942
‘Britain’s most tattooed man’ claims he is unable to watch p*rn as 'new age check system mistakes his ink for a mask' | Need To Know (needtoknow.co.uk)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/nottheonion@lemmy.world
150 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

cross-posted from: https://endlesstalk.org/post/92550159

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 254 points 1 year ago (23 children)

Since when did keeping kids off of porn sites become everyone else's problem and not the problem of parents? Oh, right, that's just a bullshit reason to make accessing porn more difficult and a security risk since they can't just make porn illegal.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 23 child comments
    •
  • [–] 181 points 1 year ago (13 children)

    It's not even that. Porn is just a bystander here. The first step is put in place a very large framework for making some form of verification mandatory on arbitrary services and sites under the guise of whatever (terrorism, child protection, and extremely niche content are good candidates). Once it's in place, it becomes the new normal very quickly.

    Then, as the government, you suddenly have the power to extend the provision of said system to whatever the fuck you want. That's where things gets funky, and not the good kind.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
    •
  • [–] 67 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    And look at the money.

    The reasoning for this is to eventually lock the internet down completely to put up fences and paywalls everywhere to every single site so that even if you pay for the privilege of using the internet, you will have to pay more money to actually use the internet.

    It is all about controlling you and taking every single penny they possibly can out of your pocket.

    All of the tracking, all of the identity verification, all of the invasive watching every single thing you do on your computer and your phone, everywhere, all of the time always, is all about milking you for every single penny they can.

    Even though they are insanely rich, beyond the imagination of any human being that has ever lived in the hundreds of thousands of years of humanity's existence on this planet they still don't have enough money and they will still never be satisfied with how much money they have.

    The fact that there are free websites where people can congregate and communicate and have fun with each other without paying them for the privilege galls them.

    It grinds their heart and soul the way watching a dog get shot in the head at the end of old yeller does to a normal person.

    These people are evil, and we need to stop them.

    When it comes down to it, we may have to rise up and slay them.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Nothing will improve until the rich fear for their lives.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I'm not saying that we should start getting pitchforks or anything right now. I'm just saying that like, they need to know that that is an option and that if they keep pushing us, they're gonna start painting targets on their own back.

    I mean, that's two billionaires down in a year, and they're still ramping things up. Next year, it'll be four. The year after that, it'll be eight. And in like 15 years, we won't have any billionaires left unless they fucking straighten up an act right.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Sometimes they will act if they fear for their moneys.

    With that said it bothers me that they will always look to strike a deal with the more pacifist/less disruptive parts of a movement in order to neutralise the threat.

    Which in theory means it's useless to actually aim for a reasonable goal but rather you need to overshoot by a fair bit in order for the deal to land anywhere near what you believe is decent.

    BUT when you overshoot you come across as disillusioned and a lot of people will distance from you, making any movement impossible.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    “Oh look, we just banned all the opposition party from using any online services at all because (checks notes) campaigning against us is hate speech “

    All you EU chatters going on about us in the US sitting on our asses and not doing anything about what’s going are gonna eat your fucking words if you don’t show us how it’s done, and quick, because they’re coming for you HARD right now

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Maybe people should care more about voting if they dont like the results. Just sayin...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Given the context of the UK political climate, who would you have voted for?

    *The tories that caused brexit (along with plenty of other scandals)

    *UKIP/Reform (who's members also caused brexit)

    *Lib Dems (split the left vote and help the aforementioned)

    *Labour who as of the last election, hadn't had a go at shafting us in a while

    Im not saying voting isn't important, it is. But i'm struggling to see the connection between this issue and who could be voted for.

    The only party that i've seen against this change is Reform, but they come with more than enough baggage..

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But I was told that third parties would fix everything in the US?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*

    With literally one change, a national-level replacement of FPTP with any other ranked choice voting system (there are plenty to choose from) would make 3rd parties not only viable, but competitive. We would no longer be required to settle for the lesser of two evils, and so the evil party and the greater evil party will absolutely do everything in their power to avoid making that change.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    That's when the databases become huge targets and the government officials get their everything leaked online. They voted against privacy, they can enjoy the stones they threw in the glass house they forced themselves into.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    It's more than that, they want to

    1. limit who can post and make money off porn, and no, this isn't to support small creators at all unfortunately
    2. build massive blackmail networks
    3. build massive sex work websites with curated AI models and videos

    And yes, any time ANY ONE EVER says, "Do it for the kids, just think of the kids," when it is not something DIRECTLY and CONSENSUALLY helping kids, but instead FORCING ADULTS TO DO THINGS, is being manipulative every time.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The only time the phrase "do it for the kids" is actually valuable is when it's someone asking you to grill hot dogs at a picnic.

    If it's a politician saying it, "do it for the kids" is slang for "bend over and take it up the ass because otherwise you're a bad person".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    Yes and again, your example is an action of directly and consensually helping kids. The kids directly get the hot dog you made. They consent to eating the hotdog. They aren't forced to eat it. You aren't giving the hotdog to a third person who will then eat it and then by extension later help a child in some other way. Which btw, they should be doing in the first place.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I’m gonna be the odd one out, I guess.

    At a picnic, it’s likely that you’re not grilling just for the kids; and likely that grilling means you’re excluded from other activities.

    Activities like playing games with said kids.

    Bringing them into the picture instantly becomes manipulative, where you can make the same argument (that they need to be cooked, and someone has to do it,) without it.

    Edit to add some background: I’m an uncle, but not a father. At family picnics, my bro and parents like to use my nephew and nieces as a guilt trip so I let them task dump; even though we’re organized enough they’re fairly equitable (including watching the kids as a task, even if it’s more fun.)

    SiL in particular is egregious.

    It’s always manipulative, even if when the child’s wellbeing is directly involved, it’s maybe called for. But that really shouldn’t t be the case at a picnic.

    Most parents don’t even realize they’re doing it- ie asking you to cover their summer vacation (and not reciprocating.) at work.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    I think the narrative is now that "parenting is hard" and you can't expect parents to do it right by themselves. Parenting used to be easy so parents didn't need any help but now it's just too difficult and government needs to help.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago*

    Parenting used to be easy so parents didn't need any help but now it's just too difficult and government needs to help.

    Ahh ok, so that means they're for parental leave, and free daycare/preschool, right?

    And surely they'll do something to lower the maternal and infant mortality rates, right?

    And they'll definitely make sure that we're teaching proper sex education, and making contraceptives free and widely available in order to lower the rate of unwanted pregnancies, right?

    Right??

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent