Age-verification HTTP requests are deeply rooted in this nation’s history.
this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
110 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19338 readers
2512 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is probably one step on the path to the xtianist wishes of outlawing porn so it can be weaponized only against certain groups.
Also, when dumbass redpilled angry young males bitch that they "didn't vote for this"....
Tired of it being everybody else's job to "protect the children" rather than their parents.
Supreme Court rules once again that American citizens have no right to privacy.
"Come on man, just give us an ID linked to your IP address! We won't use it for anything, I swear! We will also make sure it is kept in the most secure servers!"
I’m shocked that the DoD doesn’t step in to slap down this kind of insecure shit. Leaking more personal details to more parties is a national security nightmare.
The DoD is salivating over this one. They get to link IPs to passports.
So what they're saying is that times have changed and things that used to be considered rights guaranteed by the Constitution need to change with the times.
I'm sure this logic can be applied to other rights as well, as long as those rights aren't laid out in any amendments that come after 1 and before 3.
Do changes in technology justify curbing the second amendment, too, or just the first? I mean, guns have certainly changed a lot since the bill of rights was written.
It applies to whatever they goddamn please now.
I'm sure it doesn't apply to only the 1st amendment! They'll apply it to all the other amendments too (unless they don't want to)
"but justices noted filtering software is ineffective"
lol
But they're doing it, anyway!
Let's not let something like justice get in the way of expensive useless bullshit and graft, it's the Roberts court
I like that the arguement is that there are technical limitations to age restricting graphic content, so the best course of action is limiting people's rights.
Seems like people's rights should be more important.
Can't wait for all Red states to instantly mirror the Taliban government.
The dominionist movement took a lot of lessons from Iran, and seek to create a similar society but with christianity instead of islam.
Yallqada about to take over :(
Red states are about to get even more "freedom".
You get what you vote for.
I live in a state that has porn ID laws. I did not vote for this.
When the bill was signed into law was when I heard of it. I was fucking livid. Not a single peep from any of the many, many groups I'm a part of. It was almost like it was snuck through last minute.
I emailed my Republican representatives, which of course support the bill and sent me a form letter back.
These laws are impossible to repeal due to their "what about the children" arguments. I'm so fucking tempted to spear phish these assholes to publish their browser histories but who has the time.
As if republicans care about children. They want you having sex instead of masturbating. They want you poor from having kids instead of having an abortion or using contraceptives. They want more bodies to feed the us military complex.
This reminds me of a geroge carlin qoute
"They want live babies so they can make dead soldier"
It's sad how it's still relevant almost 30 years later.
It's been relevant for all of human history, silly
The SC works for the blyats and CCP. Fucking traitor cunts.
Idiot tax as far as I'm concerned. Get a VPN.
You know they can just outlaw VPNs as they did it in many countries already...