this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2026
306 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

83125 readers
3672 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The European Commission preliminarily found Pornhub, Stripchat, XNXX and XVideos in breach of the Digital Services Act (DSA) for failing to protect minors from being exposed to pornographic content on their services.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MithranArkanere@lemmy.world 11 points 4 hours ago

That's not how the internet works.

The onus is on the users. The parents are the ones who have to figure out a way to ensure what their kid's devices can access, or that they are educated enough not to seek it.

[–] chunes@lemmy.world 12 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

I am once again asking why a non-European website (pornhub) should have to care.

If you want to censor stuff so bad, then hop to it. Why are you asking people outside your borders censor themselves?

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

If we don't have to do anything about China wanting Tienanmen Square being suppressed then we don't have to do anything about any foreign nation suppressing anything of ours. And if we do have to care about one, why do we not have to care about the others?

[–] SabinStargem@lemmy.today 18 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

If kids are willfully seeking porn, then it ain't anybody's business to stop them. Exploring and enjoying your sexuality is part of growing up, and "moral" whackjobs shouldn't get to decide how people grow up.

Protecting the kids should be about providing useful information, contraception, and official aid against predators.

[–] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 3 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I'm pretty liberal but nobody's kids need to watch anyone get tied up and anally fucked while they scream.

I get your point about regular stuff, but there is a fuckton of irregular stuff

[–] NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

And you bring that up bcz you think that's specifically what OP was referring to?

[–] pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 hours ago

Back to magazines and dvds?

[–] grapefruittrouble@lemmy.zip 48 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Hey EU (and all other regulatory agencies interested in “protecting the children”), how about you provide information to parents on how they can setup their own blocking tools, like DNS. You can do this for free, today, right now and actually get the results you supposedly want.

[–] maplesaga@lemmy.world 12 points 19 hours ago

It's a precursor to a digital ID.

Because China and Russia will use bots.

The real crime here is while the EU is trying every angle to error your privacy, that time is not being spent on real issues. You are being sold out by the very people put into positions of power to serve you. If the data supported their goals, I would be there with them, but the data is very clear on the matter and the it indicates we are in for big issues with all these IDs being stored by centralized targets.

[–] thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

porn should be behind age of consent not behind 18; being allowed to fuck someone but not see media of sexual things is total bullshit

and not as a law. this is not the government's job at all. prohibition doesn't work. the only solution is proper sex ed

just because it's harmful to the self (according to dubious claims) doesn't mean that people should not have this freedom. people's freedom is more important than prevention of them harming themselves.

[–] lightnsfw@reddthat.com 23 points 1 day ago

Whoever's currently responsible for the kid should be responsible for watching them and keeping them out of shit they shouldn't be getting into. Expecting everyone else to put up with this privacy invading shit is fucking stupid.

[–] ImmersiveMatthew@sh.itjust.works 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The smart people never enter politics and so rational solutions like yours never see the day of light. Plus, it is more about collecting your data and control than protecting anyone.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Sineljora@sh.itjust.works 61 points 1 day ago (10 children)

Minors accessing porn on their own is not a real problem, and hurts no one.

load more comments (10 replies)
[–] death_to_carrots@feddit.org 20 points 1 day ago

Didn't know about Stripchat. Sooo … thanks, EU?

[–] febra@lemmy.world 64 points 1 day ago (3 children)

And that's how it begins. Soon they'll start asking everyone to provide ID to access the internet.

[–] jackal@feddit.uk 1 points 4 hours ago

If they want to know who I am they can already ask my ISP, I don't see why they need to also have a copy of my driving license.

[–] nforminvasion@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Exactly. Chat Control being rejected is a minor victory unfortunately. There are VERY powerful actors and organizations behind the scenes for these policies.

I think they realized chat control wasn't going to work, but do not abandon the watch post, they will be back with a different approach.

[–] partofthevoice@lemmy.zip 4 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

There are VERY powerful actors

God, I fucking hate this timeline. You know you’re talking about Zuckerberg in that way, right? It’s disgusting that he ought fit such an eery description.

[–] qwerty@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 1 day ago

That's why we need decentralized infrastructure like a meshnet or personal/community satellite network. Reticulum based networks are imo the best candidates for that, right now and in the foreseeable future.

[–] GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world 50 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (6 children)

I suggest that instead of age verification for kids, we do parenting verification licences for anyone wanting to have kids, before they have kids and then don't raise them.

[–] BlindFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 6 hours ago

Some might be upvoting this in cheeky irony, but I see this as a modest proposal.

This position deserves a longer form article & widespread publication, and numerous calculations & studies detailing how much more ethically beneficial this would be for society. Would it not be more efficient to curb idiocy among the masses by regulating people's choices in population control than conducting intimate mass government surveillance? Would it not be a higher ethical stance to give people the illusion of choice by making them work for the privilege of birthing, maintenance, and management of another human being?

Counterpoint: it is cheaper and cost-effective to dehumanize and control the masses with the technical advances we have today ~~, and-also, to hell with ethics~~. Think about it. If car manufacturers would be made responsible for designing cars to identify bad actors, we wouldn't have to deal with the inevitable consequences of people who gain their driving licenses but bend the rules anyway. We could do with discarding licensing altogether because it's not perfect. Only by singling out and reprimanding each person for their faults with the conviction of a Walmart micromanager and the ruthless efficiency of Palantir surveillance - can we create a more perfect bubble of safety for society.

~(I don't have time to even pretend to cough up statistics, k thx bye)~

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (2 children)

What a second. Pornhub is in US. This is like UK trying to force 4chan into age verification

[–] kylian0087@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So yeah tor doesnt require a ID... So have fun I suppose? And be careful

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (15 children)

And then it pushes people into darker areas. I just sw a post about a horrible rape ring and it hosted videos on sites that I saw on 4chan over the years.

How about parents be parents and monitor kids.

load more comments (15 replies)
[–] HuudaHarkiten@piefed.social 158 points 1 day ago (15 children)

I wonder why the EU didn't find the parents of the kids to be in breach of whatever relevant child "protection" laws there are? I guess they are okay with the porn websites raising the kids. Maybe the EU can make PornHub to start a chain of day care centers?

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 30 points 1 day ago

I would trust porn stars more than Conservatives to raise children properly

[–] thethunderwolf@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

no one should be in breach

just because a freedom enables harming of the self does not mean that it should be taken away

[–] HuudaHarkiten@piefed.social 10 points 1 day ago

Agreed. I was making a tongue in cheek comment about the absurdity of this whole thing. In my opinion, the parents are more responsible than the porn sites, but no one should be punished because young Peter managed to see a boob.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] timestatic@feddit.org 111 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And what do you think happens when big platforms have to introduce age verification? People will just go to smaller unregulated sites which may inadvertently be worse because of malware risks and unregulated content. You just can't take the porn out of the internet, people always find a way

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›