Most active commenters
  • watwut(4)
  • aaronmdjones(3)

←back to thread

Supreme Court's ruling practically wipes out free speech for sex writing online

(ellsberg.substack.com)
693 points macawfish | 16 comments | 12 Jul 25 18:14 UTC | HN request time: 1.512s | source | bottom
Show context
xp84 ◴[12 Jul 25 19:01 UTC] No.44544217[source]▶
So, while I agree that this feels foreign and wrong to me as someone who has experienced "The Internet" for so long, I can't help but wonder if we can separate that from how the offline world works.

I'm asking this in good faith.

Given that:

1. The Internet is not an optional subscription service today the way it was in 1995. Every kid and adult has 1,000 opportunities to get online including on the multiple devices every one of their peers owns, which a single set of parents has no control over. So "Just keep them off the Internet/control their devices" seems like a silly "Just" instruction.

2. The Internet is nearly infinite. The author of this editorial says "then install a content blocker on your kids’ devices and add my site to it". This is a silly argument since the whole point is that no one has ever heard of him/her and it's obviously impossible for a filter (let's just assume filters can't be bypassed) can "just" enumerate every inappropriate site even if it employed a full-time staff who did nothing but add new sites to the list all day long.

So given all of that, how do we justify how the Internet must operate on different rules than the offline world does? One can't open a "Free adult library" downtown and allow any child to wander in and check out books showing super explicit porn. I'd have to check IDs and do my best to keep kids out. It also seems like it would be gross to do so. If you agree with that, why should the Internet operate on different rules?

I'd also like to separate the logistics from the morality here. If you believe it's hard to do it without satisfying privacy concerns, totally true! But then the focus should be on finding a good privacy-respecting solution, not just arguing for the status quo.

replies(12): >>44544288 #>>44544347 #>>44544450 #>>44544850 #>>44545884 #>>44545971 #>>44546073 #>>44546385 #>>44547167 #>>44547340 #>>44547886 #>>44556828 #
1. perth ◴[12 Jul 25 19:29 UTC] No.44544450[source]▶
Nitpick: currently in the US, most public libraries do not regulate anyone, of any age, from reading “adult” books.
replies(2): >>44544600 #>>44551939 #
2. watwut ◴[12 Jul 25 19:49 UTC] No.44544600[source]▶
They wont allow minors to take out porn. Simply, they wont and it would be illegal for them.
replies(4): >>44544705 #>>44544714 #>>44546324 #>>44549235 #
3. 3eb7988a1663 ◴[12 Jul 25 20:04 UTC] No.44544705[source]▶
What public libraries have porn?

Or is it the pearl clutching where a novel with a same-sex kiss is smut? What about all of the graphic acts that happen in the Bible?

replies(2): >>44545669 #>>44550757 #
4. aaronmdjones ◴[12 Jul 25 20:04 UTC] No.44544714[source]▶
I think the point they were making is that a child can walk into a library, pick up any book, and open it. All without any adults being in the loop. They can do that today.
replies(1): >>44547797 #
5. lg ◴[12 Jul 25 22:18 UTC] No.44545669{3}[source]▶
10 year old me definitely checked out the Clan of the Cavebear books and similar from my local library, no one cared.
replies(1): >>44546063 #
6. DonHopkins ◴[12 Jul 25 23:20 UTC] No.44546063{4}[source]▶
My idea of a hot date was looking up dirty words in the unabridged dictionary.
7. croes ◴[13 Jul 25 00:06 UTC] No.44546324[source]▶
You can read a book without taking it out.
replies(1): >>44548536 #
8. watwut ◴[13 Jul 25 05:41 UTC] No.44547797{3}[source]▶
Yeah, and my point is that the "pick up any book" thing is hiding the fact that selection is in fact seriously limited.

And second, underaged kids can not checkout non kid material without adult in the loop. That part is simply not true, the librarian will say no to the child or ask for parents permission.

replies(1): >>44549255 #
9. sigwinch ◴[13 Jul 25 08:23 UTC] No.44548536{3}[source]▶
Meaning anyone taller than 4’ can reach tedious essays about porn.
10. sethammons ◴[13 Jul 25 10:40 UTC] No.44549235[source]▶
Calvin and Hobbs, the comic strip, has been banned in Tennessee schools on the grounds that it had pornography in the form of Calvin's naked butt being in some cells.

What is adult content? A cartoon butt? A book on breastfeeding? "I can't define porn, but I know it when I see it" has led to Calvin and Hobbs being banned.

11. aaronmdjones ◴[13 Jul 25 10:42 UTC] No.44549255{4}[source]▶
> hiding the fact that selection is in fact seriously limited

If your goal is "prevent children from accessing adult material", it really isn't that limited.

> underaged kids can not checkout non kid material without adult in the loop

They don't need to. They can read it in the library; that's what libraries are for.

replies(1): >>44550716 #
12. watwut ◴[13 Jul 25 14:31 UTC] No.44550716{5}[source]▶
Have you ever been in the library? Cause they really limit minors.

And obviously "adult material" is not referencing cookbooks for housewifes nor antic philosophy nor fantasy books meant for adults.

It does in fact means porn and such.

replies(2): >>44550875 #>>44554844 #
13. watwut ◴[13 Jul 25 14:37 UTC] No.44550757{3}[source]▶
Pretty much none which is exactly why the comparison to libraries makes zero sense.

And yes, there was considerable pearl clutching over same sex kiss. To the point the supposed old school bastions of freedom would not print it, would not put it in the library and would do everything possible for kid not to read it.

The physical world of back then was considerably more restrictive in terms of what kids could access. Whether in the libraries or outside of them.

14. aaronmdjones ◴[13 Jul 25 14:56 UTC] No.44550875{6}[source]▶
I have been to my library yes. You don't need ID or a library card (unless you want to check something out or use a computer) and you can pick up any book you like (including e.g. 50 Shades of Grey), sit down at a table, and read it. There are children in there all the time and there isn't an adults-only section.
15. xp84 ◴[13 Jul 25 17:21 UTC] No.44551939[source]▶
I didn't say public libraries, I was going to say bookstore but picked "library" because I wanted to drive home the point that even a kid whose parents didn't give them any money would be allowed to access the materials. My point: if someone opened a facility to knowingly give kids books about sex acts (and not the "sex ed" kind), we would all agree they are a creep.
16. piperswe ◴[13 Jul 25 23:43 UTC] No.44554844{6}[source]▶
A minor can walk into any library I've been to, grab any book off the shelf, and read it.