finally:
(*) Sorry, it just doesn’t work.
( ) This idea causes more harm than good.
( ) You're solving a symptom, not the problemOr maybe it’s not that odd and this is a common conflict.
I stand on the side of those indifferent to the material consequences of this censorship on pure moral grounds.
And the funny thing is that there are people who seek to mean well and who find the material trade-off intolerable for their own reasons.
Society as a whole is kept in quite the quagmire by the string of these aforementioned hands, ain’t they?
Take a look at the Australian age verification law. Mainstream websites aren't even collateral damage, they are explicitly the target.
As for destroying the internet? No. It may, in fact, make the internet a little better. Less bandwidth usage. Less intrusive advertisements, maybe even less spam.
Age verification for pornography is not the hill to die on. A national internet identification number is the hill to not only die on, but riot.
Pornography is not free speech or free expression, unless you assume a totally unhinged and nihilistic/libertarian view of these terms to mean "anything goes". Pornography is morally reprehensible in every imaginable way, and it is the source of too many social and personal ills to list. It destroys human relationships, ruins a person's ability to relate to others in a healthy and respectful way, cultivates habits that cripple intellectual function, involves the mistreatment and abuse of women in the industry, contributes to infertility, stunts moral development and psychological health, the list goes on. There is no real argument for porn, only boring skeptical rationalization and relativist sophistry, and a list of reasons of why it is a bad thing.
That covers principle. What about policy? Here is where questions of implementation are relevant. The fallacy we must avoid is the false implication that if a particular way of containing, reducing, or eliminating porn is impractical, then all means are impractical. (I have given here a general principle that should guide policy. It may very well be the case that the tactics proposed won't "ruin the internet", even if they may shape the internet in ways that opponents don't like. Porn is so odious, that we may need to entertain certain restrictions that bleed into other areas.)
FWIW, I think a more aggressive, categorical assault on the production and distribution of pornography is more sensible. The internet is a medium of delivery, not a producer of pornography, so existing laws criminalizing the distribution or other objectionable content could be expanded to include pornography. Targeting producers, whether corporate or private individuals, is arguably the most fruitful tactic, with the secondary result that there will be less porn being distributed. And we mustn't ignore the chilling effect that criminalization has on attitudes. It is not true that the only laws worth making are those that can be enforced. A law is a kind of declaration of expectations that has the power to shape social norms. Simply knowing something is illegal has a psychological and social effect. It gives the conscience a signal, or at threat to motivate the morally unscrupulous, and it provides a tangible basis for establishing social sentiment and stigmas. There is a social stigma attached to being a criminal, and so by criminalizing porn, you receive a clear social sanction to classify those involved in porn as criminals and therefore worthy of being ostracized. It won't prevent all pornographic activity, but it will create an environment that will reduce its presence and shape attitudes toward it.
aogaili•5mo ago
The flood of AI content, social media, and confused articles is destroying the internet.
puppycodes•5mo ago
Porn has always been around.
It will easily outlast the idiots writing these laws.
> The Wheel: 6000 years old
> Porn: 42,000 years old (Hohle Fels “Venus”)
jabedude•5mo ago
puppycodes•5mo ago
Not to be rude but, this is a lazy analysis that is filled with assumptions, moralizing, over identification, and magical thinking.
you are falling into a causation coorelation trap
a4isms•5mo ago
I am under the impression that "unhealthy ideas about sex and the opposite sex" have been with us for a very, very long time. If we observe that porn addicts have such unhealthy ideas, are we confusing correlation with causation?
fpgaminer•5mo ago
So if we're looking at correlation, doesn't the data imply that _more_ porn is associated with _more_ rights for women?
(Conversely, the vast majority of people calling for and enacting policies for more restrictions on pornography are also rolling back rights for women.)
diggan•5mo ago
danaris•5mo ago
thinkingtoilet•5mo ago
rescripting•5mo ago
Sohcahtoa82•5mo ago
thinkingtoilet•5mo ago
rescripting•5mo ago
Finding a Playboy magazine in the bushes wont radicalize a 13 year old, but watching BDSM or CNC at an age where you're beginning to form your sexual ideologies can't be healthy.
thinkingtoilet•5mo ago
I completely agree that the intensity of porn that can be accessed at a young age is deeply concerning. I have two sons. If I found a playboy in their room at age 13 we would have a discussion but I wouldn't really care. However, if I walked in on them watching extremely hard core pornography I would be pretty concerned.
giardini•5mo ago
mpalmer•5mo ago
TehCorwiz•5mo ago
The world population also exploded in almost every corner from hundreds of millions a to billions.
Relationships, procreation, gender views, and such also depend heavily on economic outlooks and have tracked that rather than porn in every comparison I can find.
I disagree with your assessment that porn causes those things anymore than violent video games cause violence.
cardanome•5mo ago
Yeah, we should go back in time to when good men used to regularly beat up and rape their wife just like god wanted. Where anything not cis and hetero was not tolerated. Where relationships where based on dominance and very seldom on love.
Nope. As sad as that may be, in terms of having healthy ideas about sex, we are probably at the peak since the neolithic revolutions. Times have never been better, especially in progressive Western nations.
For porn to have ruined anything where would need to be something to ruin in the first place. Young men had unhealthy ideas about sex long before porn existed. They probably have a little bit more of a clue now.
Don't get me wrong, I am absolutely willing to entertain the idea that porn and especially over consumption of porn is problematic in many aspects. However it is not a major societal issues. And I absolutely abhor the idea of the state censoring porn to enforce personal and specifically sexual morality. There is good reason civilized countries don't do this.
bigyabai•5mo ago
krapp•5mo ago
This only seems like porn because we live in a culture founded on Judeo-Christian taboos against sex and the female form. I wouldn't assume it was in any way pornographic in its own time and context.
puppycodes•5mo ago
There are 34000 years of other examples to choose from. It's an example to illustrate how long we have been into depecting explicit forms, for pleasure, for art, or otherwise.
krapp•5mo ago
Pornography as a concept in Western societies was entirely invented by Christians. The same concept does not exist elsewhere in the same form except where the influence of Western colonizing powers forced it upon native cultures, and I guarantee it did not exist 46,000 years ago when the Venus of Hohle Fels was created.
puppycodes•5mo ago
Go off on your liberal arts dissertation though.
aogaili•5mo ago
aogaili•5mo ago
normalaccess•5mo ago
https://youtu.be/-gGLvg0n-uY?si=KDEVLayU5ToEEmpL
sunshine-o•5mo ago
Porn is just the new TV or video games, the scapegoat hidding the real taboo of our society: Parents are happy to believe the society, the government has to take care of their children.
In the 80s they were leaving their children in front of the TV all day long and were blaming the TV programming. Then they bought them video game consoles and games and complained the games were too violent. Now they buy them full HD porn streaming devices with unlimited data and access to the internet to get rid of them and blame porn or tik tok.