• lemsip@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              0·
              11 days ago

              You said porn is evil. Seems pretty relevant to reply saying things aren’t all good or evil.

              I could explain it slowly in simpler terms with easy words, if it helps?

              • Manmoth@lemmy.mlEnglish
                0·
                11 days ago

                If you have a position state it directly instead of hiding behind a low effort platitude.

                • lemsip@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
                  0·
                  11 days ago

                  I did. My position is that there is nuance and not everything can be described as good or evil.
                  Please learn to read.

    • TeddE@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      11 days ago

      Have you met the French? There’s a bunch of English sex words brought in from French! Most notably is ménage à trois, for a threesome. The smoking a cigarette after sex cliché is pretty French too.

        • subversive_dev@lemmy.mlEnglish
          0·
          11 days ago

          I have no idea what is correct French, but the first phrase is the one that is used in English, I have never heard the second

        • TeddE@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          11 days ago

          My understanding is that ménage à trois says the three are ‘living together’ with the sex being implied via innuendo, whereas plan à trois is more directly about the sex act itself.

  • commander@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    11 days ago

    I guess this bodes well for Proton becoming increasingly a Google One products replacement with more users potentially paying

    • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      You misunderstand, France didn’t block pornhub, pornhub blocked France.

      It is to protest against a new law requiring porn site to verify the users age. Which they argue will have dire consequences for security and privacy (I fully agree about the danger)

    • tempest@lemmy.caEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      So funny thing about Aylo, which used to be called mind geek, they own quite a lot of porn sites. Probably 5 or 6 of the top ten.

  • meowmeowbeanz@sopuli.xyzEnglish
    0·
    11 days ago

    Peak French stupidity, this isn’t about protecting kids - it’s about building surveillance infrastructure. Back in 2024, critics already called this the foundation for a “Great Firewall of France”. Once you have the legal framework to block websites and force ISPs to implement monitoring, mission creep is inevitable.

    The technical approach is laughably naive. They’re essentially creating a centralized system that could easily become a database of citizen sexual preferences. Even with their “double anonymity,” you’re still creating digital fingerprints and metadata trails.

    Most importantly, it won’t work. Kids will just use VPNs - the same way adults are already doing. You’re not protecting anyone; you’re just pushing everyone toward circumvention tools while normalizing government control over what adults can access online.

    It’s perfectly French because it combines maximum bureaucratic complexity with zero practical benefit, all while creating new opportunities for state overreach. Classic.

    • xor@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      0·
      11 days ago

      i think it should be a little harder for a child to watch anal prolapse fisting porn than “click yes if you’re of legal age”….
      but… not a good excuse for creating a citizen surveillance database.

      • meowmeowbeanz@sopuli.xyzEnglish
        0·
        11 days ago

        Fair point on the current system being theater, but here’s the thing - any centralized age verification system creates exactly the surveillance database you’re worried about.

        The “harder than clicking yes” solutions all have the same fundamental flaw: they require collecting and storing sensitive data that becomes a honeypot for both state actors and bad actors. Upload your ID? Now there’s a database linking your identity to your viewing habits. Credit card verification? Same problem, plus you’re creating financial trails.

        The technical reality is that determined kids will circumvent anything you put in place. We already saw this play out - VPN registrations exploded 1,000% in France within 30 minutes. You’re not actually protecting kids; you’re just normalizing data collection on adults while teaching every teenager in the country how to use Tor.

        Better approach would be device-level parental controls that parents can configure without creating centralized databases. Let Apple, Google, Microsoft handle age verification through their existing account systems where the data stays local. That way you get actual protection without building the infrastructure for a surveillance state.

        The French solution gives you the worst of both worlds - ineffective protection AND mass surveillance. Classic government efficiency.

        • xor@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          0·
          10 days ago

          that’s a lack of imagination….
          just because i can’t think of a great solution doesn’t mean there isn’t one.
          off the top of my head, here’s a system without a centralized surveillance database:

          1. porn site gives you a random token,
          2. you then hash that with a time-stamp,
          3. get the token signed by your government ID system (like a dmv),
          4. return the signed hash.
          5. the government only knows that you used age verification for something somewhere….

          now the hard part is just explaining cryptographic signatures and hashes to people….
          of course people could still give a kid a verified account, but at least it’s harder for them to access it, i don’t need perfection….

  • passepartout@feddit.orgEnglish
    0·
    12 days ago

    I’m shocked that this many people feel the need to disobey a rule that is only there to help the children. Next step must be to ban VPNs altogether, and enforcing all Internet users to be identified with their real identity (/s obviously).

    • scott@lemmy.orgEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      Jokes on them I just have an incredibly high volume of DNS traffic

    • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      The VPNs will be harder to ban. Not just from a technical standpoint, but politically as well. Big businesses will be absolutely opposed to VPN bans.

      • ifItWasUpToMe@lemmy.caEnglish
        0·
        12 days ago

        I feel they could easily ban VPN companies (maybe?), which is what 99.9% of people that want to browse from a different location use.

        This won’t affect companies at all as they would be using their own VPN.

        • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          0·
          11 days ago

          The only way the sovereign nation of France can ban VPN companies not based in France is to block the IP address of every single entry point of every single VPN company and keep doing so as they add new entry points (I bet the response on the VPN company side would be to start having some kind of dynamic VPN server thing).

          And then, as somebody else already pointed out, any technically inclined person can just rent a VPS anywhere in the World and fire up their own VPN server on it.

      • passepartout@feddit.orgEnglish
        0·
        12 days ago

        There will be a lot of businesses who feel the (justified) need to hide the entrypoint to their infrastructure behind a VPN.

    • affiliate@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      if the VPN ban doesn’t work then the only reasonable course of action would be to ban the internet entirely. it’s the only way the children can be truly safe.

    • unautrenom@jlai.luEnglish
      0·
      11 days ago

      Fun fact: they already tried. In the same law where they tried to ban E2EE a few months ago. It went about as well as you’d expect.

  • venusaur@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    12 days ago

    If you at all think that people can be addicted to social media, you could draw a correlation from this to porn addiction.

    I know a lot of you either don’t think porn can be addictive and/or don’t think it can have negative effects on society.

    Ask yourselves why the logic works for social media but not porn.

        • FireIced@lemmy.super.ynh.frEnglish
          0·
          12 days ago

          I’m all good, thanks

          To be clear: yes it has some impacts, but I believe the majority of problems could be avoided if the parents did their job and told them that it wasn’t like that in real life. The impacts are in most cases not as extreme as other addictions by a large margin.

          Asking for identity like this isn’t fine as we all know porn isn’t really well accepted by everyone, including employers, so having a data leak or just having our preferences linked to our identity doesn’t make us confortable.

          People will always be able to go around and find porn every way, and I bet people that ended up on porn either searched for it, or went to a shady website you can’t regulate anyway, or went to some social media where some asshole posted explicit photos, which imo is the most likely.

    • skeesx@lemm.eeEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      You absolutly right, but here in the Mecca of internet freedom, we don’t likey.

      • venusaur@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        12 days ago

        But we love our mods. What about freedom of speech online? People just too addicted to porn and can’t even muster an ounce of criticism or critical thinking.

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.socialEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      To be fair, potentially addictive or not, I wouldn’t support a ban on social media either. The practical requirements needed to effectively restrict access to information in the modern age (both porn and social media being examples of information) are such that I generally view the cure as worse than the disease, so to speak, and view the least bad option as being to just give up on legal restrictions and just deal with the consequences instead. Addiction is harmful, but most consumers of such information aren’t harmed by it, and restriction inherently requires monitoring and removing internet anonymity to a degree that I find unacceptable.

      • venusaur@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        12 days ago

        Didn’t say anything about banning porn or social media. Just saying that they’re both addictive and have negative consequences on society. Yall can keep your porn. Relax.

    • zarkanian@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      Ask yourselves why the logic works for social media but not porn.

      Because they’re two completely different things.

    • HexesofVexes@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      Ehh… Application of a addiction model is somewhat controversial for pornography (the ground seems divided on whether it’s a compulsion or an addiction). Social media, however, is no less controversial (it’s just the media likes to hype this more).

      I will say - the point of a porn site is to sell user data and deliver ads, whereas the point of social media is to keep the user scrolling by any means possible. By its design, the latter cultivates addiction as a clear goal (the goal to scroll is artificially imposed), whereas the case for the former is less clear (the goal to masturbate isn’t something porn created). In essence, one creates a drive and then sates it, whereas another sates an existing drive.

      Honestly, I think, at the moment, we’re on the “violent video games cause violence” stage of the research. In other words, not enough data to decide so the media has decided for us.

  • Spaniard@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    11 days ago

    And now they want to keep doing the job of the parents and forbid “social network” to kids 15 and under.

    • Schmoo@startrek.websiteEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      VPN companies and data brokers have a financial incentive to lobby for intrusive age-verification and restrictions, and prudish politicians are conveniently present in every political system. The porn lobby is powerful, but it seems they’ve been losing this battle recently. Or maybe they’re cutting deals with the data brokers, who knows.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        0·
        12 days ago

        I feel like reddit and YouTube are completely different leagues when it comes to porn… Porn is the only reason I haven’t deleted my last reddit account. YT doesn’t even really have real porn…

        • FireIced@lemmy.super.ynh.frEnglish
          0·
          12 days ago

          YT doesn’t even really have real porn

          Indeed, but there’s still things to find if you’re a young scared kiddo, and I’d say it’s pretty soft so it’s okay

      • mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        0·
        12 days ago

        Reminds me of when my buddies discovered our friend’s YouTube account… He only had one public playlist, and it was 100% full of softcore porn. Nothing else. It was all softcore porn. We gave him a pretty good ribbing for that one, and still make a point of reminding him that better porn sites exist every time it comes up.

        • FireIced@lemmy.super.ynh.frEnglish
          0·
          12 days ago

          Always hide your playlists and subscriptions haha

          But softcore has the benefit to help you retain normal libido and to not be dependent of more hardcore stuff

    • shalafi@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      Politically speaking, it’s easy money. You pander to the conservatives with blocking propositions, get votes.

      *Who is going to champion the flip side?!"

      • Liz@midwest.socialEnglish
        0·
        12 days ago

        Me. Porn is fine. Teach your children how to handle it. Teach them that it’s not realistic and some of it is straight-up dangerous. Put a filter on your internet if you’re too scared to talk to your kids about uncomfortable topics.

    • Etterra@discuss.onlineEnglish
      0·
      12 days ago

      Political theater. “Won’t somebody think of the children?” is an easy win for politicians.