Skip to content

Reddit users in the UK must now upload selfies to access NSFW subreddits

Technology
269 180 963
  • Just post on them. Two birds with one stone.

    But if you do comply, double down by ringing Kier Starmer up and letting him (and your local MP) know what you've been wanking off to, since he's so fucking interested. He could have blocked this, but he let it run because he also agrees with it.

    I wonder if there's a browser addon to make an itemised list of all the videos and camgirls and then I can send it to him on a regular basis. It should log when you close the browser window so it knows when you've "finished" so to speak. Maybe I could highlight those videos in bold for him, so he can skip right to the good ones.

    Browser history? Just export as html or something and email it over…

  • Keeping the age verifier seperate from the content host is good. Destroying the files used for verification is good. On paper it's not too a bad system for age verification, but it really hinges on if you can trust them. Given the track record of basically almost every company and government ever...

    Problem is, how do we know that the company is reputable, audited, and so on?

    I’ve seen more places requiring verification - and each one of them seems to use a different verification company. How are there so many of these places, and why aren’t they more commonly known? Like Experian for credit, etc.

    Sure it might sound good to keep them separate - but all that is doing is absolving the content host from liabilities for providing the adult content (somewhere) on their platforms and sites. Reddit don’t want to get involved, and I’ll bet they found the cheapest and easiest provider, or the first one in the search list and thought “good enough”.

  • Nah. An image of government ID. “But we don’t need your information, just confirmation of age” 🫠 forget that.

    I don't have any government ID

  • Proton mail has a feature where you can create a new address that ties to your main one, but nobody except proton knows it is you. They end in passmail.net. I'm sure there are other providers that do similar things

    Cool. Thanks 🙂

  • Keeping the age verifier seperate from the content host is good. Destroying the files used for verification is good. On paper it's not too a bad system for age verification, but it really hinges on if you can trust them. Given the track record of basically almost every company and government ever...

    Good take. You are right. Still fuck this.

  • no don't do it

    But he's levioser than Hermione?!? How does one resist.

  • Ohhhhhh so that's why, now I get why my FB account got auto-deleted repeatedly.

    Does Discord do that too ?? Because it makes sense

    They started recently yeah. I'm in some nsfw discords and they I'd you now

  • Finally it seems the end of Reddit is near.

    I keep thinking about some of RPs I've done in my life. Hot, vile, smutty text based RPs. I think about them and wonder if there will ever be a time when those words would be considered illegal and I would be arrested for posting them. This doesn't just protect minors. It tags deviance. Some of you may know the darker corners of Reddit. Imagine if an AI flagged your subs. The delete-rebuild cycle doesn't work anymore. Reddit will always know. If the law asks for suspects for newly illegal thought crime, Reddit will be able to point to all the users on those dark corners. We are moving into a future where privacy doesn't matter and I fear what that means for the kinky among us.

  • I keep thinking about some of RPs I've done in my life. Hot, vile, smutty text based RPs. I think about them and wonder if there will ever be a time when those words would be considered illegal and I would be arrested for posting them. This doesn't just protect minors. It tags deviance. Some of you may know the darker corners of Reddit. Imagine if an AI flagged your subs. The delete-rebuild cycle doesn't work anymore. Reddit will always know. If the law asks for suspects for newly illegal thought crime, Reddit will be able to point to all the users on those dark corners. We are moving into a future where privacy doesn't matter and I fear what that means for the kinky among us.

    Something similar happened In China recently. A female author of homoerotic texts was charged for it.

  • Proton mail has a feature where you can create a new address that ties to your main one, but nobody except proton knows it is you. They end in passmail.net. I'm sure there are other providers that do similar things

    It's actually passinbox.com. The format is ${aliasName}.${randomWord}${random3DigitNumber}@passinbox.com
    Ex: lemmy.spaghetti198@passinbox.com

  • u/spez was the lead moderator of r/jailbait, and when he was caught, he got rid of mod transparency. Ghilisaine Maxwell was likely a l lead moderator of news Reddits as well (u/MaxwellHill). Reddit has always been compromised.

    what's the topic of r/jailbait?

  • Meh, just upload a dick pic.

    Greedy little pigboy.

    I'll never forget how he changed users' text without them knowing it before the 2016 election. Reddit was going downhill before, but that was a turning point.

  • Didn't they ban NSFW a year ago?

    They’re not banning NSFW, they’re trying to control it. It’s now login-gated (with a cheeky blurred background if you’re not).

  • Finally it seems the end of Reddit is near.

    Hm, I'm going to need some software engineers to critique an idea I have that could at least partially solve the fears people have about their personal details being tied to their porn habits.

    The system will be called the Adult Content Verification System (or Wank Card if you want to be funny). It's a physical card, printed by the government with a unique key printed on it. Those cards are then sold by any shop that has an alcohol license (premises or personal). You go in, show your ID to the clerk, buy the card. That card is proof that you're over 18, but it is not directly tied to you, you just have to be over 18 to buy it. The punishment for selling a Wank Card to someone under the age of 18 is the same as if you sold alcohol to someone under 18.

    When you go to the porn site, they check if you're from the UK, they check if you have a key associated with your account. If not, they ask for one, you provide the key to the site, the site does an API call to https://wankcard.gov.uk/api/verify with the site's API key (freely generated, but you could even make the api public if you want) and the key on the card, gets a response saying "Yep! This is a valid key!" and hey presto, free to wank and nobody knows it's you! If you don't have an account, the verification would have to be tied to a cookie or something that disappears after a while for all you anonymous people.

    As a result, you can both prove that you're over 18 (because you have the card) and some company over in San Francisco doesn't get your personal data, because you never actually record it anywhere. All you have is keys, and while yes, the government could record "Oh this key was used to verify on this site", they'd have to know which shop the key was bought from, who sold it, and who bought it, which is a lot more difficult to do unless the shopkeeper keeps records of everyone he's ever sold to.

    So... Good idea? Bad idea? Better than the current approach anyway, I think.

  • u/spez was the lead moderator of r/jailbait, and when he was caught, he got rid of mod transparency. Ghilisaine Maxwell was likely a l lead moderator of news Reddits as well (u/MaxwellHill). Reddit has always been compromised.

    I’m not defending Spez, I think he’s a piece of shit and he did edit other users’ comments that were critical of him, which is fucked up, but I don’t think he was actually involved with that sub. It was possible to appoint mods without their knowledge or consent, and he’s a huge target, someone must have done it as a joke.

  • Hm, I'm going to need some software engineers to critique an idea I have that could at least partially solve the fears people have about their personal details being tied to their porn habits.

    The system will be called the Adult Content Verification System (or Wank Card if you want to be funny). It's a physical card, printed by the government with a unique key printed on it. Those cards are then sold by any shop that has an alcohol license (premises or personal). You go in, show your ID to the clerk, buy the card. That card is proof that you're over 18, but it is not directly tied to you, you just have to be over 18 to buy it. The punishment for selling a Wank Card to someone under the age of 18 is the same as if you sold alcohol to someone under 18.

    When you go to the porn site, they check if you're from the UK, they check if you have a key associated with your account. If not, they ask for one, you provide the key to the site, the site does an API call to https://wankcard.gov.uk/api/verify with the site's API key (freely generated, but you could even make the api public if you want) and the key on the card, gets a response saying "Yep! This is a valid key!" and hey presto, free to wank and nobody knows it's you! If you don't have an account, the verification would have to be tied to a cookie or something that disappears after a while for all you anonymous people.

    As a result, you can both prove that you're over 18 (because you have the card) and some company over in San Francisco doesn't get your personal data, because you never actually record it anywhere. All you have is keys, and while yes, the government could record "Oh this key was used to verify on this site", they'd have to know which shop the key was bought from, who sold it, and who bought it, which is a lot more difficult to do unless the shopkeeper keeps records of everyone he's ever sold to.

    So... Good idea? Bad idea? Better than the current approach anyway, I think.

    This would be better than most of the crap being proposed or implemented.

    But, since the keys are presumably reusable, they'll presumably get borrowed shared by and among minors almost immediately.

    There could be some "Netflix account sharing" style work to deter that, of course.

  • The solution to all of this “think of the children” stuff is that devices owned/used by children should have to be registered as a child’s device, which would enable certain content blockers.

    Forcing adults to verify their identity, rather than simply activating some broad based restrictions on devices being purchased for child use, is a waste of time. Kids will still find workarounds. Adult privacy will be compromised.

    Its also an easily enforceable policy to require registration of children’s devices. You can hold the parents to compliance. You can hold the carriers to compliance. Its truly the simplest way to keep kids from accessing porn without having to mess with adult use of the internet whatsoever

    Your solution is worse.

    As is, it is the responsibility of the content provider to make sure that they are distributing only to people who are legally allowed to have it.

    With age-verification the user has to prove that they are allowed to access the content, then the site can distribute it to them.

    Your approach is to distribute the content by default and only deny it to ChildDevices. In order for this to work at all, you have to mandate that children can only use ChildDevices. This is soooo much worse than simply requiring that adults who want to see certain content have to prove that they can legally access it. If adults have reservations about providing ID for pornography, the loss of such content seems to be much less than denying children Internet access. (Although, I'm sure that Lemmings would disagree for obvious reasons).

  • This would be better than most of the crap being proposed or implemented.

    But, since the keys are presumably reusable, they'll presumably get borrowed shared by and among minors almost immediately.

    There could be some "Netflix account sharing" style work to deter that, of course.

    Yeah I did consider that people are going to share keys, but people are going to share accounts too so that's always going to happen. The best thing you can do is stick some safeguards on the keys where if a key is found online, it can be deactivated and potentially investigated since you can tell which shop sold the key. If there's a shop out there just giving cards away to minors, well they're in for a world of trouble.

    Under the Licensing Act of 2003, it's illegal to sell alcohol to an adult if you reasonably suspect that they will be then giving that alcohol to a minor. You can assume the same will apply to people selling Wank Cards.

  • It'll almost certainly be an AI model doing it.

    It'll almost certainly be an AI model backed by 1000s of "trainers" in 3rd world countries doing it, but only until the model is fully trained.

  • I keep thinking about some of RPs I've done in my life. Hot, vile, smutty text based RPs. I think about them and wonder if there will ever be a time when those words would be considered illegal and I would be arrested for posting them. This doesn't just protect minors. It tags deviance. Some of you may know the darker corners of Reddit. Imagine if an AI flagged your subs. The delete-rebuild cycle doesn't work anymore. Reddit will always know. If the law asks for suspects for newly illegal thought crime, Reddit will be able to point to all the users on those dark corners. We are moving into a future where privacy doesn't matter and I fear what that means for the kinky among us.

    I'm nowhere near as worried about this for kink stuff as I am about us LGBTQ living in the US.

  • Meta snubs the EU’s voluntary AI guidelines

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    66 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    dojan@pawb.socialD
    PleasedontadaptandGTFOinsteadpleasedontadaptjustGTFOpleasepleasejustGTFOrotinhell.
  • How Apple’s iOS 26 and Google’s Android 16 Will Change Our Phones

    Technology technology
    17
    8 Stimmen
    17 Beiträge
    56 Aufrufe
    adespoton@lemmy.caA
    The one thing I’m continually annoyed about though is battery management. Why, in this day and age, do we not have a smartphone that can last on a single charge for a week? Instead, after a year or two of use, the devices with a glued in battery can barely last 8 hours on a charge. Doesn’t seem all that smart.
  • AI slows down some experienced software developers, study finds

    Technology technology
    129
    1
    400 Stimmen
    129 Beiträge
    797 Aufrufe
    damaskox@lemmy.worldD
    Ah. True. I realise it now.
  • AI Robots Could Fill $10 Trillion Labor Gap as World Ages

    Technology technology
    7
    1
    12 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    50 Aufrufe
    M
    Or maybe create opportunities that people can meet?
  • 111 Stimmen
    24 Beiträge
    128 Aufrufe
    O
    Ingesting all the artwork you ever created by obtaining it illegally and feeding it into my plagarism remix machine is theft of your work, because I did not pay for it. Separately, keeping a copy of this work so I can do this repeatedly is also stealing your work. The judge ruled the first was okay but the second was not because the first is "transformative", which sadly means to me that the judge despite best efforts does not understand how a weighted matrix of tokens works and that while they may have some prevention steps in place now, early models showed the tech for what it was as it regurgitated text with only minor differences in word choice here and there. Current models have layers on top to try and prevent this user input, but escaping those safeguards is common, and it's also only masking the fact that the entire model is built off of the theft of other's work.
  • Signal – an ethical replacement for WhatsApp

    Technology technology
    235
    1
    1k Stimmen
    235 Beiträge
    1k Aufrufe
    V
    What I said is that smart people can be convinced to move to another platform. Most of my friends are not technically inclined, but it was easy to make them use it, at least to chat with me. What you did is change "smart people" with "people who already want to move", which is not the same. You then said it's not something you can choose (as you cannot choose to be rich). But I answered that you can actually choose your friends. Never did I say people who are not interested in niche technologies are not smart. My statement can be rephrased in an equivalent statement "people who cannot be convinced to change are not smart", and I stand to it.
  • How not to lose your job to AI

    Technology technology
    16
    1
    9 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    76 Aufrufe
    rikudou@lemmings.worldR
    A nice "trick": After 4 or so responses where you can't get anywhere, start a new chat without the wrong context. Of course refine your question with whatever you have found out in the previous chat.
  • Uber, Lyft oppose some bills that aim to prevent assaults during rides

    Technology technology
    12
    94 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    62 Aufrufe
    F
    California is not Colorado nor is it federal No shit, did you even read my comment? Regulations already exist in every state that ride share companies operate in, including any state where taxis operate. People are already not supposed to sexually assault their passengers. Will adding another regulation saying they shouldn’t do that, even when one already exists, suddenly stop it from happening? No. Have you even looked at the regulations in Colorado for ride share drivers and companies? I’m guessing not. Here are the ones that were made in 2014: https://law.justia.com/codes/colorado/2021/title-40/article-10-1/part-6/section-40-10-1-605/#%3A~%3Atext=§+40-10.1-605.+Operational+Requirements+A+driver+shall+not%2Ca+ride%2C+otherwise+known+as+a+“street+hail”. Here’s just one little but relevant section: Before a person is permitted to act as a driver through use of a transportation network company's digital network, the person shall: Obtain a criminal history record check pursuant to the procedures set forth in section 40-10.1-110 as supplemented by the commission's rules promulgated under section 40-10.1-110 or through a privately administered national criminal history record check, including the national sex offender database; and If a privately administered national criminal history record check is used, provide a copy of the criminal history record check to the transportation network company. A driver shall obtain a criminal history record check in accordance with subparagraph (I) of paragraph (a) of this subsection (3) every five years while serving as a driver. A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: (c) (I) A person who has been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol in the previous seven years before applying to become a driver shall not serve as a driver. If the criminal history record check reveals that the person has ever been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to any of the following felony offenses, the person shall not serve as a driver: An offense involving fraud, as described in article 5 of title 18, C.R.S.; An offense involving unlawful sexual behavior, as defined in section 16-22-102 (9), C.R.S.; An offense against property, as described in article 4 of title 18, C.R.S.; or A crime of violence, as described in section 18-1.3-406, C.R.S. A person who has been convicted of a comparable offense to the offenses listed in subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (c) in another state or in the United States shall not serve as a driver. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the criminal history record check for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least five years after the criminal history record check was conducted. A person who has, within the immediately preceding five years, been convicted of or pled guilty or nolo contendere to a felony shall not serve as a driver. Before permitting an individual to act as a driver on its digital network, a transportation network company shall obtain and review a driving history research report for the individual. An individual with the following moving violations shall not serve as a driver: More than three moving violations in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver; or A major moving violation in the three-year period preceding the individual's application to serve as a driver, whether committed in this state, another state, or the United States, including vehicular eluding, as described in section 18-9-116.5, C.R.S., reckless driving, as described in section 42-4-1401, C.R.S., and driving under restraint, as described in section 42-2-138, C.R.S. A transportation network company or a third party shall retain true and accurate results of the driving history research report for each driver that provides services for the transportation network company for at least three years. So all sorts of criminal history, driving record, etc checks have been required since 2014. Colorado were actually the first state in the USA to implement rules like this for ride share companies lol.