France Moves to Classify X as an Adult Site Amid Digital ID Crackdown
Technology
57
Beiträge
43
Kommentatoren
78
Aufrufe
-
I'm certain that religion is responsible, and has been, for nearly every conflict in the last 1500 or so years. Yet, it seems to be entirely ignored by leftists (conservatives don't have a reasonable view) as the cause of problems.
I think you're confusing Liberals with Leftists.
I can't remember a single self-proclaimed "Communist" nation that wasn't anti-Religion.
Tolerance of Religion comes from the Liberal political beliefs side (which many people who are also Leftwingers have) and the modern "Liberals" in places like the US and UK (which are Rightwingers) are the ones who stretch it well beyond tolerance to the point of deeming criticism of some Religions (but not others) as a bad thing, or in other words, activelly supporting certain religions and their values (which as you pointed out, tend to be Corporatist and Fascist).
In summary, Authoritarian Leftwingers tend to be anti-Religion, Liberal Leftwingers tend to tolerate Religion and "Liberal" Rightwingers at the very least defend and sometimes even support certain specific Religions (as far as I can tell, the ones supported by their local money and power elites) but not others.
-
France is moving to classify X as a pornographic website, a designation that would place it under the country’s mandatory age verification and digital ID laws.
This step, if finalized, would force the company to either implement robust age-gating mechanisms or restrict access to adult content altogether to avoid being cut off from younger users.
It would also mean that users have to show ID to access the platform, introducing major implications for privacy and free speech.
Everyone should have content filtering tools. I use Adguard services for filtering my own internet (adult, Reddit, YouTube, etc.). Surely, implimenting something similar at an OS or router level would have saved us decades of pointless bickering and provided us with an actual consumer benefit?
-
I think you're confusing Liberals with Leftists.
I can't remember a single self-proclaimed "Communist" nation that wasn't anti-Religion.
Tolerance of Religion comes from the Liberal political beliefs side (which many people who are also Leftwingers have) and the modern "Liberals" in places like the US and UK (which are Rightwingers) are the ones who stretch it well beyond tolerance to the point of deeming criticism of some Religions (but not others) as a bad thing, or in other words, activelly supporting certain religions and their values (which as you pointed out, tend to be Corporatist and Fascist).
In summary, Authoritarian Leftwingers tend to be anti-Religion, Liberal Leftwingers tend to tolerate Religion and "Liberal" Rightwingers at the very least defend and sometimes even support certain specific Religions (as far as I can tell, the ones supported by their local money and power elites) but not others.
Honestly, it seems that Christianity is the only one mentioned as a problem, normally with a big disclaimer about "not all Christians". Judaism is only really mentioned explicitly with "Judeo-Christian values", as if the founding fathers were staunch members of either religion, which most were not. Authoritarian governments like controlling religion because it can control the people. Leftists (at least the ones I've seen) are mostly ignoring the issues of other religions. Conservative critiques of religion tend to just be actual racism, without criticising the actual problems present.
-
Everyone should have content filtering tools. I use Adguard services for filtering my own internet (adult, Reddit, YouTube, etc.). Surely, implimenting something similar at an OS or router level would have saved us decades of pointless bickering and provided us with an actual consumer benefit?
If you want it, that should be your right, but the government shouldn't be forcing it on you.
-
Honestly, it seems that Christianity is the only one mentioned as a problem, normally with a big disclaimer about "not all Christians". Judaism is only really mentioned explicitly with "Judeo-Christian values", as if the founding fathers were staunch members of either religion, which most were not. Authoritarian governments like controlling religion because it can control the people. Leftists (at least the ones I've seen) are mostly ignoring the issues of other religions. Conservative critiques of religion tend to just be actual racism, without criticising the actual problems present.
I'm shocked you're missing the rabid anti-Islamism in most of the West - I mean, half of the support in the West for what Israel is doing comes from the whole "Muslims are violent" idea which in turn derives from over a decade of portraying the phenomenon Sunni Islamit Extremism (which is a tiny minority) as a problem of that religion in general (which is hilarious if one is well informed enough to know that for example, Indonesia is the biggest Muslim country in the World).
Not that I'm saying that Islam is any better than the rest, by the way, just pointing out the level of prejudice about it from people who literally know nothing at all about it (learning a bit about it is enough to figure out it's pretty complex and learning a bit more is enough to figure out it's as fucked up as most other major religions, just not in the way people think)
Then, of course, there's the whole looking down on animist religions (most of which are African) as "savagery", and also a bit so for Hinduism.
In the West maybe only the Eastern ones like Buddism and Shintoism don't get looked down on, probably because the former was a New Age fad over here and the latter is unknown to most people (and those who do know it, associate it with Japan, which is a country that most people see in a positive light).
The actual religion of Christinanity gets criticized by at most very highly educated agnostic or atheists, whilst for most of the other religions, their practictioners are negativelly viewed by even the most ignorant and ill informed of morons that has no clue whatsoever about the tenets of those religions or the boundary between regional cultural practices and the actual religions.
-
Oh, of course not. Just the given excuse. Honestly, people being so obsessed with minors jacking off is creepy. Who cares? If it's a problem, then the parents can deal with it.
As a parent, I'm with you.
-
I think you're confusing Liberals with Leftists.
I can't remember a single self-proclaimed "Communist" nation that wasn't anti-Religion.
Tolerance of Religion comes from the Liberal political beliefs side (which many people who are also Leftwingers have) and the modern "Liberals" in places like the US and UK (which are Rightwingers) are the ones who stretch it well beyond tolerance to the point of deeming criticism of some Religions (but not others) as a bad thing, or in other words, activelly supporting certain religions and their values (which as you pointed out, tend to be Corporatist and Fascist).
In summary, Authoritarian Leftwingers tend to be anti-Religion, Liberal Leftwingers tend to tolerate Religion and "Liberal" Rightwingers at the very least defend and sometimes even support certain specific Religions (as far as I can tell, the ones supported by their local money and power elites) but not others.
I can't remember a single self-proclaimed "Communist" nation that wasn't anti-Religion.
Besides historical trends and stuff (like how push to literacy denied religion it's power), 'communist' governments directly competed with religion on the ideological table.
Soviet people were given an afterlife-like myth of finally building the communism via socialism, for example, Lenin was a handy translation of Jesus, and so on. All pieces felt into existing sockets, that's how it worked out. It's a win for however found that conversion of ideas for the masses.
(I tolerate faith, I hate religious institutions)
-
I like my porn to be less faschy and more flashy.
Yeah alright, but dem uniformed forms though..
-
Everyone should have content filtering tools. I use Adguard services for filtering my own internet (adult, Reddit, YouTube, etc.). Surely, implimenting something similar at an OS or router level would have saved us decades of pointless bickering and provided us with an actual consumer benefit?
what does that have to do with France forcing you to show your ID to use Twitter?
-
Everyone should have content filtering tools. I use Adguard services for filtering my own internet (adult, Reddit, YouTube, etc.). Surely, implimenting something similar at an OS or router level would have saved us decades of pointless bickering and provided us with an actual consumer benefit?
I don't know if they still do it, but some mobile internet providers in the UK would filter things out unless you sent them your ID to unblock it.
Not sure it's a great solution, but better than having to provide your ID to every random website out there.
-
How would that work?
Just ask for something like "what's the quadratic formula?"
Tho to be fair, that would still probably block at least half of xitter's users...
-
what does that have to do with France forcing you to show your ID to use Twitter?
Those against website age verification argue that content blocking should happen at the OS level. For example, a parent could enable the built-in "child mode" on their child's smartphone or computer. As I understand it, that would be more effective, graceful, cheaper, free speechy, and private. To a degree, tech savvy parents (and people who block ads and other content) already do similar things with third party tools - i.e. it's feasible.
-
Won't somebody think of the children [who should be raised by their parents, not governments]?
-
France is moving to classify X as a pornographic website, a designation that would place it under the country’s mandatory age verification and digital ID laws.
This step, if finalized, would force the company to either implement robust age-gating mechanisms or restrict access to adult content altogether to avoid being cut off from younger users.
It would also mean that users have to show ID to access the platform, introducing major implications for privacy and free speech.
Sad to see France is heading this direction, Canada was very close to heading this route too, thankfully it didn't end up that way.
-
Those against website age verification argue that content blocking should happen at the OS level. For example, a parent could enable the built-in "child mode" on their child's smartphone or computer. As I understand it, that would be more effective, graceful, cheaper, free speechy, and private. To a degree, tech savvy parents (and people who block ads and other content) already do similar things with third party tools - i.e. it's feasible.
Sure if that was all they had in mind. This is also about collecting info and controlling what people can do, the content is just an excuse as a means of doing so.
-
France is moving to classify X as a pornographic website, a designation that would place it under the country’s mandatory age verification and digital ID laws.
This step, if finalized, would force the company to either implement robust age-gating mechanisms or restrict access to adult content altogether to avoid being cut off from younger users.
It would also mean that users have to show ID to access the platform, introducing major implications for privacy and free speech.
Never expected the place known for nude beaches and a president who married a pedophile to be one that implemented this kind of block.
-
If you want it, that should be your right, but the government shouldn't be forcing it on you.
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying governments could force MS, Google, Apple to implement content filtering tools at the OS level, that give users the choice to set up filtering however they want for themselves or their kids.
-
Sure if that was all they had in mind. This is also about collecting info and controlling what people can do, the content is just an excuse as a means of doing so.
Well, yes, there is that.
-
France is moving to classify X as a pornographic website, a designation that would place it under the country’s mandatory age verification and digital ID laws.
This step, if finalized, would force the company to either implement robust age-gating mechanisms or restrict access to adult content altogether to avoid being cut off from younger users.
It would also mean that users have to show ID to access the platform, introducing major implications for privacy and free speech.
Nazi propaganda: I sleep
Porn: Real shit
-
That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying governments could force MS, Google, Apple to implement content filtering tools at the OS level, that give users the choice to set up filtering however they want for themselves or their kids.
This already largely works, at least on Android. I use RethinkDNS, which allows me to filter stuff already, and comes included with a host of DNS filters out of the box.
I don't need MS, Google, or Apple to do it, just make it possible to install a third-party app that does it. That way I get to decide which tool I think works best instead of whatever the OEM decides.
