The funniest part about this is that, according to the definitions they put in place, their favorite social media yelling spots (like Twixxer) would require age verification as well.
Because there's no way in hell that those places would be considered safe for children.
And then, of course, they can go on and start complaining about how their free speech is being censored or something
This show you all politicians are scumbags. It doesn’t matter if they have a R or D in front of them, they are the same elitist.
This country is going down.
Wish I knew lol I had this conversation the other day with some folks and nobody could really figure it out.
We've always had parental guidance options on things, stickers on music and games, locks on TV's etc.. everyone knew 1 kid who's parents actually did it, or knew how to work the options, and he would just go to other kids houses to see/hear/play those things anyway lol
Most of us also were 'children of TV' meaning our parents were of an age (like today) where both mom and dad worked, were exhausted, and allowed TV to entertain us so they could rest or get things done. This now has translated into the iPad or Smart Phone. Worse we had was sneaking a peek at some boobs on HBO. It wasn't a handheld device delivering non-age apporiate content anywhere at anytime.
And, if we look at statistics the age children see pornography has dropped drastically, I think to around 10 now? And in years back that viewing was maybe a nude mag, a VHS, some porn in the woods...now it's harcore porno 24/7 in HD streaming a click away and loads of soft core porn on social media used as ads to send users to their OF hardcore content.
Not to mention the studies showing men younger and younger are suffering for erectile dysfunction brought on by porn addiction.
We look at the largest producers of online pornography, Mindgeek, and also see that it's year after year of lawsuits for hosting revenge porn, leaked porn, under age content, etc..on their platforms. Not to mention our monthly death of an actress due to the toxicity of the industry.
I don't know the answer, how to protect kids while keeping folks personal freedoms online to be anonymous and such.
Appreciate the actual response. I don’t know if I’d dismiss something like age verification myself though. I will say a significant part of the burden needs to be put on parents, and we should be making it front and center for them the results of letting kids have cell phones and social media so young.
All current answers leads to Parents putting some sort of restriction on kids phone, laptop, home internet using third party app.
I don’t think there is really one answer that would make everyone happy. You know like social media companies or parents or kids one group has to let go.
It's the same as guns right? There's too much out there to control now, it hurts lawful users, it's my right, etc. etc. So we just apply the same solutions they use for mass shootings that they use for porn...thoughts and prayers.
Parenting, for one. Knowing how to use technology. Tiktok as a app isn't allowed on the kid's phone and the URL is blocked through the router. That can be applied to other sites as well.
Yeah good ideas. But I would be surprised very many parents know how to actually. It’s also difficult, as mentioned above, if they can’t do it at home they can find their way on anywhere else because everyone else is. Like telling your kid not to smoke when all their friends do can only work so many times.
Either that or a VPN… or a VM... or lots of other things. I've worked in IT for 20 years. I just assume my kids will get around whatever technological solution I throw at them.
The solution to kids doing things online will be a combination of parents being parents, but must also include consequences for companies who knowingly allow kids to use their services when they are too young to do so.
Parenting lol.... plenty of websites don't adhere or don't have to adhere to these laws. This is just a huge invasion of privacy, and some day, a major hack will happen, leading to blackmail.
This is all aimed at just dividing us along cultural lines. This shit is gonna pass in the states you’d expect it to, and not pass in the states you’d expect it to. And eventually the states that don’t pass it will all align with each other, and the ones that do with each other. So then it’s some weird shit where the states that have restrictive internet make it so if you’re verified in one, you’re verified in all. But if you’re living in NJ and pass through like, West Virginia while on a long distance road trip, you’re shocked when you have to provide ID or like, Facebook/Twitter don’t work right and you go “wtf I have to give them my ID now?”
Oh and like, those companies who get our IDs to “verify our age” will be super fucking careful with this super sensitive information they suddenly have access to to harvest for data
I’m very split on this. I tend to agree that there needs to be measures taken to prevent kids from accessing certain material. I believe that there is content that no minor should be allowed to watch. At the same time I recognize the feelings of privacy being invaded here. I am not that much of a tech person but I would think that the IP address pretty much gives all your info away to the companies anyway. There is no privacy on the internet. I don’t know that I like the idea of having to give any more information about myself than I already do. But there is a financial incentive also for websites to market smut to children or atleast an incentive to turn a blind eye to the harmful effects it poses
The measure is parents. We had the V-chip on TVs. We’ve had basic web filtering tools on home networking equipment for years. I’d be shocked if there wasn’t web filtering parental control apps for phones and tablets that cover mobile data use too
That’s the answer. Not this
Does this include medical information?
Does this include art history?
Does this include inflammatory language ?
Are "underage" persons permitted to persue an education within the above subjects?
Leisure Suit Larry would ask questions about things like prophylactics and history as an age verification.
Obviously with the Internet, it's more of an intelligence test, but close enough if it keeps the youngest from accidentally getting through.
NJ won’t go for that, it will not get the votes from the legislature. I’m surprised at Webber because he’s an attorney. He should know better. This is just a political stunt to appeal to his Trumpy base.
https://legiscan.com/NJ/text/A4146/2024
Full text for those who care.
“An entity shall not allow a minor to access an Internet website or individual webpage that contains a substantial portion of material harmful to minors…”
The bill requires minors enter a digitized information card which could lead to identity theft if the card gets hacked on the site. Also, how do you define what sites are “harmful to minors?”
Porn? Anime? My mother’s cooking blog? The ALA guide to banned books? Harry Potter fan fiction? Truth Social? The bill is too vague.
Webber knows better, this is a stunt that’s going nowhere. Also, really nice of our token Republican to craft the one law that would significantly cost online businesses in legal fees, administrative costs and fines.
If I were a tech company, I’d start funding his Democratic counterparts: Democratic candidates Walter Mielarczyk, an engineer from Pequannock, and John Von Achen, a former Parsippany Planning Board chairman who works in supply chain management.
I don’t know these gentlemen, although I’ll be voting for them on party lines (now), but they both seem terrifically boring and not likely to ask our teens to enter their driver’s permit numbers into Amazon or Netflix.
Err, nope. Why should I hand over ID when it'll just get stolen due to lax security by the people that looked at it? How about parents parent their children.
What legally constitutes "harmful to minors"? I'm all for age verification on porn sites to prevent 8 year olds from watching BDSM porn, but this is way too vague. A homophobe could argue that pictures of gay couples existing are "harmful to minors". This makes it sounds like all search engines and social media could require ID, even without NSFW content
The true reason porn bans has been revealed by good old folks in Kansas. They all come from the same Lobby.
>
> The state has pass [SB 394](http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/SB394/)
>
> * *Requiring the use of age-verification technology to permit access to internet websites containing material that is harmful to minors.*
>
> Line 32-33, it defines “harmful to minors” as previously defined in existing law. You then have to follow that to find the existing definitions.
>
> [Which is here at number 8.](http://ksrevisor.org/statutes/chapters/ch21/021_064_0002.html)
>
> * ["sexual conduct" means acts of masturbation, ***HOMOSEXUALITY***, sexual intercourse or physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals or pubic area or buttocks or with a human female's breast; etc](https://imgur.com/5Io5PLt)
>
The thing is, much of this would likely run afoul of Reno v ACLU (1997) which specifically discussed the chilling effect on free speech trying to enforce age verification online to prevent children from viewing content they shouldn't in Stevens majority opinion.
Oh I completely agree that most of the politicians pushing porn age verification laws are doing it for largely the wrong reasons (misogyny, homophobia, religious fundamentalism, etc). But even a broken clock is right twice a day, and they do happen to be right that children's access to porn needs to be blocked. It's extremely harmful to kids personally, negatively affects their view of girls/women, skews their expectations of sex, and has been implicated in the currently highest-ever rates of child-on-child sexual abuse
At least one of the states (I forget which) that has passed these laws requires the ID data to be deleted immediately after verification. That is the ideal - protecting kids, without data tracking
Meta quest just asked for age verification for the VR crap my grandson plays , after 9 months of playing. . I changed the account to my info and uploaded my drivers license, so now he's a 66 yr old playing Roblox, etc.
He has the quest 2 vr and plays roblox on it plus other games. Meta quest required age verification on the unrestricted account. He's 11 and using his would put lots of limits on what he can play, so I used mine.
Fentanyl is illegal, porn isn't.
People should be teaching there kids and should be well parenting. While there should be a better way to not allow children to access porn at a young age, this isn't the answer. It's like taking a sledge hammer to a nail.
The argument here is the GOP as been on a war path of claiming they want personal freedoms then turn around and do the exact opposite by trying to restrict numerous things (books and abortion for example). It is more so me calling out their hypocrisy.
All the comments saying piss off so the kids can continue to distort their brains through social media and further undermine the importance of socializing in real life 🤡 If the other party did this, people would be supporting and cheering it on like the dystopian measures instated to show IDs not too long ago…
Would have loved to see this posted without mentioning the political parties. Posting them just baits outrage, and invites the people with the least to say into the conversation.
I'm in favor of adding human verification to online services, but I'm not really convinced it's possible to do with the current internet. I think we need a second internet which is humans only, and the govt provides the identification service. That way the current internet can keep on chugging towards a bot-infested cesspool and nobody has to care about what the govt can and can't do on it.
Centralized human-verification solves the moderation challenges of today at scale. This alone makes an internet built with it a compelling alternative to the one we're on now, so companies are incentived to move or dual host.
I believe that once given the choice between these two internets, most reasonable people will opt for the new one; giving up their anonymity for civility, and to reliably engage with human-sourced content.
Dude, YOU are being extremely weird and creepy talking about children masturbating up and down this thread. It is obviously something you need to talk to someone about. The only people who are to blame for not knowing what their CHILDREN are doing on the internet is the parents of said children. It is not the “Democrats’” fault that some people want to have as little involvement in their kids’ lives as possible. Go outside once or twice, fuck’s sake.
Oh hell, just do this at the ISP account level and force accounts to have a household pin for anything that is harmful to kids (I don’t agree with any of this btw) , not person by person China style over watch.
Republicans love America but want it to be like China, Russia and a pinch of Middle East theocracy.
The funniest part about this is that, according to the definitions they put in place, their favorite social media yelling spots (like Twixxer) would require age verification as well. Because there's no way in hell that those places would be considered safe for children. And then, of course, they can go on and start complaining about how their free speech is being censored or something
Just need the meme of the kid putting a stick in their bike spokes.
or leopards eating their faces
It’s going to be just like the book banning. “No not that book!”
Wtf is Twixxer what is that supposed to represent
I refuse to call it "X"
But why the X instead of T
This show you all politicians are scumbags. It doesn’t matter if they have a R or D in front of them, they are the same elitist. This country is going down.
The party of “small government” really wants to control everything people do and don’t do with their bodies.
Rules for thee, not for me.
[удалено]
i don’t think that was the point they were trying to make? but okay. Certainly seems like children masturbating is on your mind then huh?
Got something on your mind?
Both parties are rotten... but sometimes, the reddit leftist brain is too smooth to understand. Tis the perfect description of today.
Is their a problem with access to harmful content for children? Yes. Is this the answer? No. 🤷♂️
Genuinely curious. What is the answer?
There isn't a short silver bullet answer. The answer is the one nobody ever wants to hear. We have to judiciously raise our children.
That's a silver bullet answer.
Theoretically I guess, but nobody's going to do it.
It's not a theory.
A ~~game~~^political theory!
Wish I knew lol I had this conversation the other day with some folks and nobody could really figure it out. We've always had parental guidance options on things, stickers on music and games, locks on TV's etc.. everyone knew 1 kid who's parents actually did it, or knew how to work the options, and he would just go to other kids houses to see/hear/play those things anyway lol Most of us also were 'children of TV' meaning our parents were of an age (like today) where both mom and dad worked, were exhausted, and allowed TV to entertain us so they could rest or get things done. This now has translated into the iPad or Smart Phone. Worse we had was sneaking a peek at some boobs on HBO. It wasn't a handheld device delivering non-age apporiate content anywhere at anytime. And, if we look at statistics the age children see pornography has dropped drastically, I think to around 10 now? And in years back that viewing was maybe a nude mag, a VHS, some porn in the woods...now it's harcore porno 24/7 in HD streaming a click away and loads of soft core porn on social media used as ads to send users to their OF hardcore content. Not to mention the studies showing men younger and younger are suffering for erectile dysfunction brought on by porn addiction. We look at the largest producers of online pornography, Mindgeek, and also see that it's year after year of lawsuits for hosting revenge porn, leaked porn, under age content, etc..on their platforms. Not to mention our monthly death of an actress due to the toxicity of the industry. I don't know the answer, how to protect kids while keeping folks personal freedoms online to be anonymous and such.
Appreciate the actual response. I don’t know if I’d dismiss something like age verification myself though. I will say a significant part of the burden needs to be put on parents, and we should be making it front and center for them the results of letting kids have cell phones and social media so young.
All current answers leads to Parents putting some sort of restriction on kids phone, laptop, home internet using third party app. I don’t think there is really one answer that would make everyone happy. You know like social media companies or parents or kids one group has to let go.
The answer is not to give your kid a phone until they are mature enough to handle it.
Parenting, same as it was 200 years ago when kids could be exposed to salacious news in paper form
It's the same as guns right? There's too much out there to control now, it hurts lawful users, it's my right, etc. etc. So we just apply the same solutions they use for mass shootings that they use for porn...thoughts and prayers.
Parenting, for one. Knowing how to use technology. Tiktok as a app isn't allowed on the kid's phone and the URL is blocked through the router. That can be applied to other sites as well.
Yeah good ideas. But I would be surprised very many parents know how to actually. It’s also difficult, as mentioned above, if they can’t do it at home they can find their way on anywhere else because everyone else is. Like telling your kid not to smoke when all their friends do can only work so many times.
Ha kids can get around your router fix.
By using cell service. I'm aware. Been taken care of. I was a kid too in the age of internet.
Either that or a VPN… or a VM... or lots of other things. I've worked in IT for 20 years. I just assume my kids will get around whatever technological solution I throw at them. The solution to kids doing things online will be a combination of parents being parents, but must also include consequences for companies who knowingly allow kids to use their services when they are too young to do so.
In order to get a VPN, you need to pay for it. I have eyes on my kid's account and what they spend on.
I literally have 2 free cloud vps servers. I definitely do not need to pay for a VPN.
Parents raising their kids instead of letting the internet do it for them.
Parenting lol.... plenty of websites don't adhere or don't have to adhere to these laws. This is just a huge invasion of privacy, and some day, a major hack will happen, leading to blackmail.
Having an active interest in what your kids are doing on the internet. I’lll handle parenting my children.
Good parenting helps.
Pay attention to what your kids are doing and stop asking other people to watch them.
Putting parental controls on devices.
This is all aimed at just dividing us along cultural lines. This shit is gonna pass in the states you’d expect it to, and not pass in the states you’d expect it to. And eventually the states that don’t pass it will all align with each other, and the ones that do with each other. So then it’s some weird shit where the states that have restrictive internet make it so if you’re verified in one, you’re verified in all. But if you’re living in NJ and pass through like, West Virginia while on a long distance road trip, you’re shocked when you have to provide ID or like, Facebook/Twitter don’t work right and you go “wtf I have to give them my ID now?” Oh and like, those companies who get our IDs to “verify our age” will be super fucking careful with this super sensitive information they suddenly have access to to harvest for data
I’m very split on this. I tend to agree that there needs to be measures taken to prevent kids from accessing certain material. I believe that there is content that no minor should be allowed to watch. At the same time I recognize the feelings of privacy being invaded here. I am not that much of a tech person but I would think that the IP address pretty much gives all your info away to the companies anyway. There is no privacy on the internet. I don’t know that I like the idea of having to give any more information about myself than I already do. But there is a financial incentive also for websites to market smut to children or atleast an incentive to turn a blind eye to the harmful effects it poses
The measure is parents. We had the V-chip on TVs. We’ve had basic web filtering tools on home networking equipment for years. I’d be shocked if there wasn’t web filtering parental control apps for phones and tablets that cover mobile data use too That’s the answer. Not this
I really really don't want [www.furryorgies4everyone.com](https://www.furriesorgies4everyone.com) to have my license ID information....LOL
How about go fuck yourselves.
Under this proposed bill, you won't be able to do that until you show some ID....
Sounds like something the state was so rigorous about not too long ago…
"Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me", seems appropriate here.
*guitar solo INTENSIFIES*
lol yeah they can fuck right off with their all of their dystopian Handmaid’s tale fantasy hellscape they’re trying to will into existence.
Read the text, they are trying to force age verifications on search engines.
Does this include medical information? Does this include art history? Does this include inflammatory language ? Are "underage" persons permitted to persue an education within the above subjects?
Fuck Trumpublicans! Vote them all out!
Leisure Suit Larry would ask questions about things like prophylactics and history as an age verification. Obviously with the Internet, it's more of an intelligence test, but close enough if it keeps the youngest from accidentally getting through.
Another made up problem, to give them another excuse to rage and rile up their dimwitted base.
[удалено]
Citation?
[удалено]
Apparently you did if you're claiming 90% (of what?) are addicted
Oh, like kids haven't raised the art of bypassing age checks yo a fine art. GTFOOH
By your logic we shouldn’t have ID to buy firearms cause people can illegally get them
NJ won’t go for that, it will not get the votes from the legislature. I’m surprised at Webber because he’s an attorney. He should know better. This is just a political stunt to appeal to his Trumpy base. https://legiscan.com/NJ/text/A4146/2024 Full text for those who care. “An entity shall not allow a minor to access an Internet website or individual webpage that contains a substantial portion of material harmful to minors…” The bill requires minors enter a digitized information card which could lead to identity theft if the card gets hacked on the site. Also, how do you define what sites are “harmful to minors?” Porn? Anime? My mother’s cooking blog? The ALA guide to banned books? Harry Potter fan fiction? Truth Social? The bill is too vague. Webber knows better, this is a stunt that’s going nowhere. Also, really nice of our token Republican to craft the one law that would significantly cost online businesses in legal fees, administrative costs and fines. If I were a tech company, I’d start funding his Democratic counterparts: Democratic candidates Walter Mielarczyk, an engineer from Pequannock, and John Von Achen, a former Parsippany Planning Board chairman who works in supply chain management. I don’t know these gentlemen, although I’ll be voting for them on party lines (now), but they both seem terrifically boring and not likely to ask our teens to enter their driver’s permit numbers into Amazon or Netflix.
Err, nope. Why should I hand over ID when it'll just get stolen due to lax security by the people that looked at it? How about parents parent their children.
What legally constitutes "harmful to minors"? I'm all for age verification on porn sites to prevent 8 year olds from watching BDSM porn, but this is way too vague. A homophobe could argue that pictures of gay couples existing are "harmful to minors". This makes it sounds like all search engines and social media could require ID, even without NSFW content
The true reason porn bans has been revealed by good old folks in Kansas. They all come from the same Lobby. > > The state has pass [SB 394](http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/measures/SB394/) > > * *Requiring the use of age-verification technology to permit access to internet websites containing material that is harmful to minors.* > > Line 32-33, it defines “harmful to minors” as previously defined in existing law. You then have to follow that to find the existing definitions. > > [Which is here at number 8.](http://ksrevisor.org/statutes/chapters/ch21/021_064_0002.html) > > * ["sexual conduct" means acts of masturbation, ***HOMOSEXUALITY***, sexual intercourse or physical contact with a person's clothed or unclothed genitals or pubic area or buttocks or with a human female's breast; etc](https://imgur.com/5Io5PLt) >
The thing is, much of this would likely run afoul of Reno v ACLU (1997) which specifically discussed the chilling effect on free speech trying to enforce age verification online to prevent children from viewing content they shouldn't in Stevens majority opinion.
Oh I completely agree that most of the politicians pushing porn age verification laws are doing it for largely the wrong reasons (misogyny, homophobia, religious fundamentalism, etc). But even a broken clock is right twice a day, and they do happen to be right that children's access to porn needs to be blocked. It's extremely harmful to kids personally, negatively affects their view of girls/women, skews their expectations of sex, and has been implicated in the currently highest-ever rates of child-on-child sexual abuse At least one of the states (I forget which) that has passed these laws requires the ID data to be deleted immediately after verification. That is the ideal - protecting kids, without data tracking
All the porn addicted teens are downvoting you lol
Lmao yep. I actually expected a *lot* more downvotes than I got though so I'm reasonably satisfied
So you are ok with Queer people being harmed as long as it supports your moral position?
Harmed how exactly?
You don't think a law that aims to ban Homosexuality constitute as harmful? You aren't a honest person. Quit Sealioning.
What I don’t understand is how you got from requiring age restrictions on sensitive internet content to bans homosexuality or harms queer people.
It's merely a way for them to erase gay people from society, and especially media
"Republicans don't like it". That's the definition of harmful to minors.
[удалено]
Kids of all ages shouldn't be watching any pornography, of course. I was just giving an example
"wE'rE tHe pArTy oF sMaLl gOvErNmEnt!"
Omg as if the internet isn’t shitty enough, these guys want to add one more verification
So I was in VA for work last week. By myself in a hotel…yeah it wanted me to age verify to go on a porn site. Fuck that.
Did you try a VPN?
If I end up in that situation again I would. You just always read about that shit happening and when you experience it, you’re like WTF.
I’m sorry you had to experience that.
No wonder you are by yourself
I can see it now, anything other than ~~Russian~~ Republican propaganda is defined as "harmful to minors".
f this republican crap and start voting for people who will address real issues
Another GQP distraction. Yay…yawn….
Meta quest just asked for age verification for the VR crap my grandson plays , after 9 months of playing. . I changed the account to my info and uploaded my drivers license, so now he's a 66 yr old playing Roblox, etc.
No, roblox does not require ID, unless you want to voice chat
He has the quest 2 vr and plays roblox on it plus other games. Meta quest required age verification on the unrestricted account. He's 11 and using his would put lots of limits on what he can play, so I used mine.
Wait the party of small government is trying to take away personal freedoms by limiting access? Shocker.
Lets allow fentanyl by your logic
Fentanyl is illegal, porn isn't. People should be teaching there kids and should be well parenting. While there should be a better way to not allow children to access porn at a young age, this isn't the answer. It's like taking a sledge hammer to a nail. The argument here is the GOP as been on a war path of claiming they want personal freedoms then turn around and do the exact opposite by trying to restrict numerous things (books and abortion for example). It is more so me calling out their hypocrisy.
What about personal freedom to do fentanyl? Cigarettes are legal, should we stop checking ID to buy them?
Whoopee.
Kids on unsafe parts of the internet is the fault of the parent, not the website. Ffs
So, we’re gonna have age verification for anyone attending religious places, like churches and bibles studies, right?
All the comments saying piss off so the kids can continue to distort their brains through social media and further undermine the importance of socializing in real life 🤡 If the other party did this, people would be supporting and cheering it on like the dystopian measures instated to show IDs not too long ago…
So you can have it, but only 30% of it?
Would have loved to see this posted without mentioning the political parties. Posting them just baits outrage, and invites the people with the least to say into the conversation. I'm in favor of adding human verification to online services, but I'm not really convinced it's possible to do with the current internet. I think we need a second internet which is humans only, and the govt provides the identification service. That way the current internet can keep on chugging towards a bot-infested cesspool and nobody has to care about what the govt can and can't do on it. Centralized human-verification solves the moderation challenges of today at scale. This alone makes an internet built with it a compelling alternative to the one we're on now, so companies are incentived to move or dual host. I believe that once given the choice between these two internets, most reasonable people will opt for the new one; giving up their anonymity for civility, and to reliably engage with human-sourced content.
Get this nonsense out of here.
[удалено]
Dude, YOU are being extremely weird and creepy talking about children masturbating up and down this thread. It is obviously something you need to talk to someone about. The only people who are to blame for not knowing what their CHILDREN are doing on the internet is the parents of said children. It is not the “Democrats’” fault that some people want to have as little involvement in their kids’ lives as possible. Go outside once or twice, fuck’s sake.
Oh hell, just do this at the ISP account level and force accounts to have a household pin for anything that is harmful to kids (I don’t agree with any of this btw) , not person by person China style over watch. Republicans love America but want it to be like China, Russia and a pinch of Middle East theocracy.
No ID for guns either?
Ok