He should get a VPN, for example: https://mullvad.net/en
the greatest Onion writer could never come up with a headline like this
Let this man watch porn without giving out any of his personal information. I too want to watch porn without giving out any of my personal information. You do too, if you watch porn.
The people making the rules know this. They just … in their Christian nationalist hearts believe porn shouldn’t exist. And since there’s too much precedent to simply make it illegal (they’ve tried before). So here they’re trying to make watching it as painful and degrading as humanly possible.
In other words, you’re not wrong - just preaching to the choir.
Christian nationalists say that porn shouldn’t exist while watching a lot of porn and they would get mad if someone took away their porn. They only want others to not watch porn.
They all have Sunday brain. Living one life Sunday morning that’s just disconnected from their choices they make the rest of the week.
But, that’s indoctrination for you. The most infuriating part is when otherwise good & great people decide that calling themselves Christian, setting themselves up as human shields for all the abusive controlling monsters among their number. They’ll say the monster is ‘a sinner’ and ‘doesn’t represent our values’ while rushing to the defense of Christianity. They’d rather white-wash the Christian label than fix the structural abuse done by by ‘their neighbors’ (but it’s never their church that’s the problem).
Christian nationalists say that other people shouldn’t watch porn but that they’ve figured out a curious caveat within the faith that exempts them, personally. Then they establish special repositories of pornographic material that serve as an incentive for membership and a form of blackmail against turncoats.
Porn becomes a more direct means of patriarchal control - both in how it restricts which senior members are allowed to buy it and (in turn) which women are allowed to sell it, and at what price. It is a form of societal monopsony intended to make sex work a privilege afforded to elites at below market rates.
Yeah. Except these “Christians” also love to rape children. It’s pure projection on their part.
They’re usually (usually) not the same individuals, but the evil ones deliberately use the “good” ones as a shield. They’re a happy to rally as Christians to any attack from outside the religion, but will write off abuses they see internally as “not my church”.
If only there was a very easy, simple way to trick the system into thinking you are an adult.
You mean a bobble head because apparently those work incredibly well.
I heard you could do it with a photograph with someone’s face in profile. Also with the Death Stranding photo mode for taking screenshots.
Yep some funco pops and whatnot, just basically any sort of smooth plastic-y face.
valve faceposer
From here
It’s all part of the plan. Only this time they let the cousins across the pond do the first significant move.
The line about “educators and public libraries” gives away the real game; this isn’t about actual pornography at all.
The “pornography” they’re referring to here is any form of media that portrays LGBTQ+ people in a neutral or positive light.
The age old problem of “if you remove rights from criminals, you can just change the definition of crime to encompass the people you don’t like”
I don’t think they view it as a problem
Don’t forget people of any color but white having any kind of fun. That’s shameful, too!
🙄
Since when did keeping kids off of porn sites become everyone else’s problem and not the problem of parents? Oh, right, that’s just a bullshit reason to make accessing porn more difficult and a security risk since they can’t just make porn illegal.
It’s not even that. Porn is just a bystander here. The first step is put in place a very large framework for making some form of verification mandatory on arbitrary services and sites under the guise of whatever (terrorism, child protection, and extremely niche content are good candidates). Once it’s in place, it becomes the new normal very quickly.
Then, as the government, you suddenly have the power to extend the provision of said system to whatever the fuck you want. That’s where things gets funky, and not the good kind.
And look at the money.
The reasoning for this is to eventually lock the internet down completely to put up fences and paywalls everywhere to every single site so that even if you pay for the privilege of using the internet, you will have to pay more money to actually use the internet.
It is all about controlling you and taking every single penny they possibly can out of your pocket.
All of the tracking, all of the identity verification, all of the invasive watching every single thing you do on your computer and your phone, everywhere, all of the time always, is all about milking you for every single penny they can.
Even though they are insanely rich, beyond the imagination of any human being that has ever lived in the hundreds of thousands of years of humanity’s existence on this planet they still don’t have enough money and they will still never be satisfied with how much money they have.
The fact that there are free websites where people can congregate and communicate and have fun with each other without paying them for the privilege galls them.
It grinds their heart and soul the way watching a dog get shot in the head at the end of old yeller does to a normal person.
These people are evil, and we need to stop them.
When it comes down to it, we may have to rise up and slay them.
Nothing will improve until the rich fear for their lives.
I’m not saying that we should start getting pitchforks or anything right now. I’m just saying that like, they need to know that that is an option and that if they keep pushing us, they’re gonna start painting targets on their own back.
I mean, that’s two billionaires down in a year, and they’re still ramping things up. Next year, it’ll be four. The year after that, it’ll be eight. And in like 15 years, we won’t have any billionaires left unless they fucking straighten up an act right.
Sometimes they will act if they fear for their moneys.
With that said it bothers me that they will always look to strike a deal with the more pacifist/less disruptive parts of a movement in order to neutralise the threat.
Which in theory means it’s useless to actually aim for a reasonable goal but rather you need to overshoot by a fair bit in order for the deal to land anywhere near what you believe is decent.
BUT when you overshoot you come across as disillusioned and a lot of people will distance from you, making any movement impossible.
waiting for the last line to start, I can’t start it myself but I’ll join when it’s time
Bystander effect
hey look the dumbass effect, you start it jackass
“Oh look, we just banned all the opposition party from using any online services at all because (checks notes) campaigning against us is hate speech “
All you EU chatters going on about us in the US sitting on our asses and not doing anything about what’s going are gonna eat your fucking words if you don’t show us how it’s done, and quick, because they’re coming for you HARD right now
Maybe people should care more about voting if they dont like the results. Just sayin…
Given the context of the UK political climate, who would you have voted for?
*The tories that caused brexit (along with plenty of other scandals)
*UKIP/Reform (who’s members also caused brexit)
*Lib Dems (split the left vote and help the aforementioned)
*Labour who as of the last election, hadn’t had a go at shafting us in a while
Im not saying voting isn’t important, it is. But i’m struggling to see the connection between this issue and who could be voted for.
The only party that i’ve seen against this change is Reform, but they come with more than enough baggage…
But I was told that third parties would fix everything in the US?
With literally one change, a national-level replacement of FPTP with any other ranked choice voting system (there are plenty to choose from) would make 3rd parties not only viable, but competitive. We would no longer be required to settle for the lesser of two evils, and so the evil party and the greater evil party will absolutely do everything in their power to avoid making that change.
That’s when the databases become huge targets and the government officials get their everything leaked online. They voted against privacy, they can enjoy the stones they threw in the glass house they forced themselves into.
It’s more than that, they want to
- limit who can post and make money off porn, and no, this isn’t to support small creators at all unfortunately
- build massive blackmail networks
- build massive sex work websites with curated AI models and videos
And yes, any time ANY ONE EVER says, “Do it for the kids, just think of the kids,” when it is not something DIRECTLY and CONSENSUALLY helping kids, but instead FORCING ADULTS TO DO THINGS, is being manipulative every time.
The only time the phrase “do it for the kids” is actually valuable is when it’s someone asking you to grill hot dogs at a picnic.
If it’s a politician saying it, “do it for the kids” is slang for “bend over and take it up the ass because otherwise you’re a bad person”.
Yes and again, your example is an action of directly and consensually helping kids. The kids directly get the hot dog you made. They consent to eating the hotdog. They aren’t forced to eat it. You aren’t giving the hotdog to a third person who will then eat it and then by extension later help a child in some other way. Which btw, they should be doing in the first place.
I’m gonna be the odd one out, I guess.
At a picnic, it’s likely that you’re not grilling just for the kids; and likely that grilling means you’re excluded from other activities.
Activities like playing games with said kids.
Bringing them into the picture instantly becomes manipulative, where you can make the same argument (that they need to be cooked, and someone has to do it,) without it.
Edit to add some background: I’m an uncle, but not a father. At family picnics, my bro and parents like to use my nephew and nieces as a guilt trip so I let them task dump; even though we’re organized enough they’re fairly equitable (including watching the kids as a task, even if it’s more fun.)
SiL in particular is egregious.
It’s always manipulative, even if when the child’s wellbeing is directly involved, it’s maybe called for. But that really shouldn’t t be the case at a picnic.
Most parents don’t even realize they’re doing it- ie asking you to cover their summer vacation (and not reciprocating.) at work.
More reasons for gov to track everyone with face scans
I think the narrative is now that “parenting is hard” and you can’t expect parents to do it right by themselves. Parenting used to be easy so parents didn’t need any help but now it’s just too difficult and government needs to help.
Parenting used to be easy so parents didn’t need any help but now it’s just too difficult and government needs to help.
Ahh ok, so that means they’re for parental leave, and free daycare/preschool, right?
And surely they’ll do something to lower the maternal and infant mortality rates, right?
And they’ll definitely make sure that we’re teaching proper sex education, and making contraceptives free and widely available in order to lower the rate of unwanted pregnancies, right?
Right??
Can’t raise kids? Don’t have kids. You’re not ready yet.
They can’t make porn illegal yet.
you’re allowed to say PORN on the internet
Not in Britain
“You got a loicense for that???”
“Gunna ask mi muum”
The right answer is “Gunna ask ya muum next taim 'seer”
Brilliant Govna
Sobering how all the tech bro social sites are programming people to self-censor so the bots don’t cull their posts. The Internet is turning into a shitfuck.
shitfuck
Reported for language
Son of a damn mother shitter!
We needed a national online govt forum where we could sue for freedom of speech violations by mods etc. Unfortunately our government lacks leadership or progressives so
I’m picturing a discord-like server run by USPS and boooooooooy what a cluster fuck that would be
(Mostly because of the users, but also because of the way the current and previous administrations have repeatedly hamstrung USPS)
I more mean something organized like Reddit or Lemmy, with multiple aids for translating into other languages and disability access and allowing for an audio mode or text mode. Eg instead of going to my city’s Reddit, I’ll go to their actual official forum page. Instead of viewing my rep’s stupid Twitter, I can view their actual offical forum account.
And yeah it’ll be a fucking mess, legal nightmare, and expensive. But we need it as much as we need the post office and everything else.
I agree, it’s a necessary clusterfuck. But a clusterfuck indeed.
Not only are they censoring porn, they’re censoring the word itself!
Not in the UK
Why you think the net was born? P*rn, p*rn, p*rn!
Parn? Pern? Purn?
I guess we’ll never know ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I’m confused, can’t literally anyone just generate an AI selfie to submit for the censorship?
A couple news cycles ago was just talking about how AI video and image generation has progressed so far that it is really difficult for any system to tell it is AI in some cases. This seems like the perfect usecase for that.
Or does it need to link to a real person ID or something?
Selfie doesn’t work, you need to turn your head left and right to follow instructions.
But yeah, there’s a bunch of avatars that will bypass it
GMod apparently works lol
The simplist answer is that this guy could buy some high-coverage foundation and a make-up sponge. He could change his appearance in other ways too if he likes - get a wig, fake nose, etc.
In the US you submit your ID, no face scan that im aware of (yet).
In states that have started this requirement (at least in Virginia), they do have ID as an option, but the default is a face scan. I don’t think an ID is better. In fact, it’s even more personal information being exposed.
I don’t know the technical terms, but my internet provider sometimes routes my internet through Virginia, and even though I live in Wisconsin, I’m forced to adhere to Virginia law online because of it. It’s very annoying. I
It’s not a discrimination thing, I’m sure this is just facial recognition failing over his extensive facial tattoos, same as it can fail on people with very dark skin. No racism or discrimination needed to explain it, it’s just the software or sometimes even physics that causes it.
Having said that, fuck the UK government for implementing this shit.
Get your porn whilst you can because other countries will follow suit and soon even a VPN won’t save you anymore
The system is still discriminating against this guy’s face tattoos even if it’s unintentional. Hopefully they will fix the issue.
This is one of the many ethical issues that can come up when you build software. It might be just a bug for the engineers who built it but this probably ruined this guy’s whole life. I hope he can move on from this hahaha.
Agreed with all your points though. What a stupid law. It’s crazy they are popping up all over now. We are losing anonymity online. What little we had left.
I want there to be a difference between actual discrimination and just software not working the way it should be, or sometimes even physics.
Again as the example: facial recognition on people with extremely dark skin. The camera gets less light, less detail, it’s literally physics causing the issue, NOT discrimination.
If cour the that needs to be fixed but that might mean that the camera needs a small light to help, for example. Again, this is not discrimination, it’s just a consequence of having darker skin, doesn’t make anyone less or more, it is what it is.
I really get uncomfortable when people start throwing around “discrimination!!!” on things like this, because it means that in my job as a software developer now suddenly I can be called a nazi because a software method wasn’t done quite right
Don’t assume evil where plain stupidity suffices
The discrimination part comes in when the decision to use it is made. In your example that’s a huge technical flaw that makes the technology useless for a large part of the population yet someone still chose to implement it in a way that would affect people’s lives.
The technology is cool on its own but why does it need to be used if it doesn’t work correctly? If you were the person making the call and you knew the technology didn’t serve all of the people it’s supposed to in a fair way and you still choose to use it that is discrimination.
Maybe it was initially a bug but once it is identified and there is no real attempt to fix it or make a work around, that would also be discrimination. It’s not the bug that is discriminating it’s the people who allow it to persist intentionally.
same as it can fail on people with very dark skin. No racism or discrimination needed to explain it
That’s a classic case of implicit racism. The technology is tailored to perform optimally against lighter toned skin, because the people building and evaluating the software are all lighter skinned, themselves. Similarly, I’m sure, the developers of the technology didn’t bother to evaluate how it would work on people with facial skin conditions, markings, or tattoos.
In classic “Move Fast and Break Things” style, they rushed an application to market that only half worked on some people, and then told anyone who would fail the check by default that this was an individual’s problem to resolve.
“Who cares if this system works for <Subset of People X>?” shows up in all sorts of lowest-bidder crap work, from medical studies to mechanical engineering. Whether its left-handed car drivers get fucked by a right-hand favorable design or clinical trials that just didn’t bother including women as subjects or dark-skinned people failing facial recognition, the implicit bigotry of poor engineering is rampant in our modern world.
The technical aspect could be a systemic SDLC problem if the software wasn’t tested on a broad enough range of users. As for what’s broad enough, that’s another issue to debate.
wow, they actually, properly, fully did this shit. Amazing.
So glad I left that shithole. My friends are aparantly using VPNs, which is the same fucking thing I had to use to access WIKIPEDIA in TURKEY.
Well, maybe not properly
enough for it to be consistently a violation of privacy and all the rest of the terrible things it does.
Well that’s the point isn’t it
He knows that video games where you can pose the character can bypass it, right?
Iirc death stranding and a few others have been shown to work.
Alternatively VPNs work.
Or piracy.
I don’t think that’s really the point.
I hope he sues and wins
I don’t want to know anything more about this man other than he has a lot of tattoos, likes porn, and isn’t afraid to say it.
We can also surmise that he’s bad at computers.
I’m sure he could probably figure out a VPN or a site that doesn’t give a fuck about UK law, but chose to stir shit anyway.
Well it at least seems he doesn’t care about privacy, if he chose to upload a selfie to get past the check.
He also gave an interview about the experience of failing to upload his selfie. I think you’re right about him not caring about his privacy.
My guess is at least 80% of average internet users don’t care about privacy
You can assume anything you want, but that doesn’t make it true. This guy wanted to stir the pot. I’ll assume he just wants to bring attention to this dumb law.
hmm, something tells me that facepaint will come into style in the next 10 years…
I’m honestly already thinking about anti-AI recognition make-up.
I want to go full cyberpunk and get QR codes tattooed on my cheeks that will either crash the cameras or tell the recognition software that I’m a stegosaurus.
King Of Ink Land King Body Art The Extreme Ink-Ite has written to his local MP to air his grievances.
Holy shit. That’s his legal name?!
For King of Ink Land, this is particularly tricky as the system believes he’s wearing a mask – but it’s actually his tattoo-covered face.
So is it first name ‘King of Ink Land’, last name ‘King Body Art The Extreme Ink-Ite’? Or is there a middle name in there?
The King of Ink Land, who is now considering using a VPN, was attempting to access a live webcam site when the issue arose.
Whoa whoa whoa. “The” King of Ink Land? That’s his name, not a title!
Godspeed, King of Ink Land. I sincerely wish you success in this fight.
In the UK it is easier to change your name than to watch porn.
The true King of United Kingdom.
There’s no such thing as “legal names” in the UK.
People don’t need to file paperwork to change their name? They just start using a new one on legal documents?
Correct. We can have as many names as we like too.
However there’s various documents available that are proof that one is using a name. So for example my bank wouldn’t let me change my name unless I present something like a deed poll. Said deed poll is literally just a print out with some stock phrasing and the signatures of two witnesses.
We don’t have a central database that covers everyone in Britain (unlike, say, Sweden). If I want to change my name I can just start using the new one. Amusingly lots of people in the UK don’t know this and are sure it’s not the case. I ended up switching banks because the final straw was how poorly the staff were trained on the subject. My new bank and the DVLA did not have similar weird ideas, thankfully, so now my name is updated on my driving licence, etc…
I mentioned how my deed poll is a print out earlier because so many people seem to think it needs to be something notarised, or on special stationery, or something (usually they’re not sure what, they just think it seems wrong). When they consult the law they tend to then have a bit of a laugh with me because the law is indeed a bit mental (such as at the registry office when I got married a few months ago).
That sounds really nice! It often costs hundreds of dollars to get your name changed in the US, and if you don’t do that then it can’t be on any of your ID documents. It’s a huge pain and barrier to a lot of people.
Dude needs to just upload a pic of Norman Reedus.
Norman Reedus
You spelled Benny Hill wrong
At some point I think he just said fill the rest in with Aquaman to the artist
