• chuck@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Ok I don’t understand this push to block porn at a country wide level.

    Who wants this and why?

    I honestly don’t see why. Most to the time they tell you follow the money but I can’t think how blocking porn helps anyone but VPN providers, and old school porno mag and video publishers.

    Maybe this is a fundamentalist puritanical thing? But how is it getting such wide support? Are there that many but hurt virgins in the Senate and House of Commons?

    Argh so many questions and this feels so absurd.

    • stephan262@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      74
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I think they want the precident of being able to require id verification to access websites. It’s a great spying tool for the government, if they can legitimise it’s use. First they go for the porn sites to ‘protect children’. Then they’ve got a foot in the door with the infrastructure in place to expand it to other ‘objectionable’ sites, and perhaps even further.

      Maybe I’m just being paranoid and it’s just puritanical BS pushed by out of touch politicians who are trying to appeal to the moral busybodies in society.

      • chuck@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        No it’s not paranoia if they are actually out to get you.

        If they are out to get us it’s just baffling to me. The internet was originally designed as a communications tool to survive large parts being damaged in the event of a major disaster/attack.

        It got hijacked by people first who used it to share less and scientific information and more for the lack of a better word human information. Then corporations came and wanted to extract value from it some how. So we had the Dotcom bubbles and pop-up ads.

        Now I don’t have the hindsight now to succinctly explain what happened next but then Facebook became a dominant social media platform. And everyone gave them info about themselves contrary to the previous advice about never using your real name on the internet.

        Now we have governments world wide actively trying to police porn a good 50 years after it existed on the internet. 20 years since it was freely and widely available as streaming video? What’s the goal trying to tax free porn somehow?

        I think the genie is out of the bottle at this point.

        • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          What’s the goal trying to tax free porn somehow?

          Almost like taxing someone else for linking to your website…

    • sbmc29@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      The conservatives along with the NDP and Bloc are apparently the ones who want this.

    • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      I think its a step towards decentralizing the internet and requiring government backed profiles to access it by having all your online access linked to a profile that is linked to your real world information.

      • chuck@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        It’s wild because back in the day they told us don’t let anyone know your real name or where you live if you can help it. Now it’s let’s see your driver’s license to verify you before you can look at cat videos…

        But how much of this is actually new trying to build a world order and how much is just ignorance in the capabilities of the technology of the members of the Senate and House of Commons

        • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          6 months ago

          If someone is incapable of understanding or respecting the capabilities and implementation of a technology, they are unfit to govern it.

          • Grimpen@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            That’s why they have lobbyists…

            In theory there are also panels and advisory boards for technical things. Of course, the same monied interests who pay the lobbyists also try and get people into those roles. Heck, I would wager a good chunk of the lobbying is in the form of a non-governmental policy advisory group.

            Elected representatives don’t need to be experts in everything, but they should be able to get technical advice. Unfortunately this is where much of the lobbying comes in.

            • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Anyone who can’t install nvidia drivers on Debian is unfit to govern the internet.

      • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        6 months ago

        decentralizing the internet and requiring government backed profiles

        Requiring a centralized auth is not decentralization.