| DISCUSSION | [View Previous Page] | |||
 |
LSjustbloggin: Internet freedom has limitations, under federal law, you cannot distribute copyrighted material by creating your own website or else A.C.E and the DOJ will come after you.
Well I think the Copyright system is bull**** and is heavily restrictive, but that's a topic for another day LSjustbloggin: If porn should be distributed, it should be ethical porn, but that's near impossible because in the porn industry, performers are not treated with the dignity every human deserves, they are exploited and coerced into doing certain acts that hurts them emotionally and physically. Pornhub was exposed and admitted to having profited off the exploitation of several women who now demand justice.
So you are in favor of the OnlyFans model of Pornography? I'd say I am in agreement, the Sex Workers themselves are the bosses, they don't do what they don't want to do. No Pimp, No Exploitation. The Workers are emboldened to take the fruits of their labor. Then that leads to the segue of if you are so concerned of the ethics and peoples dignity, did you per chance make sure the computer/phone you typed this out on was produced ethically? Or the food you ate? Or the clothes you wear, etc. Under capitalism, exploitation is kind of part of the deal. And the way you talk about the issue later makes it even more abundantly clear you do not care or even think what you are saying, because A) I have still yet to hear a SOLUTION to stop the "addiction" or wean them off of it, social programs, mental health care, etc. and B) If you truly thought people were addicted and needed help, why would your solution sound like "BANKRUPT THEM AND RUIN THEIR LIVES" | |||
About ethical porn, there's just too many cam girls out there and we don't know how much money each one is making. Do I believe that these people are scammers ?, yes, certain ones, the ones who made millions by doing hardcore, unethical, and exploitative type of porn. For those performers who went from hardcore to webcam, I feel bad that they were exploited on camera, but sour over the fact they want to keep making money by showing their private parts to thousands of people online instead of just live a normal life after. About copyright, I downloaded a bunch of cartoons from different torrent sites, before getting an email from my ISP. Mostly shows 2000s kids watched. You would need a 256GB SD Card. | ||||
 |
E Pluribus Unum: That depends on the type of age verification. If you are technical Porn Sites already HAD Age Verification prior; they asked you if you were 18 and u check Yes Or No
This is actually the problem the legislation addresses because this type of age verification you describe is meaningless. Real age verification requires more than just the self-selection you describe above. It requires a gate to allow only those that are proven to be of age through government or other id. The burden is put on the gatekeeper to ONLY allow proven adults into their websites. Interestingly, the leftist Prime Minister of Spain is now calling for the end for Internet anonymity. It is international leftist governments (US Democrats seem to want to make the decisions for American parents and view parents as the enemy) that are being more aggressive in this regard to protect our children. I agree with it and applaud it. | |||
However, this must also be balanced out with protecting the privacy of folks on the internet and ensuring that fourth amendment rights aren't violated. So personally, I view Sanchez's proposed solution as too far, if someone wants to be anonymous on the internet, that's their right in my opinion. Anyway, that's my $0.02. Enjoy! :) | ||||
| |
BrentinCO: This is actually the problem the legislation addresses because this type of age verification you describe is meaningless. Real age verification requires more than just the self-selection you describe above. It requires a gate to allow only those that are proven to be of age through government or other id. The burden is put on the gatekeeper to ONLY allow proven adults into their websites.
I know that's more of a satirical remark pointing out how "TECHNICALLY" the solution is there. A lot of this is really a parental issue. We've seen this before; violent video games, R Rated Movies, "IMMITATABLE VIOLENCE" on TV. Rather than parents taking accountability for watching their kids and properly educating them about this, they'd rather go the book burning route and blame OTHERS for their own issues BrentinCO: Interestingly, the leftist Prime Minister of Spain is now calling for the end for Internet anonymity. It is international leftist governments (US Democrats seem to want to make the decisions for American parents and view parents as the enemy) that are being more aggressive in this regard to protect our children. I agree with it and applaud it.
Well that's more in regards to cyberbullying and harassment as opposed to pornography, but I also think Pedro Sánchez is 100% wrong. Internet Privacy is a very fundamental part to the laws of at least the US. Europe doesn't have as hardcore individual rights as the US, and conservatives will whine about that when it comes to cyberbullying Trans Kids, but not when they can use that to ban porn it seems. LSjustbloggin: My solution would to have Congress pass a bill that would make the porn industry fight human trafficking by requiring them to verify the age's of the performers and to ensure that they would be able to perform in an environment where they wouldn't feel coerced or threatened to be exploited. That's easier said than done. Senator Mike Lee wrote a bill called the Protect ACT which had no further legislative action other than being introduced.
That's already the rule of most Porn Sites. OnlyFans and Pornhub already have that as rules to make content on the sites. You are telling them to make laws that already exist AGAIN. It's like the GOP Demand Laws banning Illegal Immigrants from voting, THATS ALREADY THE LAW. Or when Anti-Vaxx cranks say "WE JUST WANT THEM VETTED", they already are. Your augments mean nothing when they are already rules in place for that LSjustbloggin: About ethical porn, there's just too many cam girls out there and we don't know how much money each one is making. Do I believe that these people are scammers ?, yes, certain ones, the ones who made millions by doing hardcore, unethical, and exploitative type of porn. For those performers who went from hardcore to webcam, I feel bad that they were exploited on camera, but sour over the fact they want to keep making money by showing their private parts to thousands of people online instead of just live a normal life after.
IDK what ur even talking about here, like the OnlyFans/Fansly model is a pretty transparent model to do porn in the future. It's completely ethical, no exploitation, the worker rakes in all the profit. And they have very strict age verification laws, to the point where people who are LEGAL get banned because they look too young. It sounds like if you truly cared about the ETHICS of the Porn Industry, you'd be advocating for the OnlyFans Model as opposed to simply wanting to ban it thus leaving hundreds of thousands of people unemployed LSjustbloggin: About copyright, I downloaded a bunch of cartoons from different torrent sites, before getting an email from my ISP. Mostly shows 2000s kids watched. You would need a 256GB SD Card.
As for Copyright | |||
Children and sexually exploited women are protected from having their on-camera-abuse from being distributed under law, it's a tragedy that this protection doesn't apply to ex porn stars who now feel victimized and exploited. Amara Maple aka Lana Rhoades is one example, she entered the porn industry at a very young age and she has since regretted doing it. Now she wants porn sites to take down content featuring her, but they won't as copyright law protects them, not her. Laws should be enacted to protect people from being exploited. The porn industry does NOT deserve copyright protection if they continue to distribute content featuring ex performers who now regret doing porn. Exploitation and dehumanization of performers is what they profit off of. Every time a porno from years ago is being viewed, that performer is being exploited regardless of whether or not that performer has since publicly regretted ever doing porn. I don't want to participate in the exploitation of these people. About that copying is not theft video, I'm fully onboard with you. I do believe that copyright law has its purpose, but the enforcement of it has gone way too far. Do you believe that people should be allowed to profit off their works when it's an ongoing series ?. All the shows I downloaded were downloaded many years after they were cancelled. | ||||
| |
I've been radicalized to be borderline 100% opposed to Copyright, if you in the method to have random lectures throne at you; Lawrence Lessig is a good way to learn about how Copyright in the digital age should be handled, he's the founder of an organization that literally seeks to make the Copyright System better (Creative Commons) | |||
| ||||
| |
LSjustbloggin: I'm critical of copyright enforcement, not copyright in general. Pirates deserve protection too because copying is not theft.
That makes no sense. If enforcement is legitimate, so is that specific law. "Copying is not theft" is literally antithetical to Copyright. Its the RIGHT of the company to COPY their own work. | |||
| |
| |||
| ||||
| |
Sounds pretty dictatorial to me.... | |||
The Hamas flags are very concerning, and they should not be used, though imho it doesn't downgrade the justice of the Palestinian cause. | ||||
| ||||
 |
The Fixer: In 1990s, George HW Bush rolled out a plan to house Haitian and Cuban migrants and Bill Clinton when running for POTUS vowed to discontinue that policy, but however after winning the election, he continued that policy into his presidency and closed only due to HIV outbreak. A year later he re-continued the policy with at its peak housing over 50,000+ migrants with many of them lacking basic necessities like clean water, food, sewage, and etc. The UNHCR in fact said it was against international law and Clinton still continued it on. But that is okay, because it is someone who is a Democrat.
1. That was over 30 years ago 2. Two wrongs don't make a right. 3. Just because Clinton did something crappy, it doesn't mean it's okay for Trump to do it. The rule shouldn't be "Well he did that, so I guess its okay if you do it." when it should be "He did something crappy. Let's make sure if doesn't happen again." | |||
The Fixer: In 1990s, George HW Bush rolled out a plan to house Haitian and Cuban migrants and Bill Clinton when running for POTUS vowed to discontinue that policy, but however after winning the election, he continued that policy into his presidency and closed only due to HIV outbreak. A year later he re-continued the policy with at its peak housing over 50,000+ migrants with many of them lacking basic necessities like clean water, food, sewage, and etc. The UNHCR in fact said it was against international law and Clinton still continued it on. Fast forward to 1996, Democrats re-elected him. But that is okay, because a Democrat did that.
Never claimed that was ok but hey keep resorting to whataboutism.... | ||||
BigZuck08: He also advocated for ANNEXING the Gaza Strip, which are resulting in some protests in Washington DC.
Expanding on this point a little bit: It feels kinda good to be vindicated, honestly. THIS is what I tried to warn folks who were either not voting, voting for Stein, or voting for Trump over this issue, that Kamala would be a way better candidate on the issue of Palestine than Trump, and that Stein had no realistic chance of winning. But now, this is a situation that we're in. And now, as I've said many times and will keep saying, every single one of those voters is about to learn what Trump meant by "end the war quickly." THIS is what we get partially because Jill Stein voters wanted to feel righteous..... | ||||
| ||||
The Fixer: Here is the difference between the two housing crisis (Clinton and Trump): Clinton detained any migrants trying to enter the country while Trump has claimed that he wants to detain the worst criminal illegal aliens, in fact 10 migrants have only been sent to Guantanamo Bay and ALL of them are adults and are suspected members of Venezuelan gang, Tren de Aragua. I know listening might be hard for the left, but Trump has stated that and so has the DHS.
It's not only convicted criminals they're going after, the raids across the country are also impacting not only non-criminal undocumented immigrants but even in some cases US citizens: [Link] That facility, as mentioned in the post @E Pluribus Unum linked, is meant for 30,000 people. I don't know, but I don't think that they'd use a 30,000-person facility for just 10 people. | ||||
| ||||
The Fixer: No where are we talking about raids, we were talking about the detention of migrants in Guantánamo Bay. If you want to consider raids as a dictatorial act, then that is an entirely different issue, but solely on detention of migrants in Guantánamo Bay is for only violent criminals. In this link [Link] it clearly states that only 10 people as of today are at that base and all are single adults part of a violent gang in Venezuela. If Venezuela wants to accept them, then I have no problem, but they have to ensure the US that they will not re-enter the country illegally.
The raids and the migrant detentions are all a part of the same issue: immigration and the treatment of immigrants under this administration. And from the link you provided, that is only the first flight. I, for one, do not trust that Trump will only put the worst of the worst there, given his past history. | ||||
| |
"Guy you don't like did bad thing...well what about OTHER Guy you don't like did bad thing"....**** Bill Clinton too? I'm literally a Socialist, I hate all of the US Presidents especially post 1960s, this isn't a ****ing gotcha at all. I am not even a registered Dem, I really don't get how violently shaking while saying "dEmOcRaT" on loop is an argument against ME of all people. XD. Ignoring the longstanding history of Torture without Trial, that I assume as a Muslim you'd know and/or care about; why does the US have a Military Base in a nation we have an Embargo on? | |||
E Pluribus Unum: I really fon't understand the point Fixer thinks he is making.
"Guy you don't like did bad thing...well what about OTHER Guy you don't like did bad thing"....**** Bill Clinton too? I'm literally a Socialist, I hate all of the US Presidents especially post 1960s, this isn't a ****ing gotcha at all. I am not even a registered Dem, I really don't get how violently shaking while saying "dEmOcRaT" on loop is an argument against ME of all people. XD. Ignoring the longstanding history of Torture without Trial, that I assume as a Muslim you'd know and/or care about; why does the US have a Military Base in a nation we have an Embargo on? I am a Democrat, so I think that he was making that argument against me, but I possess the ability to criticize my own party when I feel it's needed, as the Democrats are by no means perfect. | ||||
| |
The conservatives on this site, are a little....how do I put this delicately..... | |||
E Pluribus Unum: No he does this to me all the time.
The conservatives on this site, are a little....how do I put this delicately..... Are you thinking of the word "misguided" or something similar? | ||||
| [View Next Page] | ||||