Pornhub Blocks All of Utah From Its Site 219
In response to a new law that requires porn sites to verify users' ages, Pornhub has completely disabled its websites for people located in Utah. From a report: As of today, anyone accessing Pornhub from a Utah-based IP address doesn't see the Pornhub homepage, but instead is met with a video of Cherie DeVille, adult performer and member of the Adult Performer Advocacy Committee, explaining that they won't be able to visit the site. "As you may know, your elected officials in Utah are requiring us to verify your age before allowing you access to our website," DeVille says. "While safety and compliance are at the forefront of our mission, giving your ID card every time you want to visit an adult platform is not the most effective solution for protecting our users, and in fact, will put children and your privacy at risk."
working as intended (Score:5, Insightful)
I would say that this is exactly what Utah officials envisioned when they passed this legislation.
I do wonder what the Internet will look like in 100 years. Will it all be locked down and federated? Seems like the direction things are going.
Re:working as intended (Score:5, Insightful)
Kids aren't going to get VPN providers (Score:5, Insightful)
But that's a pretty standard right wing thing. You decide something is immoral, force your will on other people (all while talking up a "small gov't" game) and then when your bad policy causes untold harm you blame the victim. That's right wing politics 101.
Re:Kids aren't going to get VPN providers (Score:5, Insightful)
There isn't one, roastie. And I can tell you there was ZERO trafficking on Backpage before they took it down, because Backpage self-policed that shit. Anything I ever saw that was questionable was gone 5 minutes later. Now the escort sites are sites you haven't heard of, and they're all on EU servers.
Re: (Score:2)
Now the escort sites are sites you haven't heard of, and they're all on EU servers.
Have an examples? For, you know, research purposes?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Tell us again how safe legal, rare worked out.
You'll have to fill me in on that one. I've seen safe & legal argued for marijuana, and overall we're trending that way, but I've never heard rare used in that context. And I can't think of anything else it might apply to.
What has been the trend in drug abuse since we backed off the 'war on drugs'?
When did we back off? Our prisons are full of people convicted of possessing small amounts of drugs. We jail tons of people for minor drug crimes.
What the relationship between legal porn, and sex-trafficing again...
There is no relationship, at all. They're not even remotely related.
Re: (Score:3)
Safe, legal, and rare was the desire phrase the Clintons used for abortion back in the day.
Given that the abortion rate declined while it was legal, it was working.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm trying to figure out what point your are trying to make.
If there is no difference on drug abuse after we backed off the 'war on drugs' what was the point of wasting all that energy, money and time on the 'war on drugs' anyway?
What traditional mores? This is just someone imposing their will on others.
The relationship between legal porn (Score:5, Informative)
As for drug abuse, it's down in every place that legalizes drugs. Pot isn't a Gateway drug in the sense you think of it. The "gateway" is that once you've made somebody commit a crime (and go to jail) for a bit of weed they've now passed a line in the sand, making it more likely (statistically) for them to go onto harder stuff because they've already committed one crime. Legalizing drugs and treating the hard stuff as a medical condition is both cheaper and more humane.
Over and over and over again harm reduction works. But it doesn't let you take away voting rights (*cough*Richard Nixon*cough*) and it doesn't fill private prisons.
No one cares about drug "use", just "abuse" (Score:2)
Drug use is most certainly not down in west coast cities that have decriminalized hard drugs.
We only care about drug "abuse." You want to smoke legal weed in the privacy of your home...who cares? I personally hate the stuff, but if that's what someone else needs to destress?...it's no worse than scotch. Also, those cities have increased crime because of increased poverty and wealth inequality, not drugs. If people could afford housing and a decent standard of living with a regular job, crime would go WAY down...as would homelessness.
Just look at prohibition for an example of where your logi
Re: (Score:3)
What has been the trend in drug abuse since we backed off the 'war on drugs'?
It's really weird when you start looking into fentanyl. So apparently China sells the majority of fentanyl precursors to Mexico. And yet drug cartels that are normally seemingly capable of very precise chemical formulations are creating overdose pills all over the place. Doesn't seem good for business, and I expect a lot of people are avoiding hard drugs that would have tried them otherwise because of the fear of fentanyl contamination. It's almost like the US managed to convince cartels to start using
Careful what you wish for, chief (Score:2)
Ah the harm reduction argument. Tell us again how safe legal, rare worked out.
Greatly reduced crime? Less families in poverty?
What has been the trend in drug abuse since we backed off the 'war on drugs'?
It worked out well. Recreational weed is legal in my state. Crime has gone down. People who want to get high go to disp
Re: (Score:2)
Sorta like how banning guns is a left-wing thing. You decide something is scary, then force your will on people who haven't hurt anyone and then when bad policies lead to crime-ridden cities, police forces that take minutes or hours to respond, people being murdered because they are defenseless...then you can blame the criminals who don't follow the law to begin with.
Surely you jest. Most people being murdered, statistically, are drug-related murders (86% of homicides), and drug dealers tend not to follow the law to begin with, so if they're defenseless, it is presumably because they left their guns at home.
And the #1 strongest correlation with the number of gun murders is the number of guns. So anybody arguing that more guns will somehow make people safer is arguing directly against the data.
There are exceptions, of course, such as people with abusive exes, but that
Re: (Score:2)
Surely you jest. Most people being murdered, statistically, are drug-related murders (86% of homicides), and drug dealers tend not to follow the law to begin with, so if they're defenseless, it is presumably because they left their guns at home.
And the #1 strongest correlation with the number of gun murders is the number of guns. So anybody arguing that more guns will somehow make people safer is arguing directly against the data.
There are exceptions, of course, such as people with abusive exes, but that still doesn't mean that firearms are the right solution, only that we live in a world where the tools necessary for someone to get away from an abusive situation (e.g. government relocation and job change assistance, restraining order surveillance, incarceration of serial abusers, etc.) are often broken or nonexistent. Solve those problems, and the defensive need for guns is diminished greatly.
Yeah...there's a difference between "murder" and "killing". A murder is the unlawful ending of a human life. Like all the gangbangers shooting themselves in Detroit, Chicago, San Francisco, or the insane trannies shooting up schools. A killing can be either lawful or unlawful. If you break into my house at 3 AM and shout "I'm here to rape and rob you" and I blow you away, that's a lawful killing in self-defense.
And those are exceedingly rare. Criminal homicide outnumbers justifiable homicide 35:1, and a lot of those justifiable homicides involve police officers.
You know what other correlation doesn't equal causation? Humans breathing air equates to people murdering. We can stop *all* murders if we just kill off all humanity, right?
First, animals murder each other all the time, and would continue to do so if all humans ceased to exist.
Second, you're wrong. Gun violence is typically measured in per-capita terms, so until there are zero people, you would expect it to remain constant as you wipe out all humans (or even to increase as they fought back). And when you hit zero, gun viole
Re: (Score:2)
Actual highest homicides per capita:
The 10 cities in the United States with the highest murder rates (murders per 100,000 people) are:
St. Louis, MO (69.4) (last Republican mayor was 1945)
Baltimore, MD (51.1) (last Republican mayor 1967)
New Orleans, LA (40.6) (All mayors of New Orleans since 1872 have been Democrats.)
Detroit, MI (39.7) (last Republican mayor 1962)
Cl
Re: (Score:2)
Try looking at per capita per state and things take a different turn.
Re: (Score:2)
republicans as always (Score:2, Funny)
are obsessed with other peoples' genitals
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
While it is true that elected officials do things to earn voter support, it is also true that they have political agendas of their own to push.
In the case of Utah, many of the elected officials are likely to be religious and puritanical, so it is believable that at least some of them would have a desire to legislate morality like this.
There is also the issue of America's severely declining birthrate, which has many people alarmed. One way people are reacting is by trying to take away any sexual outlet that
Re:working as intended (Score:5, Informative)
Well, here's what they find important. https://assets3.cbsnewsstatic.... [cbsnewsstatic.com]
Nothing about wages, healthcare, the economy, world affairs. Just jesus, guns, and Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, here's what they find important. https://assets3.cbsnewsstatic.... [cbsnewsstatic.com]
Nothing about wages, healthcare, the economy, world affairs. Just jesus, guns, and Trump.
Which is ironic as I'm pretty sure Jesus wouldn't support Trump or the US gun culture / obsession / fetish. WWJD? Not those.
Re:working as intended (Score:5, Informative)
The news you watch is both sad and frightening. https://news.yahoo.com/republi... [yahoo.com]
House Oversight & Accountability Committee Chairman James Comer admitted in an interview with CNN that the committee he leads has yet to find any criminal activity on behalf of President Joe Biden’s family.
Re:working as intended (Score:5, Informative)
Go read the Meuller report (you haven't and won't), then tell me what Trump was guilty of.
I read it.
Mueller found evidence that Trump's campaign conspired with Russia to influence the election, but the evidence was circumstantial and wasn't strong enough to warrant prosecution, meaning the evidence didn't meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard. He therefore issued a negative finding, at least with respect to Trump. He did indict many others, both Russians and Trump campaign officials.
Mueller found overwhelming evidence that Trump obstructed justice. He laid out a dozen cases, and for every one of them meticulously documented exactly how the legal requirements for the crime were met. But because of the DoJ opinion paper that bars indicting a sitting president, he could not recommend indictment and considered it unfair to make the accusation since Trump would not have been given the opportunity to defend himself in court (because it would never have gone to court). So he issued no finding at all. It seems pretty clear to me that he expected that by detailing the evidence he was handing it over to Congress to pursue. But Barr's whitewash worked and Congress didn't pursue it. They might have if the Ukraine scandal hadn't erupted and looked like a cleaner case for impeachment and conviction.
In Biden's case, James Comer has yet to find evidence of any criminal activity. He didn't say "insufficiently-strong evidence", and he didn't say that he was barred by a DoJ opinion (which wouldn't apply to Biden's family, and which Comer wouldn't be restricted by anyway). He said he hasn't yet found anything.
One thing is not like the other.
Re: working as intended (Score:2)
"Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything."
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt they envisioned anything. The just found that the issue polled well. If this spread to other states, invest in VPN providers.
Yep. "Casual evil" done for a minor personal gain. Leave it to the deeply religious to do that on this scale.
Re: working as intended (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
this is exactly the reaction i recently proposed in a similar situation for arkansas
(https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=22836494&cid=63434112#comments)
it's hilarious that in this case it wasn't facebook or twatter, but no other than pornhub doing the right thing. fuck yeah, that's how you deal with self-righteous intolerant and ignorant morons, just where it hurts: sorry, no porn for them anymore, enjoy your own medicine! :'D it's just comedy gold!
So in 2 election cycles (Score:3)
When that happens a lot of this nonsense will go away, being quietly repealed in a rider to a budget bill or something.
Assuming we're still a democracy that is. I've got my doubts. There's definitely a concerted effort on the part of folks who's grip on power is slipping to do away with this troublesome "democracy" stuff.
Re: (Score:3)
the baby boomers will "age out" of voting and Gen Z will age into it.
When that happens a lot of this nonsense will go away, being quietly repealed in a rider to a budget bill or something.
What will be really interesting is to see if the distribution of political beliefs in each generation remain static as they age. I have my doubts. The current boomers likely did not act the same way or believe in the same things when they were teenagers. Values tend to change as life situations change and life experiences accumulate. I would be surprised if the current Gen Z doesn't start to acquire boomer views as they approach boomer age.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does not appear to be happening to the same extent. Current theory is that Boomers became more conservative as they became more wealthy and wanted that status-quo to be preserved. That's not happening to the same extent with subsequent generations, so they are becoming more radical as they age if anything. Fun times ahead.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The boomers mostly did very well when they were young. There were lots of opportunities for them, cheap fossil fuels, cheap housing, fantastic pensions. Gen Z doesn't have access to those things, and they have to deal with climate change too.
Boomers love to blame Gen Z for being lazy and wasting their money on avocado toast, but the reality is that they created that situation. They are conservative leaning because they think that if Gen Z was just more like they were at that age, things would be better. It
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming we're still a democracy that is. I've got my doubts.
I have little doubt.
We are no longer a democracy but an oligarchy with a thin crumbling veneer of choice that is noticeably failing to pacify the consumers.
We're well on our way to dictatorship. The only uncertainty is whether the overseers will be wearing red or blue.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, there was some bit of self-inflicted eugenics at play with COVID that may have had an impact. Early on before Republicans were denying COVID was even dangerous, they were basically calling on sick old people to die for the good of the economy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Assuming Gen Z can take the time to stop filming Tik-Toks and actually go to the polls. Not many of the younger crowd bother to register, much less vote, which allows boomers to still remain at the helm.
Not just "Gen Z", but every generation in history. Young people don't vote. (There's always a huge push by the parties to get them to vote. But it never amounts to anything.)
Maybe *this* year/generation things will be different!
Nope.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Show a tit or two (or more) people fucking and its the end of the world (never mind that in almost 99% of the cases, that's how many of us GOT HERE!!!.. And yet. a person mowing down people faster than a fat man with a free ticket to the Cinnabun factory and that's ok..
Violence.. no problem
Drugs.. umm.. well as long as there is some redemption or upside in the end, its ok.
Cursing.. Fuck yeah!!!
But sex?... (something that is in our VERY DNA and quite literally EVERYTHING on the pla
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. This measure doesn't remove liability, since it is obvious to all concerned that Utah citizens requiring inspiration can make their exit node appear out of state.
Re: (Score:2)
That's interstate commerce. States can't regulate that.
Of course, Pornhub also isn't based in Utah, so it is still interstate commerce. But they don't want to pay for the lawyers. They'll probably let someone else do that.
Re: (Score:2)
All make sense except 802.11x, what does a WiFi protocol have to do with this? Curious
Re: (Score:2)
Pretty sure you meant 802.1x (PNAC) not 802.11x (generic term for quite of WLAN protocols)
Smarter move (Score:2)
Open a VPN service in Utah and link to it.
Re: (Score:3)
I can see people going a step ahead of this, and creating remote machines (think Windows 365) one can RDP into for pr0n viewing. This way, all the bookmarks, history, cookies, and other stuff are stored offsite, and the Internet connection for browsing stuff is coming from the service provider. The only thing that can be snooped on is the remote desktop connection, which would be encrypted, point to point, no VPN needed.
Of course, this means trusting the service provider, and it is a lot more work for the
Re: (Score:2)
I can see people going a step ahead of this, and creating remote machines (think Windows 365) one can RDP into for pr0n viewing. This way, all the bookmarks, history, cookies, and other stuff are stored offsite, and the Internet connection for browsing stuff is coming from the service provider. The only thing that can be snooped on is the remote desktop connection, which would be encrypted, point to point, no VPN needed.
Looking to see if mypornstash.com is already registered or not. Ka-Ching!
Re: (Score:2)
wank.to sadly is taken.
Re: (Score:2)
Almost right. Open a VPN service almost anywhere but Utah. Today marks Mormon VPN Day. The day 100,000s of Mormons signed up for VPN service to keep accessing Pornhub.
There will be an interesting social effect here. You hide your porn so that people casually glancing at your computer don't see it. Will it be harder to hide that you have VPN software installed?
Is that already a thing in repressive countries? A way to hide your VPN software when your laptop is inspected?
Will there be a service (offered by the church) that certifies that you're not using a VPN? Or how about: Everybody righteous MUST USE a church-approved VPN, which of course filters out porn. This would be
Re: (Score:2)
None of that will happen. The law requires sites to check age, it does not bar anyone in Utah from viewing porn.
Its not a crime to use a VPN. Its not even a crime to use a VPN to watch porn without having to prove your age.
The law just prevents offering online pornographic materials to persons in Utah without verifying their age, offering certain parental controls, and curfew features.
Legislating Morality (Score:5, Interesting)
Now, the backwards religion of Utah that clings to beliefs of an 19th century Charlatan thinks blocking porn is going to somehow help society. It won't, but it scores points with the (irrational) religious base.
Fun fact about the Morman church (Score:4, Interesting)
Look it up, I'm sure the church would like to forget their early days, but it's pretty well documented.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Totally agreed, they justify changing things by "revelation," which basically means "Because the head of the church (Prophet) said so."
As opposed to all other religions?
Re:Fun fact about the Morman church (Score:4, Interesting)
Catholicism: While the pope is 'infaliable,' de facto a Vatican Council is required for major changes. For example, when the mass stopped being said in Latin, this required a Vatican Council with all of the Cardinals etc in attendance to make the decision.
Islam: Imams or Ayatollahs etc may control small groups of Muslims, but due to fragmentation no decree from one person has universal impact on Islamic people. Even then, centuries of Islamic jurisprudence and scholars make it so a leader making vast changes to the rules of the faith can be in a tenuous position, or replaced etc.
Judaism: . While Rabbis may control closely small following, such as individual Hassidic communities (e.g. Satmar, Lubavitch/Chabad), they only speak for a small minority or community. In reform Judaism interpretation of what rules to follow is left to the individual, and individual rabbis (basically governing a parish, not millions and millions like the Mormons) make determinations for Orthodox communities.
For all these religions, walking back old dogma would be very difficult -- we see this in how Pope Francis has been unable to allow women to be ordained due to opposition of the Cardinals.
Mormonism is one of the few religions beyond the status of a small cult or sub group (with 17 million+ professed members) where the leader has dictator-like control over the organization. Other religions would view assuming the title of Prophet for a church head would be blasphemy. In addition, they maintain control of the government of the State of Utah -- no other individual religion has control of a US state like they do, due to the fragmentation of other "Christian" churches.
So, while leaders of other religions have control, the scope of control in the Mormon church given to one individual is quite remarkable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And don't forget the church hit squads.
Really, the more you dig into Mormonism, the more it's like some cynical, dystopian cyperpunk cult.
Re: (Score:3)
Interesting, but a quick google suggests that early mormonism was extremely anti-prostitution, and instead "prostitution" was used against mormonism to criticize polygamy. Any sources?
Utah has a Porn History (Score:5, Informative)
Utah has found themselves on the top of "State with most porn consumed" a couple [ksl.com] of times [nytimes.com] in the past.
As someone who used to run porn sites (Score:5, Interesting)
As someone who use to run porn sites, my metrics always showed that the most active users in the USA tended to be from either gulf coast states or Utah. Maybe the majority of people in those places are prudes, but everywhere there are a bunch of prudes, there's a greater than normal demand for gaping buttholes, muscle twinks and teenage MILFs.
Pornhub and its corporate parents are deeply awful companies. They don't do anything right by performers and at the lowest levels of camgirls, it's much closer to sex trafficking than anything else. But on the other hand, it IS well moderated and responsive to legal matters. I understand that the people who are seeking these restrictions want to legislate porn out of existence and that All Porn Is The Enemy, but if these people could actually read without moving their lips, they'd realize that they'll get farther with restrictions by working with major players in adult entertainment than trying to prevent access entirely.
Re: (Score:3)
APITE is an OK acronym, but it would be better if you could think of a couple more words to add to make it APETITE.
Re: (Score:2)
APETITTY? TITEAPE? Regardless, I don't think involving our genetic cousins is going to poll well. Then again, it IS Mormon country, and they don't accept evolution anyway, so maybe it's fine.
Re: (Score:2)
...it would be better if you could think of a couple more words to add to make it APETITE.
We only have to hark back to that fateful Superbowl a few years back to recognise what 'terrifies' some Americans:
All Porn, especially titties, is the enemy
APETITE.
Re: (Score:2)
Completely dishonest take (Score:2, Insightful)
This is about allowing people to browse the content without having an account. That's where they get most of their money. Doing basic KYC checks on registered users is easily done; most of the major crypto exchanges have semi-automated the process of checking IDs and wouldn't mind sharing the tech with them.
There's no requirem
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly this. Did see the video but I would love to hear their explanation about how it "puts children at risk."
I do appreciate the privacy challenges around these age verification laws; but I fail to see how it puts anyone 'at risk' of anything other than perhaps not being able to watch free porn.
Its just sour grapes.
Re:Completely dishonest take (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly this. Did see the video but I would love to hear their explanation about how it "puts children at risk."
Because humans (including teenagers) are not going to stop desiring porn just because their state legislature said so... Many/most are simply going to turn to progressively shadier sources (i.e. those sites ignoring Utah law) to get whatever they can. Many will get scammed, infected with malware, blackmailed, get their identity stolen, etc. along the way.
Re:Completely dishonest take (Score:5, Insightful)
Victim-blaming is a hallmark of the conservative mindset. You're poor? It's because you don't work hard enough or make poor life choices. Teenage daughter pregnant? She shouldn't have had sex; you should have been better parents. Got your identity stolen? You shouldn't have been visiting such sites. Additionally, the conservative mindset generally thinks the victims deserve it because they weren't virtuous enough.
Re: (Score:2)
So you're argument the predators who are the result of the previous generation of predators we did not deal with hurt people. The problem maybe isnt the people and methods trying to keep smut away from good people but possibly the smut dealers!
<sarcasm>...because this approach worked so well during the war on drugs, prohibition, etc.</sarcasm>
You cannot realistically ban anything in the real world. Someone with sufficient motivation will find a way to get the banned item or substance. And bans only ensure that people who find a way to do so are put at greater risk of harm during the acquisition process.
Thus, banning things should generally be limited to situations in which either there is no strong motivation to obtain the banned th
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Any time you reveal your identity online, it can end up anywhere, most notably in the hands of blackmailers, or alternately in the hands of the govt, who may find you "interesting." 99.999% of people who view porn online do not want either of those parties to know about it.
However, it is entirely likely that local police do sniff either before or at the isp, so mind your manners.
Re: Completely dishonest take (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
A well regulated militia. How else are you going to know who to call up if you don't have a list of people who own guns?
Re: (Score:2)
NRA members are hilarious.
I don't want the government having a list of gun owners!
Ok so you pay the NRA to maintain the list instead of the government?
Fun Fact (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
It's not just Mormons. If you look across all religions, the stricter the religion, the most randy and pervert its members are. I know that because I grew up in a strict catholic environment (and in Utah no less) and I've never seen a more bizarro sex-obsessed bunch.
My personal theory is that the more taboo a community a places on something, the more that something ends up being the focus of unhealthy attention from the frustrated members of that community. When sex doesn't carry such an emotional charge, p
Re:Fun Fact (Score:5, Interesting)
It is quite standard and quite well documented. After all, sex drive is one of the most irresistible biological drives and literally needed for species survival.
And it is worse: Outlaw porn, get a lot more rape and sexual child abuse because some people will be unable to control themselves without that outlet and go into more and more deranged fantasies. Just look at all those priests raping children, because that was the only access they could get and they could just not help themselves. (Assuming here that the typical priest is not just plain evil. That may be open for debate.)
Some references. There is a ton more out there. The 2nd one shows the effect in the Czech Republic is not limited to less children getting raped, even if the first does refrain from stating that outright. Also fascinating, apparently rapists consume significantly _less_ porn than average men:
1. https://www.sciencedaily.com/r... [sciencedaily.com]
2. https://www.psychologytoday.co... [psychologytoday.com]
Of course, the fanatics cannot have that, and hence finance a lot of "research" that is supposed to show that porn availability increases sexual assault, even when that has never been observed.
A reference explaining one of the usual tricks used to skew reality:
3. https://www.psychologytoday.co... [psychologytoday.com]
tl,dr: All men consume porn. It does not make then rapists. But the less porn consumed and the more difficult the porn access, the higher the probability they become rapists. Not politically correct, but statistically relevant and hence quite real.
Re: (Score:2)
Better than starting to rape their women. Non-availability of porn drives rape numbers up significantly. Yes, that is incompatible with feminist ideology, and hence rarely reported. It has been documented often enough to be reliable though. Same with prostitution.
Deny people one outlet and they will find another one and prayer will not do it for some people.
That said, I bet there are quite a few camouflaged prostitutes in Utah that make excellent business while looking rather plain and probably being older.
Oh, no! (Score:2)
Hmmm.. (Score:2)
Good. (Score:2)
How do they know if source IP is in Utah? (Score:2)
Pornhub may know some IPs that have a high probability of being served from Utah. But public IP blocks are sold and moving outside of the regions they were originally assigned.
If I were a Utah ISP I wouldn't be helping Pornhub or anyone else block my customers.
Re: (Score:2)
But are you a Utah ISP? Right, didn't think so.
Re: (Score:2)
There are commercial IP-based geolocation services and have been for decades. You don't look to ARIN. You underestimate the number and breadth of data brokers that exist out there.
Mormonism causes way more sexual problems than por (Score:3)
Right response (Score:2)
Good for VPN providers (Score:3)
Those that posture and virtue-signal hardest are typically the worst in actual reality.
Re:Other means (Score:5, Funny)
"Hold your firearm up to the camera to prove your age"
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously you've never purchased a firearm in the US.
Filling out a 4473 is a hassle.
Re: (Score:2)
I thought "Filling out a 4473" was only used by my family as a euphemism for jerking off.
Re: (Score:2)
All of three pages long. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/d... [atf.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
All of three pages long. https://www.atf.gov/firearms/d... [atf.gov]
And the buyer only needs to fill out half of it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"This is my rifle,
and this is my gun.
This is for shootin',
And this is for fun."
don't whip out that firearm (Score:2)
Easier to get a gun than jerk off. "Hold your firearm up to the camera to prove your age"
I think holding up your "firearm" to the camera is the problem we're talking about, isn't it? Especially to "prove your age". Unless both firearm ..holders.. are minors within 1 year of each other, in which case fewer laws have been broken.
Re: (Score:2)
This is my VPN, this is my gun. One is for getting on the other and having some fun.
Re: (Score:2)
Just stop doing it at all. There is no scientifically sound evidence that unconstrained access to porn does harm. No, not even to children. There is pretty sound evidence to the contrary, namely that easy access to porn reduces harm by lowering rape rates.
This whole thing is about restricting and controlling people and the narrative used is simply a big fat lie.
I posted some references here: https://slashdot.org/comments.... [slashdot.org]
Re: Other means (Score:2)