Let's all rub one out for our fallen brothers...
this post was submitted on 09 Mar 2026
139 points (98.6% liked)
World News
54580 readers
3033 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I wonder how instances like fediverse instances are supposed to handle this.
all curious and unsurveilled teens can only watch porn on the darkweb now
Where the good stuff is
Prove my age?
No thanks
I think I'll just wait until this thing... blows over
[ funk guitar plays ]
I wanna bet the rich will have some shell companies and lobby so they can anonymously access porn trough those.
"Instead of these crude, circumventable policies that create an infrastructure of private companies effectively doing law enforcement, they should just mandate that every operating system provider has to create genuinely functional parental controls apps that meet a set of minimum criteria," Lazar said
Uhhhh no.
Explain your objection. It's a parenting problem, not everyone else's.
My objection is that its my operating system running on my computer
Not yours. MINE.
I can make its logic gates do anything I want, as long as it's not sending CP or malware over the Internet.
Parents already have the tools to block this at the network layer, including in mobile OSes. There’s no need to add age verification at all to anything. The parents control their kids devices, so don’t give them a device they can access this stuff on.
These tools have existed for literal decades at this point. Anyone trying to add something now is just trying to make it easier for the government to spy on you.
Cool: agreed. Your objection was ambiguous.
If we had to choose, though, I'd consider the professor's suggestion preferable to age verification. While I disagree with mandating it, it'd pretty much do nothing, because it's already reality: most mainstream OSs include parental controls. The "criteria" would establish standards for parental controls, which isn't altogether a bad idea. A better idea would be to promote a standard & replace mandates with public services to provide parental control technologies free & to educate parents.
In the late 90s, when US Congress attempted to regulate access of adult content to minors, those laws commissioned studies that drew similar conclusions even then. The studies & federal courts concluded that to meet the government's compelling interest in "protecting minors from harmful content", there were more narrowly tailored alternatives to criminalization & age verification that are less restrictive to fundamental rights & are at least as effective:
- client-side filters to block content from the receiving end
- government programs to train parents & provide them resources to "protect" their children from "harmful content"
- public education campaigns.
They pointed out while client-side filters may have false positives & negatives
- they can be monitored & corrected
- they're a more complete solution that can restrict all internet protocols (not just web) from any geographic source (not only in legal jurisdiction) with content of any type (including dynamic such as live chat)
- they allow restriction of other kinds of content (eg, violence, hate speech)
- they can vary restrictions per child (eg, age-appropriateness)
- they let parents disable them
- they don't obstruct access by adults.
Criminalizing access to adult content at the source obstructs everyone's access & burdens them with loss of privacy & with security risk.
Despite their age, those studies' findings remain relevant.
- COPA Commission
In October 1998 Congress enacted the Child Online Protection Act and established the Commission on Online Child Protection to study methods to help reduce access by minors to certain sexually explicit material, defined in the statute as harmful to minors. Congress directed the Commission to evaluate the accessibility, cost, and effectiveness of protective technologies and methods, as well as their possible effects on privacy, First Amendment values and law enforcement. This report responds to the Congressional request.
- National Research Council
In November 1998, the U.S. Congress mandated a study by the National Research Council (NRC) to address pornography on the Internet (Box P.1).
COPA Commission summary
The COPA Commission found Age Verification ID to have the highest adverse impact on cost, privacy, fundamental rights, and law enforcement and to score poorly on effectiveness and accessibility.
They found other technologies & methods to be more effective & accessible with much lower adverse impact including
- client-side filtering
- family education programs
- acceptable use policies
- top-level domains for materials "not harmful" to minors
- "greenspaces" containing only child-appropriate materials.
Some recommendations to highlight
Public Education:
- Government and the private sector should undertake a major education campaign to promote public awareness of technologies and methods available to protect children online.
- Government and industry should effectively promote acceptable use policies.
Consumer Empowerment Efforts:
- Resources should be allocated for the independent evaluation of child protection technologies and to provide reports to the public about the capabilities of these technologies.
- Industry should take steps to improve child protection mechanisms, and make them more accessible online.
- A broad, national, private sector conversation should be encouraged on the development of next-generation systems for labeling, rating, and identifying content reflecting the convergence of old and new media.
- Government should encourage the use of technology in efforts to make children's experience of the Internet safe and useful.
Industry Action:
- The ISP industry should voluntarily undertake "best practices" to protect minors.
- The online commercial adult industry should voluntarily take steps to restrict minors' ready access to adult content.
NRC summary
The NRC found "no single or simple answer", agreed on the capabilities of filters in preventing inadvertent or unhighly-motivated exposure, but also stressed social & educational strategies in addressing motivation, coping, & responsible behavior. Social and educational strategies are intended to teach children how to make wise choices about how they behave on the Internet and to take control of their online experiences: where they go; what they see; what they do; who they talk to. Such strategies must be age-appropriate if they are to be effective. Further, such an approach entails teaching children to be critical, skeptical, and self-reflective of the material that they are seeing.An analogy is the relationship between swimming pools and children. Swimming pools can be dangerous for children. To protect them, one can install locks, put up fences, and deploy pool alarms. All of these measures are helpful, but by far the most important thing that one can do for one’s children is to teach them to swim.
Perhaps the most important social and educational strategy is responsible adult involvement and supervision.
Internet safety education is analogous to safety education in the physical world, and may include teaching children how sexual predators and hate group recruiters typically approach young people, how to recognize impending access to inappropriate sexually explicit material, and when it is risky to provide personal information online. Information and media literacy provide children with skills in recognizing when information is needed and how to locate, evaluate, and use it effectively, irrespective of the media in which it appears, and in critically evaluating the content inherent in media messages. A child with these skills is less likely to stumble across inappropriate material and more likely to be better able to put it into context if and when he or she does.
Education, supervision, & parental controls/filters seem a more compelling solution. However, bring that up in regard to legislation to age-restrict social media & the tune at lemmy dramatically changes: seems inconsistent.
A lot of parents sadly lack any kinds of skills to use those tools nor even know that they exist. I'm not inherently against the approach where user agent sends some rough age (allowed R-rating or something) to the website which can then block minors from accessing porn/violence/whatever. If it was just that, locally stored info if the user is minor or adult, it could be a pretty decent approach to even technically less inclined parents to give some limits on what their kids can do.
But as with nearly every 'protect the kids' thing, it's a pretty damn slippery and steep slope. If adult verification requires something more than a local variable that's the point when the whole system becomes a tool for surveillance instead of a helpful thing for parents/schools and all of these "solutions" worldwide seems to be going in that direction.
If it's illegal anyway, you might as well pirate it.
Last time I checked, the darknet marketplaces have whole sections just for stolen pr0n site username/passwords
EDIT: example screenshot
I like godnrok's suggestion of having bottle-o's sell cards with proof of age numbers/hashes.
Insane, I came up with the exact same idea when reading the article then scroll down and you’ve linked to someone else saying it too.
No problem giving those codes to minors. I bet such codes would be sold on the net withing 1 minute of the release of such a system.
Remembering that a valid age verification is supposed to be a parent approving their child's use
"Muuuuu-uuum! I wanna have a wank to incest porn! Can you come and verify me?!"
My jedi powers sense and increase in VPN subscription sales.
but doesn't this just feel like the path to making those age gated or otherwise inaccessible?
So dumb lol
This will only hurt people working in adult entertainment as it will train Australians to steal it all.
Western governments don't care about solving issues, only looking like they do.
If the porn sites just block the country from connecting with a notice as to why, will that piss people off enough to force them to change the law?
Pornhub does this in several US states. When you try to connect you get a message about why it's blocked in your state. So far I don't know of any state that has changed the law back.
After a brief Internet search, I have found that no country or state has entirely pulled out after going all in on age verification. Most of them back out before even starting. So things don’t look very good for Australia.
Like they do for Texas and Utah and I'm sure a few other states.
"It's just pushing people into the fringe of the extremes," he said. "It's not stopping you from watching porn."
Bihar’s liquor ban is on a scale unmatched anywhere in the world but, just like 1920s America, illegal bootleggers ensure that the liquor still flow
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-11/india-deadly-prohibition-state-bihar/105010860
In the third world you see people selling VPN access in person at markets. I wonder if something similar is going to happen.
This might seem drastic but think of the great benefits to society! Such as…. uhm… uuuh. Hey! Look what I can do! 🤹
Privacy violations galore?
and users tapping out, completely. Build your libraries
Hold a photo of the PM up to the camera?
I am not against porn on any moral or ethical level as long as the content is produced with everyone's consent and some level of protection for everyone involved, or if it's material being shared by adults for fun. Fantastic, more of it. Everyone should enjoy the good things in life and that includes sexuality.
That said, porn addiction is damaging not necessarily just because it alters your perception of relationships, but because anything you do that creates pleasure spikes/associations can have negative effects on your ability to derive pleasure from other things. And if you start getting hooked on porn early in life, these changes to your brain become extremely hard to break and you can set yourself up for chronic issues like depression, anhedonia and anxiety. And yes, also fucked up ideas about sex and relationships.
I don't think a ban is appropriate and I don't trust the agencies that want to manage our age-verification, but I do think something needs to be done that doesn't just hand wave it off as "let the parents do their job" because we don't live in that world. Parents are just children with more bills. Nobody knows how to parent, much less parent properly though difficult topics.
I am admittedly unsure what the right answer here is. A lot of the internet, not even just porn, is very damaging to our minds. Our attention spans are shot, we all just read the worst thoughts from the slimmest margin of people and focus on those edge cases about any idea or topic and it ruins our ability to socialize or engage with others happily. And a lot of young people around the whole world are just deeply stuck in ruts of doom-scrolling, porn, social-media and influencers giving fake advice and selling scams to anyone with access to a credit card.
I feel like with all problems it comes back to capitalism fucking everything up for everyone, but I also know we're nowhere near a point where people are going to start like, creating effective governments so that services and systems can be nationalized safely. I wouldn't trust a nationalized trash-can in the USA, not sure how bad it is in Australia but it's just a matter of time before capital ruins every developed country with a few cents to rub together.
Everything is an addiction to those with no self control. Don't project your issues onto the rest of us.
those with no self control
I am literally saying that anything that gives you pleasurable feelings can be addictive, but I'm saying it's not a morality issue. If you think people who get hooked on bad habits "have no self control" then you're part of the problem.
That is a terrible article on an argued topic, dealing with the feelings of morality surrounding porn addiction and not touching on the psychological pleasure/reward cycle that compulsive behavior creates. You misunderstand the actual debate or you're looking for the articles to support your feelings. It's a debated topic but most professionals believe that porn is addictive even if it's not a defined condition.
There is debate about if porn addiction is a real, separate issue than just compulsive behavior, but the vast consensus is that porn is addicting, just that by itself it doesn't count as a separate addiction when people show the same addictive behavior towards things like video games and other things that don't chemically interact with the brain, so the argument is if we should make a blanket category for compulsive behavior for certain media and habits.
It's about the categorization and definitions, not a pass that porn and similar compulsive behavior isn't a danger.
https://www.addictioncenter.com/community/is-porn-addiction-real/
the world’s leading guide on psychological disorders, asserts that pornography, as well as sex addictions, are not psychological disorders.
But does that mean porn isn’t addictive, and that people can’t become addicted to it? Absolutely not. Because the APA or DSM-5 has not “recognized” something does not mean that it isn’t real.
Lots of people are harmed by addictive behavior, about a lot of different things that aren't always written up in a book. I've talked to too many guys who have had problems with this for me to dismiss it just because some wannabe celebrity doctors found they can make bank supporting our bad habits that don't leave physical marks.
Porn addiction isn't a real thing, sparky.
There are thousands and thousands of people who have suffered addiction to behavior that gives them dopamine, from scrolling to video games to porn, if it's not real to you... GREAT, shut up and go away. I'm sure you'll be fine. Don't worry about it.