Show newer
Olives

@sebmeineck Long story.

pen.org/press-release/pen-amer Some Republican lawmakers are even defunding sex research, apparently due to conspiracy theories.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National With this wave of bills, there's a group called NCOSE. They used to be a fundamentalist Christian morality group called Morality in Media. They rebranded in 2015. They're likely involved.

It would also help if lawmakers were more willing to protect people's constitutional rights. "Age verification" isn't just a violation of privacy. It's a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. It impedes free expression. It exposes someone to potential blackmail and other nasty things from the leakage of their data. In theory, if there is some issue, some form of sex education would be objectively better (not only am I doubtful of censorship being helpful, it is also very harmful). I remember Dr. Ferguson suggested something like that a number of years ago?

By the way, no one really thinks of wanting minors on a site, they're thinking of entertaining other adults. They're not really an audience which comes to mind. But, then, if they are there, is it this big exaggerated terrible thing which these people make it out to be? I don't think so.

Also... If we look at some pieces of science...

utsa.edu/today/2020/08/story/p Porn isn't linked to crime.

tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.108 Or sexism...

psychologytoday.com/us/blog/al Some studies even show the opposite association when it comes to crime...

reason.com/2015/07/23/despite- Teens appear to be having less sex not more in a world with more porn...?

Even if there was an association, it'd hard to argue it was causal, perhaps someone who is sexist is more likely to view something in particular? That would be reverse causation. That is, someone has the order of causality the wrong way around. Another possibility is a third variable which interacts with the two. Someone might work hard to find a "link" to something bad.

It can be an easy scapegoat because it is so common someone can point a finger at it, even when it isn't really relevant, or there is something else, like say, other mental health issues which might be better to address.

Often, what fundamentalists are trying to "fix" isn't porn usage, it is something like homosexuality which is a "sexual orientation". It is "conversion therapy" by another name. That never ends well.

I remember moralizing about sexual things itself can be harmful to oneself. Also: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/297020

Also, IMO, if someone is interested in some taboos, consider if there isn't a satisfactory alternative which doesn't involve the other person being harmed? As a warning, what someone likes in porn isn't necessarily something they would want to act out. Maybe, that doesn't have to be said. I'll say it though. And I wouldn't presume a substitution simply because someone views something apparently similar. In any case, I think free expression contains a lot of value for people.

Aren't "thought crimes" silly anyway? If someone imagines a murder, is that the same as carrying out an act of murder? What if someone writes a horror novel where someone gets killed or other nasties? Is that the same as someone being killed? Perhaps, someone might get offended by these themes? Alternatively, they could just not read the book? Or perhaps, they're over-reacting...? And I'm sure there are plenty of people who enjoy reading horror novels. So, when it comes to "sexual violence" and the like, if it involves people who don't even exist, isn't it strange to then censor that...?

I think this might be less applicable in this case, because this sort of more mainstream platform can be more censorious (this is not necessarily a good thing), although calls to censorship (corporate or other) kind of have to contend with possibly violating someone's right to free expression. An odder (and very recent) example is one company fuming at another for not implementing one size fits all "look for potentially offensive keyword" censorship but then what if they don't even primarily deal in real actors and the like. And it can be stifling in itself.

1
Olives

Guilty until proven innocent.

0
Olives boosted
Curioso 🍉 🇺🇦 (jgg)

@olives

Well, he announced it, but never really sent the order to operators to cut the service, so it ended up being only a scare; Telegram never stopped working here.

0
Olives

reclaimthenet.org/google-is-or
"US federal law enforcement and courts have gone a step further in the extreme efforts they are making to surveil people’s activities online, including on Google’s vast platforms.

The latest is that the tech giant gets orders to identify all people who happen to be watching certain videos or livestreams on YouTube."

0
Olives

reclaimthenet.org/spain-revers
"Spain, a European Union member, has joined – even if only for a short while – China, Iran, Cuba, Pakistan and Thailand in blocking the encrypted messaging app Telegram.

The country’s High Court made the decision and said the ban was temporary, citing alleged copyright infringements happening on the app as the reason. The judge in charge of the case, Santiago Pedraz, first tried to get Telegram to hand over “certain information” regarding the case."

1
Olives

reclaimthenet.org/uk-high-cour
"In a preliminary victory against censorship, Julian Assange has been granted a temporary lifeline in his legal battle to avoid extradition to the US."
Notice she doesn't say anything about him being discriminated against for using his right to a fair trial.

0
Olives

web.archive.org/web/2024031919 What do you think of this?

1
Olives

Someone being out in the community is ideal compared to locking them up in the mental hospital.

0
Olives

Police can be notorious for using questionable technologies / techniques, and on "just closing cases" rather than serving justice (which could mean punishing innocent people, although even if this was less so, there would still be enough there that would lead to innocent people being punished).

Show thread
0
Olives boosted
Tuta

📢 Today at 14 CET we will be holding our very first Reddit #AMA! 📢

Join in to ask us any questions you might have related to Tuta, #encryption, #surveillance, #privacy, our favorite ice cream flavors, and more!

👉 reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1bo

We hope to see you there!

1+
Olives

When you look at a few groups, at first glance, they might appear a bit like a civil society group, or a technical partner.

When you dig a bit deeper, you discover the people running it are either from the police, used to work for the police, or are in something strongly associated with the police, in one case, it was a "Police University".

Show thread
1+
Olives

After doing a bit of research into an... interesting bunch.

Quite a few groups pushing for this internet control crap (mainly chat control) in the E.U. appear to be either cops or groups strongly associated with them.

It isn't just the "fake foundation" (run by the U.S. / U.K.) or "foreign dark money" from Oak going into apparent "local groups" (quite a few which sprang up out of thin air right when the E.U. pushed the E-Privacy Directive and have a tendency towards making misleading claims).

1+
Olives

@glynmoody youtube.com/watch?v=1efOs0BsE0 They should release him. By the way, here's a parody of the government(s) regarding this.

0
Olives

theguardian.com/technology/202
"Revealed: a California city is training AI to spot homeless encampments"
This is very likely going to be used to oppress homeless people.

0
Olives

reason.com/2024/03/25/ron-desa
"Ron DeSantis Signs Social Media Age-Verification Bill
The law would require platforms to use invasive measures to prevent most teenagers under 16 from making social media accounts and bar all minors from sexually explicit sites."

"The bill further states that any "commercial entity" that publishes content that is "harmful to minors" on a website or social media application must use age-verification measures to ensure that users under 18 cannot access the material."
This violates the . "" is bad for .

0
Olives

nichegamer.com/microsoft-cauti
really should mind their own business about what kinds of characters players want to play. It's okay for a character to be "sexy". I think that ultimately, the style of the game is going to depend a lot on the game. It's silly to pretend that every game should fit awfully particular and seemingly utilitarian criteria.

sciencedirect.com/science/arti
There also isn't really a scientific basis for it.

1
Olives boosted
Tuta

⚡ BREAKING: Huge win for #Privacy ⚡

German government publishes law to guarantee 'right to encryption' 🔒 💪

We at Tuta Mail applaud the #German government for this move in the right direction. 👏 👏 👏

Here's our comment: tuta.com/blog/german-governmen

1+
Olives

tuta.com/blog/german-governmen
"While most countries want to introduce new surveillance laws, Germany is taking the opposite approach: The Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport Affairs (BMDV) has published a draft bill that will require email, messenger and other cloud providers to use strong end-to-end encryption. The bill is celebrated by cryptography experts as well as privacy enthusiasts as it enshrines the digital secrecy of correspondence."

0
Olives

Reading about someone apparently needing lolis is reminding me of that episode of Spongebob all of a sudden.

The one where he tries to make do without water.

0
Olives

thespinoff.co.nz/society/25-03
"CCTV cameras, self-checkout machines, data-gathering loyalty cards, facial recognition: supermarkets gather an obscene amount of information about customers. Can they be trusted with it?"

0
Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.

Trending now

Resources

Developers

What is Mastodon?

qoto.org

More…

v3.5.19-qoto · Privacy policy