Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Social Networks The Internet

Pornhub Blocks Access in Mississippi and Virginia Over Age Verification Laws (theverge.com) 178

Pornhub is now blocking people in Mississippi and Virginia from visiting its website over laws that would require the service to verify their age. From a report The company says it's blocking users to protest unfair enforcement of these new laws, claiming that sites enforcing the new rules will lose traffic to "irresponsible platforms" that "don't follow the law, that don't take user safety seriously, and that often don't even moderate content." Traffic dropped by 80 percent for Pornhub after it began enforcing age verification in Louisiana earlier this year, the company writes. After that experience, it decided to start taking its sites offline instead of enforcing an age gate. In May, it blocked access to users in Utah over a similar law. Techdirt reports that the blackout also applies to other websites operated by Pornhub's owner, such as RedTube.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Pornhub Blocks Access in Mississippi and Virginia Over Age Verification Laws

Comments Filter:
  • More VPN usage? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by UnknowingFool ( 672806 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @12:28PM (#63653754)
    I wonder if there will be a correlating uptick in VPN usage in those states now.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by nucrash ( 549705 )

      Completely unrelated to this signature legislation.

      You should expect the increase to occur near the largest religious bases. Now where a mega church exists? That's where you will see the biggest increase in VPN subs.

      • Megachurches, almost by definition, are NOT religious.

        They are based in the modern American religion of Pride, where you tell God what he should be like rather than letting God tell you what you should be like.

        Hmm, having said that, point well taken and this is in complete agreement with the poster I was replying to that said where a megachurch is, VPN usage will go up to get around this ban.

  • by Iamthecheese ( 1264298 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @12:29PM (#63653756)
    To keep the children safe, let's drive porn usage toward ever-increasing anonymity and less regulation, instilling a culture of carefully avoiding and building disrespect for government regulation. Today we'll make them use VPNs, tomorrow TOR. What could possibly go wrong?
    • They will go to unsafe sites with viruses and dodgy content that don't bother complying with the law.
    • by taustin ( 171655 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @01:37PM (#63653970) Homepage Journal

      Do not assume the actual goal is what they say the actual goal is.

      • by Askmum ( 1038780 )
        Do you think MS and VA shed a tear that Pornhub blocks access? They probably wanted to block access to Pornhub from the start because of reasons, but couldn't do so because that would be censorship. Now Pornhub does it for them. Win-win.
    • by CAIMLAS ( 41445 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @02:46PM (#63654170)

      I think you looked past half the problem here.

      Government regulation is almost always the problem that pushes grey market activities into black markets, and in turn, growing the size of illegal black market activities, as they're more easily able to hide amidst the grey. The Silk Road is a textbook example of this - FDA-regulated items like kefir grains were being sold alongside cocaine.

      (Note, I'm not talking about laws, but market regulations like this one.)

      • In this particular case, the activity is neither grey nor black. (Most) porn is something harmless, merely painted grey by the very vilest vanta-black. I'm not aware of any kind of porn that has killed hundreds of millions of folks, religions on the other hand there are at least two[*].

        [*]. More if you include religions that have scripture, clergy, portraits of prophets everywhere, rituals, processions, preachers, gulags for heretics and unbelievers -- just don't self-identify as religions.

    • by dstwins ( 167742 )
      Its what I typically see.. Quick and dirty "solutions" to simply "outlaw" as opposed to trusting people to DO their jobs and teach their kids. And yet, for some reason they won't take the same approach to guns or drugs..

      Oh well..
  • And yet here in the UK Pornhub were all for age verification because the government were going to give the contract to do age verification to Mindgeek, the owners of Pornhub.

    Thankfully it never came to pass.

    • Yes but the UK also is a country and can enforce laws that govern the internet, where as states don't have this authority in the US and thus just pass laws with no avenue to block or enforce the law outside law suites which don't work for in friendly nations.
      • Unfriendly nations****
      • Over the years small sovereign states have claimed [arstechnica.com] they were going to have completely liberated Internet policies. They sell the idea that you can put some servers there and then basically do anything you want with them. This would include things like porn, gambling, piracy, and oh-my-god-heaven-forbid the ultimate terrible outcome: FREE SPEECH. Back in the late 1990's it looked like these sites might have huge data centers full of liberated servers threatening the corporate/statist world. Turned out the su
        • As a Knight of the Military Order of Sealand, I take exception to this characterization! The suits did not fight back very hard. HavenCo failed because my fellow Knights and our Lords made the divinely ordained decision to not give fucks and go do other things and not to support the sysadmin or the venture very much. If we had been more organized, it would have required the suits to fight back. That would have been a good time worthy of at least a made for TV movie!
  • Excellent (Score:4, Interesting)

    by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @12:32PM (#63653766)

    While people in Mississippi will frantically search for "VPN" and how to use it, Pornhub is perfectly within their right to limit who views their site as they see fit. This is no different than limiting [imgur.com] who you will serve [imgur.com] as a customer [imgur.com].

    • The really fucked up thing about that case is it's hypothetical. No one was actually harmed. In fact some of the evidence was falsified. https://www.theguardian.com/la... [theguardian.com]

    • This is no different than limiting [imgur.com] who you will serve [imgur.com] as a customer [imgur.com].

      I find it amazing that businesses just discovered they can discriminate. It's like they didn't even understand why a specific group of people known as a protected class existed at all.

      I also find it amazing that businesses are outraged over an affirmation of a ruling and a rule which has been in place since 2018.

      • I find it amazing that businesses just discovered they can discriminate.

        They really can't. There is a difference between barring someone from your property because of their actions, or perceived actions in the case of casinos, and saying you're not going to serve "those" people. Perhaps you are unfamilier with the concept of blacks only drinking fountains.

        I also find it amazing that businesses are outraged over an affirmation of a ruling and a rule which has been in place since 2018.

        The orignal ruling wa

      • This isn't discrimination. "Living in Louisiana" isn't a protected class. Companies make decisions all the time to do, or not do, business in any given state for a host of reasons.

        That's like claiming that it's discrimination that there isn't an In-N-Out burger in Montana.

    • Re:Excellent (Score:4, Interesting)

      by DesScorp ( 410532 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @01:58PM (#63654022) Journal

      While people in Mississippi will frantically search for "VPN" and how to use it

      People in these states that require verification will simply go to other sites that simply aren't complying with the law. When THOSE sites are cracked down on, then they'll simply do an image search on Google for whatever porn it is that they want. Then if THAT is ever limited, one of two things will happen: one portion of people will simply use less porn, and the other portion will go back to doing things like scraping free sites and setting up their own library of pics and video.

      You're never going to completely eliminate porn, but governments can make it hard enough to operate to where access is truly limited. Back in my youth, we had a mayor that got tired of the sleazy porn shops opening downtown, and he simply parked a police cruiser near the entrances. Men stopped coming to the shops, and they closed. Will they simply find another place to get it? Yes. But there will also be less of it to be accessed, and it'll be harder to access it. Vice laws are like any other crime law: the point is prevention and control as much as punishment, so that you're not overwhelmed with it.

    • Actually, it’s more a form of malicious compliance on Pornhub’s part.

  • by Somervillain ( 4719341 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @12:32PM (#63653772)
    This is a case where conservatives were all bark and no bite. They wanted to put up a show that they're fighting those elite coastal liberals...and they got what they wished for. If you wanted this?...great...democracy in action...I sincerely hope it is all you wished for. If you elected these shitheads to make a statement...well...you got what you deserved. Conservatives have far too long been able to do elaborate theater and complain about every grievance against the modern world with no consequences...you get your cathartic rally and the legislation never passes, so your daughter can still get an abortion when she gets knocked up...you get your porn, your big tech services, etc. Well, your lawmakers actually got competent enough to pass legislation and you reaped what you sowed.

    Good luck attracting people under 65 to your state now!!!

    Truly this is a good thing. If people really want this...great...enjoy your lives. I don't want to meddle in your local laws . I wasn't planning on living in either state due to shitty job markets and this + your abortion stupidity ensures people like me will never even consider living in your state...which likely was your goal. Either you'll create a conservative paradise or you'll see everyone with real opportunities pack up and leave for my state or a similar...so it's a great thing..democracy in action and the people will vote with their feet. We both got what we wanted.
    • Virginia has a fairly good jobs market especially near DC. And it's coastal.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by magzteel ( 5013587 )

      This is a case where conservatives were all bark and no bite. They wanted to put up a show that they're fighting those elite coastal liberals...and they got what they wished for. If you wanted this?...great...democracy in action...I sincerely hope it is all you wished for. If you elected these shitheads to make a statement...well...you got what you deserved. Conservatives have far too long been able to do elaborate theater and complain about every grievance against the modern world with no consequences...you get your cathartic rally and the legislation never passes, so your daughter can still get an abortion when she gets knocked up...you get your porn, your big tech services, etc. Well, your lawmakers actually got competent enough to pass legislation and you reaped what you sowed.

      Good luck attracting people under 65 to your state now!!!

      Truly this is a good thing. If people really want this...great...enjoy your lives. I don't want to meddle in your local laws . I wasn't planning on living in either state due to shitty job markets and this + your abortion stupidity ensures people like me will never even consider living in your state...which likely was your goal. Either you'll create a conservative paradise or you'll see everyone with real opportunities pack up and leave for my state or a similar...so it's a great thing..democracy in action and the people will vote with their feet. We both got what we wanted.

      Oh yes, every time I moved my first criteria was "Do they require age verification to access porn on the internet?

    • Good luck attracting people under 65 to your state now!!!
       

      Mississippi is literally last in every metric.

    • >Either you'll create a conservative paradise or you'll see everyone with real opportunities pack up and leave

      While those without real opportunities who don't share the hypocritical right-wing Christian culture are stuck there to suffer under its rule.

      I doubt the average person persecuted by the right chose to be born and remain under its rule.

      • >Either you'll create a conservative paradise or you'll see everyone with real opportunities pack up and leave

        While those without real opportunities who don't share the hypocritical right-wing Christian culture are stuck there to suffer under its rule.

        I doubt the average person persecuted by the right chose to be born and remain under its rule.

        The alternative is forcing my views on another state, which I am not that comfortable with. I view this as a win-win and they're the collateral. I will wager the people they WANT...young gifted folks with good earning potential will flee to states with good job markets, like CA, NY, MA, WA, etc. Any MS-bred computer prodigy who was thinking "it would be nice to build my startup close to my parents" probably decided somewhere else would be better. All the remains are those sympathetic to the laws I find

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      Either you'll create a conservative paradise or you'll see everyone with real opportunities pack up and leave for my state or a similar...so it's a great thing..democracy in action and the people will vote with their feet. We both got what we wanted.

      This is precisely how it should be. If you don't like the people around you, and the people around you don't like you, it's probably time to move. Why liberals insist on "converting" people who don't want to be converted is beyond maddening. Same for conservatives. It's a free country. Surround yourself with people you want to be around. Disruption of that is what causes all the problems.

      • If you don't like the people around you, and the people around you don't like you, it's probably time to move.

        Apparently this will come as a surprise to you, but many people simply don't have the economic freedom to pick up and move to another state (that most likely will require getting another job). And the older you get, the harder it gets because you've put down roots with friends, a spouse (who would also have to pick up and move), kids (who'd have to change schools and lose all their friends), and th

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          Liberals generally want to give more freedom to people

          Except guns. And pickup trucks. And pit bulls. And gas stoves. And sugary drinks.

          In reality the only difference between the right and left is which parts of your life they most want to control. Neither really believe in freedom.

          • If only all the things you listed affected only the people who own or use those things, then you'd be right. Except they negatively affect everyone around. (Even the sugary drinks that drives up the cost of healthcare for everyone.) Part of the contract for living in a civilized society means you can't do whatever you please.
            • Except they negatively affect everyone around. (Even the sugary drinks that drives up the cost of healthcare for everyone.)

              Using that metric most everything you do affects everyone else. I'll pass on that definition of society thanks.

              • Using that metric most everything you do affects everyone else.

                Except is simply doesn't. The specific examples I gave (other people loving and marrying who they want, watching what they want, using whatever pronouns they want) in no way affects anyone else. Others using whatever pronouns they want does marginally affect others in that it requests that others use people's preferred pronouns, but boo hoo because that's just so burdensome!

                • Using that metric most everything you do affects everyone else.

                  Except is simply doesn't. The specific examples I gave (other people loving and marrying who they want, watching what they want, using whatever pronouns they want) in no way affects anyone else. Others using whatever pronouns they want does marginally affect others in that it requests that others use people's preferred pronouns, but boo hoo because that's just so burdensome!

                  My gun ownership objectively in no way affects anyone else either. Your fear and paranoia about guns is really no different from others fear of pronouns. You both need some counselling IMHO.

      • It's a free country.

        Not for people that conservatives pass laws to oppress.

      • This is precisely how it should be. If you don't like the people around you, and the people around you don't like you, it's probably time to move. Why liberals insist on "converting" people who don't want to be converted is beyond maddening. Same for conservatives. It's a free country. Surround yourself with people you want to be around. Disruption of that is what causes all the problems.

        I have yet to experience a drag queen ring my doorbell and pontificate on the virtues of Rupaul. Conservative christians on the other hand...

      • Talk about an ignorant hot take there.

        You may have heard of the expression separate but equal and it doesn't work. Mainstream conservative politicians no longer believe in democracy as they merely claim election fraud when they lose with their complete lack of solution for any of life's problems.

        Mixing perspectives and that means people of both parties and everyone in between is the absolute best solution we currently have because most ignorance isn't dealt with by surrounding yourself with sycophants.

        I t

        • You may have heard of the expression separate but equal and it doesn't work.

          It 100% works. You don't have to be ignorant to have a preference. Preferring to be around people who share your culture and values isn't some racist, bigoted thing. People cherish their culture and values. And celebrate them. When outsiders tell them they have to change their ways, it's problematic.

          Expose people to different political points of view, have discussions that don't have to resort to name calling.

          A wonderful utopian idea. Unfortunately, we've seen that doesn't work.

  • Seems interesting to know whether we see any change in new subscribers correlated with this move.
    Notwithstanding cheap shots about people from LA & MS being too dumb to use a VPN.

  • by jacks smirking reven ( 909048 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @12:41PM (#63653792)

    Myself and I think most reasonable people would agree that accessing pornography for young children, especially those under say 14 is actually not a good thing.

    However the fact is that there is no good way to age verify on the internet outside of credit cards or other payment terms and those (rightfully) have a huge stigma becuase of the ability to rack up fraudulent charges from scummy companies (and also discretion of having things show up on bills) so any verification using that method is doomed to fail, at that point you are just charging for a service.

    With the first amendment there s a high bar to entry to block something off access to adults and rightfully so, the consequence of that though is we do have something of a problem with kids younger and younger view pronography because lets be honest, it's very hard to stop. The joke that things like Net Nanny were trivial to circumvent were true even in the late 90's when the internet was already restrictive. Today, god knows it would be a constant battle not just on your computer but all devices and all the devices of people they know and have access to.

    In an ideal world there would be a non-financial way to verify ones adult-ness without putting their financials or privacy at risk but alas I just don't see that coming along soon which is a real shame as that would solve not just this problem but a bunch of others as well.

    • However the fact is that there is no good way to age verify on the internet outside of credit cards or other payment terms and those (rightfully) have a huge stigma becuase of the ability to rack up fraudulent charges from scummy companies (and also discretion of having things show up on bills) so any verification using that method is doomed to fail, at that point you are just charging for a service.

      This is completely incorrect. The major crypto exchanges have already solved this problem at scale by using A

      • However the fact is that there is no good way to age verify on the internet outside of credit cards or other payment terms and those (rightfully) have a huge stigma becuase of the ability to rack up fraudulent charges from scummy companies (and also discretion of having things show up on bills) so any verification using that method is doomed to fail, at that point you are just charging for a service.

        This is completely incorrect. The major crypto exchanges have already solved this problem at scale by using AI to help them partially automate processing government IDs to comply with basic KYC regulations. Try it some time. You can usually get a big one like Coinbase, Crypto.com or Gemini to validate your government ID in a matter of minutes.

        Agree completely. Very often "It just can't be done" means "we just don't want to do it".
        This is a technical problem and they are technology companies. Of course it's doable. There are even third parties that you can contract with to provide the service.

      • A lot of people are going to be sketched out and put off by uploading their ID to every porn site they want to verify with.

        Now, if one of these companies offered this as a service that could be used to verify for other sites (we trust coinbase to have verified that you are in fact an adult) now you might have something (i would prefer it to be not a crypto related platform as to me personally that is barely a sketch level above porno sites even i know coinbase is fairly legit at this point)

        For that type of

        • A lot of people are going to be sketched out and put off by uploading their ID to every porn site they want to verify with.

          Now, if one of these companies offered this as a service that could be used to verify for other sites (we trust coinbase to have verified that you are in fact an adult) now you might have something (i would prefer it to be not a crypto related platform as to me personally that is barely a sketch level above porno sites even i know coinbase is fairly legit at this point)

          For that type of service to really work though I think there would ahve to be at least some amount of legislation to go along with it as well, both for user privacy (uploading your ID carries some risk) and the sites themselves (follow proactices and you wont be liable if some kids slip through the system).

          Also can it be done without making an account? If you ask users to verify but you also have to make an account by registering an email, that's a bit of a taller ask.

          It also should be open sourced or setup to such a degree that companies can access the system with minimal effort. If Pornhub has to pay 0.50c to verify every user every time (because they don't have to make an account) it's kindof a nonstarter for them, they'll never recoup that cost for most people.

          Interesting solution though, worth looking at. I think "completely incorrect" is a bit much as if it were so easy and seamless it'd be done?

          There are plenty of 3rd party age verification services

          • Well if thats these states will show if they are market viable for pornography or not.

            The issue here isn't so much "this is impossible" becuase it's always impossible with money on some persons end.

            Issue here is it's well within the bounds of the 1A to offer pornography online, for free. Plenty of precedent there.

            Now putting up a financial roadblock that's restricting Pornhubs 1A right and the viewers 1A right. You can't just say "this speech now has a financial barrier in front of it"

            • Well if thats these states will show if they are market viable for pornography or not.

              The issue here isn't so much "this is impossible" becuase it's always impossible with money on some persons end.

              Issue here is it's well within the bounds of the 1A to offer pornography online, for free. Plenty of precedent there.

              Now putting up a financial roadblock that's restricting Pornhubs 1A right and the viewers 1A right. You can't just say "this speech now has a financial barrier in front of it"

              Cost of doing business, This is not that big of a deal

              • Now putting up a financial roadblock that's restricting Pornhubs 1A right and the viewers 1A right. You can't just say "this speech now has a financial barrier in front of it"

                Cost of doing business, This is not that big of a deal

                Same for the 2A, right?

                • Little different in the case of precedent in that any fees in accordance of firearms tend to be in the matter of purchasing said firearm, not in ownership or usage (within limits)

                  Kinda how I believe the ATF does not charge for an NICS check but your state might.

                  The precedent is pretty established at this point and federally the lines of the government are fairly well defined for both the 1st and 2nd.

                  Devil's in the details as it were. There could be a challenge to this porn law, depends how it's enforced an

                  • Little different in the case of precedent in that any fees in accordance of firearms tend to be in the matter of purchasing said firearm, not in ownership or usage (within limits)

                    Kinda how I believe the ATF does not charge for an NICS check but your state might.

                    In my state to buy a firearm I needed a firearm purchaser ID card. This requires an application, documentation, references, background check, fingerprints, and a visit to the police station. It cost me around $50 and some traveling to get the ID card and it takes 2-4 weeks. This is not a permit to buy, just an ID card required before you can then buy. It's annoying but just a minor hurdle.

                    • Intersting but for whatever reason it seems like the SC has given the states a lot more leeway in front of the 2A then the 1A.

                      And I could be wrong here, maybe the states can enforce porn sites to subscribe to an age verification service and it's well within their bounds. Be interesting to see if this goes to the courts.

                    • Intersting but for whatever reason it seems like the SC has given the states a lot more leeway in front of the 2A then the 1A.

                      And I could be wrong here, maybe the states can enforce porn sites to subscribe to an age verification service and it's well within their bounds. Be interesting to see if this goes to the courts.

                      I think the SC has been fine with states enacting "reasonable procedures", which could include background checks and permits and fees and such. Where they objected was undue limitations that effectively denied your 2A rights, like places where getting a carry permit was nearly impossible unless you were connected. If a permit costs a million dollars you are effectively denied.

                • Now putting up a financial roadblock that's restricting Pornhubs 1A right and the viewers 1A right. You can't just say "this speech now has a financial barrier in front of it"

                  Cost of doing business, This is not that big of a deal

                  Same for the 2A, right?

                  Well, let's see. In my state to buy a firearm I needed a firearm purchaser ID card. This requires an application, documentation, references, background check, fingerprints, and a visit to the police station. It cost me around $50 and some traveling to get the ID card and it takes 2-4 weeks.

                  Next to buy a single pistol I need another permit which requires the aforementioned ID card, references, and a permit fee.

                  I bet a 3rd party age verification system costs peanuts and is pretty quick.

      • Although I don't live in the US there is no way I would show any porn site a picture of my ID, I believe things like social security numbers are still used as defacto identifications. Even if they weren't having a porn site being able to identify you as a person is still beyond what I would be willing to do. All the information it should know is are you over 18. This is not technically hard to do is have a register of public keys and an id, of people who are of legal age. Get the user to sign a request with

      • And there it is: government ID needed to access the internet, all in the name of protecting the children. You have no idea how evil that idea is, so let me spell it out.

        When a people have some freedom leaders want dismissed
        and the constitution's hazy and the laws are all a mist,
        and the half the people angry and t'other half dismayed
        and the corporations own the rulers, all have been betrayed!

        Remember when you wanted safety for your child and ken?
        Remember when you sacrificed the work of ancient men?
        Remember
  • by RightwingNutjob ( 1302813 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @12:53PM (#63653838)

    the good guy is in this farce.

    Is it:
    a) the corporation cutting off the pr0n cuz they don't want the liability of age verification
    b) the free speech absolutists who have chosen pr0n 4 kidz as the hill they'd like to die on
    c) the pearl clutchers who have chosen pr0n 4 kidz as the hill to die on, free speech and privacy be damned

    Or maybe a pox on all their houses. You stop pushing weirdo sex stuff into public life, we refrain from asking what the fuck you're doing behind closed doors. Just like it was in the cave days of 25 years ago when people had the decency to keep their pr0n hidden and didn't make it a point to engage in public sex acts for the benefit of The Children.

    Or perhaps we could go back to the cave days of 10 years ago when Chinese-style internet controls and content moderation were something we mocked instead of falling over ourselves to play catchup.

    • by Ogive17 ( 691899 )
      How about:
      d) let the parents parent.

      This is just another solution looking for a problem. The politicians and small vocal majority are exploiting children to push their agenda.

      I'm sure there are kids looking at porn online. Is it the responsibility of the company or the parents to monitor the kids behavior online?
  • ...

    Of holding Internet companies to the same legal standard as brick and mortar operators...

  • VPN sales in Mississippi and Virginia (almost typed Vaginia there by mistake) have skyrocketed.

    Just a reminder, folks, correlation does not equal causation. Nudge, nudge. Wink, wink.

  • "Traffic dropped by 80 percent for Pornhub after it began enforcing age verification in Louisiana earlier this year, the company writes. "

    Are the 20% VPN users or idiots showing ID?

  • by SvnLyrBrto ( 62138 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @01:18PM (#63653924)

    It seems unlikely that Pornhub keeps offices or infrastructure in these states. So why bother to block at all? Why not just tell those overreaching pearl-clutching politicos to go pound sand? Or, if they do have any offices or infrastructure (I guess the us-east-1 AWS region is a possibility for Virginia. But east-2 is generally a better choice now anyway.) there, close and/or migrate it first, tell them to take it up with the interstate commerce clause, and THEN tell those stacks of crap to go pound sand?

    When Apple, for example, finally had enough of that crooked Texas judge whose rulings are bought and paid for by the patent trolling industry; they simply closed their presence (Two retail stores, IIRC.) in that court's jurisdiction, gave the judge the finger, and went about their normal business. What they did NOT do is set ups a geofence around the court's turf and block all iPhones, Macs, and Apple Watches from working at all within the boundary.

  • Let's require businesses that send out unsolicited emails to verify that a person is not under 18 or over 65. If state laws have such a seemingly powerful chilling effect, then it should end spam forever. right?

  • by mabu ( 178417 )

    I guess a lot of people in Louisiana are paying Pornhub customers, verses MS and VA

  • by kyoko21 ( 198413 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @01:32PM (#63653956)

    Never knew people needed to use VPN to access a site that is native to the US.

    It's like living in China but without the firewall.

  • It's alright. There are 666 other pron websites to choose from. This kind of censorship never works because people, especially politicians, don't know rat droppings about the net technologies. I actually prefer them uneducated like this, for obvious reasons. This is Porhub's popularity problem. It's always the most popular websites any Joe and Mary-Ann can find way too easily, and it's usually talked about everywhere, that gets targeted by politicians. Then politicians decide to push ISPs into blocking the

  • They need to um, mastur, relieve stress too
  • by VeryFluffyBunny ( 5037285 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @02:50PM (#63654188)
    Remember that school teacher who got invited to Italy to see the original statue of David by Michael Angelo because her school kicked up a fuss about 'pornography'? The USA is waaay too prudish in public (& sordid in private) to sensibly deal with feasible pornography laws. They can't even handle public nudity & have problems with breastfeeding mothers. Are they going to ban large swaths of classic fine art paintings, prints, & sculptures from public display, public broadcast, or internet viewing? Meanwhile, the USA apparently hosts the porn capital of the world (San Fernando Valley), home to a $multi-billion industry. Meanwhile, Texas has stricter laws on sex toys than it does on firearms. And so much US TV & films features people having sex but with their clothes on?! And meanwhile, it's OK to show horrific, graphic violence in films & TV but the mere hint of nudity or sex throws the censors into a dizzy rage.

    The USA really needs to get comfortable with their bodies, nudity, & sex. Check out some regular (non-pornographic) European TV & films... if you're allowed to over there.
  • Hit the GOP legislators where it hurts.

  • State Legislatures: We want to ban porn, but can't because of the 1st Amendment. Let's require age restrictions.

    Pornhub: Your state is BANNED from watching our porn!

  • by fjorder ( 5219645 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @04:39PM (#63654514)
    Just reading this literally: "Traffic dropped by 80 percent for Pornhub after it began enforcing age verification in Louisiana earlier this year, the company writes." Though I didn't think there's enough incest porn on PornHub to satisfy Louisiana that much.
  • Pornhub abides to local law, users install a VPN to access Pornhub, and Pornhub can stiff benefit from them.
  • by memory_register ( 6248354 ) on Monday July 03, 2023 @07:58PM (#63654920)
    I get that we are mostly libertarians here, but let us not forget that porn is actually bad for you and society.

    It exploits the actors who end up broken, poor and unemployable. It encourages and abets sex trafficking. It rewires your brain away from sexual enjoyment with a partner.

    Sure, it is fun to poke at religious states where people are watching just as much porn as everyone else, but I applaud their desire to curb porn use. Roadblock laws like this worked for smoking, they will impact porn usage as well.

"...a most excellent barbarian ... Genghis Kahn!" -- _Bill And Ted's Excellent Adventure_

Working...