Porn watchers will have to prove they are over 18 under new laws | Hacker News Reader

Porn watchers will have to prove they are over 18 under new laws

news.sky.com

39 pointslumberjack16 comments

Open articleView on HN

There is a censorial streak in the British Conservative Party. In addition to porn, they also want to censor "extremist" views, with a very broad definition of "extremism". In fact, the British Labour Party isn't too hot on free speech either. A lot of laws restricting speech were passed under Blair's tenure. And the current Labour leadership isn't exactly clamoring for their repeal.

Is censorship really a popular stance in the UK? What gives? I would love to hear from a British person about this.

Censorship is a popular stance all over, depending entirely on who/what is being censored.

In the UK, it's porn. In Germany, it's Nazi memorabilia. In Canada, it's pronoun use and "hate" speech. In Iran and China, it's government dissidents. In the US, it's companies instead of governments doing it but the result is the same.

Same Stupid, Different day

I find this, quite peculiar. Who is pushing for this and why would they want to do this? Is this some convert way to better track people, online? What other motive could there be?

British conservatives have been pushing a porn crackdown for a while. I (as someone on the other side of the Atlantic) believe real identity verification is just a tool to crackdown on porn in general. Everyone knows that if you keep porn records, they'll get out (accidentally, hackers, governments, or all of the above).

On the other hand, the company the British are paying to do this, MindGeek, is not just developing the AgeID checking system. They also run most of the popular Porn websites. And they own many popular Porn production studios.

So this is also a case of an aggressive vertical monopoly corrupting a government into enriching and deepening their extremely profitable monopoly. Now, a private porn distribution company that ALSO makes porn will now have EXCLUSIVE rights to porn related age verification for all UK citizens. They're the Porn Company King of UK, and all other companies now exist on a second, less-government-supported tier.

It also means the UK Government is effectively subsidizing pornography, in a way.

So it’s a way of getting a porn “moat” if you will.

Failing to understand the logic behind this. How could the UK government possibly think letting an adult company collect user-data is for their own citizen protection.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the government/ISPs to take care of the AgeID product themselves? They are the gatekeepers to the internet basically isn't it?

Why should anyone collect this data? Can you imagine the first time it's hacked and we have complete details of everything that anyone watches and when? It will be awful, hilarious, and horrifying all at once.

"Your Royal Majesty, according to the recent Mindgeek hack, it appears you.."

NO ONE in their right mind wants that.

Needless to say it shouldn’t be done, but if anybody...a 3rd party?

> How could the UK government possibly think letting an adult company collect user-data is for their own citizen protection.

Well it's the same country that let business lobby the ICO (the regulatory office that deals with the Data Protection Act etc) to permit social landlords to pass on rent-payment data to credit agencies on an OPT OUT basis, because it would "help them build up a credit score". (Presumably to take on more debt and to also report payment failures for landlords to filter our undesirables in the future?)

The same country that has a government that is creating a blockchain implementation with the aim to track benefit recipients’ spending. (Google "DWP" "blockchain")

The same country putting immense pressure on tech companies to install backdoors because terrorism.

It goes on and on and and on and on...(notice the paternalism?)

The third-party point: we've had a Conservative-majority government since 2010 who enjoy outsourcing and privatisation. (Nobody need waste keystrokes mentioning PFI/academies/tuition fees nor to accuse me of being pro-Labour ;))

Still, it's alarmingly wrong. I mean the usual modus operandi for a government would be to assume the project themselves (to have citizen trust) and externalise it quietly to a 3rd party, bureaucratically so that people can't really tell who is doing what. But this really is too much "in your face", they don't even bother pretending.

We should have a serious discussion about the impact of mass porn consumption on developing persons. Does it have no effect at all? Does it increase sex drive? Does it decrease sex drive? Does it cause depression? Does it lower depression? Does it effect sexual preferences?

I feel like our understanding on mental wellness is so pitifully small that something a innate as porn should be heavily studied.

I agree. It's like we are in the big tobacco phase where everyone is saying it's normal and healthy. To say otherwise is considered prudish and sexually repressive.

It would be nice to see it studied scientifically, without knee-jerk reactions. But I hear one of the problems is finding enough people for studies who don't watch pornography.

My money is on decreases sex drive. Probably has little effect on depression, and probably means more guys ask for their girlfriends/significant others for sex acts depicted in porn.

Also if these questions make you feel like porn is this scary thing we know nothing about. The same questions could be asked of movies, tv, social media, flying, etc....

As it happens, going through the research was done as background work for the legislation. Here's the report: http://sheu.org.uk/content/childrens-commisioner-basically-p...

Here's the NYT summary: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/29/sunday-review/does-porn-h...

What the title suggest will never happen. But maybe users of big porn sites might have to prove they are over 18.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com