←back to thread

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

(ellsberg.substack.com)
693 points macawfish | 1 comments | 12 Jul 25 18:14 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
al_borland ◴[12 Jul 25 18:53 UTC] No.44544145[source]▶
All these ID check laws are out of hand. Parents are expecting the government, and random websites, to raise their kids. Why would anyone trust some random blog with their ID?

If these laws move forward (and I don’t think they should), there needs to be a way to authenticate as over 18 without sending picture of your ID off to random 3rd parties, or giving actual personal details. I don’t want to give this data, and websites shouldn’t want to shoulder the responsibility for it.

It seems like this could work much like Apple Pay, just without the payment. A prompt comes up, I use some biometric authentication on my phone, and it sends a signal to the browser that I’m 18+. Apple has been adding state IDs into the Wallet, this seems like it could fall right in line. The same thing could be used for buying alcohol at U-Scan checkout.

People should also be able to set their browser/computer to auto-send this for single-user devices, where it is all transparent to the user. I don’t have kids and no one else’s uses my devices. Why should I need to jump through hoops?

replies(36): >>44544207 #>>44544209 #>>44544223 #>>44544253 #>>44544375 #>>44544403 #>>44544619 #>>44544667 #>>44544797 #>>44544809 #>>44544821 #>>44544865 #>>44544875 #>>44544926 #>>44545322 #>>44545574 #>>44545686 #>>44545750 #>>44545798 #>>44545986 #>>44546467 #>>44546488 #>>44546759 #>>44546827 #>>44547088 #>>44547591 #>>44547777 #>>44547788 #>>44547799 #>>44547881 #>>44548019 #>>44548400 #>>44548482 #>>44548740 #>>44549467 #>>44560104 #
api ◴[12 Jul 25 19:04 UTC] No.44544253[source]▶
Devils advocate: parents that are too busy or not tech savvy are helpless to block content without essentially forbidding their kids from using any connected device.

I run a pi-hole that blocks ads and porn, but that’s way beyond the technical capability of probably 95% of people. There are some commercial products but they are expensive and also take time and at least a little tech ability to set up.

… and of course any phone with 5G/LTE gets around this. Cellular is impossible to police.

replies(12): >>44544262 #>>44544323 #>>44544409 #>>44544530 #>>44544554 #>>44544595 #>>44544640 #>>44544715 #>>44544831 #>>44545184 #>>44545335 #>>44545887 #
lowkey_ ◴[12 Jul 25 20:21 UTC] No.44544831[source]▶
Sorry you're experiencing a bunch of downvotes over a counterpoint from your own experience.

Even though I could predict what side HN would stand on any sort of internet freedom post, reading through all the reasonable yet greyed-out comments in this thread feels like HN's last dying breath as a place for genuine debate.

replies(1): >>44546027 #
api ◴[12 Jul 25 23:14 UTC] No.44546027{3}[source]▶
The replies here are disturbing for their lack of concern or even awareness of the fact that some parents have, you know, economic pressures? Like they have to work long hours or multiple jobs? Both parents have to work?

This site can be really gross sometimes. I want to think it's just that the site skews young and people just don't know. I might have said similar things when I was 20.

replies(2): >>44546218 #>>44548085 #
1. aspenmayer ◴[12 Jul 25 23:46 UTC] No.44546218{4}[source]▶
It’s not gross to want parents to only parent their kids, and to leave the kids of other parents out of it. It’s your responsibility what your kid does on devices that you permit them to have. If you can’t control your kid when they’re not in your presence, or can’t trust them when they’re left to their own devices (pun intended), that’s an issue, but it isn’t a technological problem, but rather a parenting problem.