Conversation

Notices

1. cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:22:46 JST cjd
   The real question is how it would be implemented:
   1. Technically banned but no one cares, everyone uses a VPN
   2. 1984 hellscape with secret police looking in your windows and your neighbors writing reports on you
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:22:36 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • ██████████████████████████████
     UAE comes to mind as an implementation of (1).
     
     A more extreme example would be sniffing glue. Nobody should be doing it, at all, there's no excuse for it. But legal efforts to try to prevent people from sniffing glue will only serve to make the world a worse place to live in.
     LS likes this.
   • ██████████████████████████████ (suqdiq@chaos.social)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:22:45 JST ██████████████████████████████

     in reply to

     @cjd pretty sure porn is already banned in lots of countries yet somehow it doesn't disappear and if you see the web history of the folks enforcing such laws, they also watch porn :D

   • LS (lain@lain.com)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:24:20 JST LS

     in reply to
     @cjd that's the issue with the suddenly so traditional alt-right, they don't want to leave you alone either.
   • feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:37:40 JST feld

     in reply to

     • LS
     • feld
     also we have Supreme Court precedents anyway
     
     https://reason.com/2019/10/04/pornography-is-protected-by-the-first-amendment/
     LS likes this.
   • feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:37:41 JST feld

     in reply to

     • LS
     jesus christ it's George W Bush all over again
     
     
     https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/apr/11/usa.uselections2004
   • Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:44:04 JST Moon

     in reply to

     • LS
     @lain @cjd tradcons/reactionaries should not be confused with alt-right, which is revolutionary not trad, (i'm talking about them not you) neither one is going to leave you alone though
     LS likes this.
   • Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:47:14 JST Moon

     in reply to

     • LS
     • feld
     @feld @lain @cjd this is one of those things where a change in the wind could easily flip the left's position in a day. "free speech should not be confused with being held accountable for recklessly ignoring human trafficking and child pornography". may or may not be true but that is currently how they're getting around free speech arguments for everything except pornography.
     LS likes this.
   • LS (lain@lain.com)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:55:10 JST LS

     in reply to

     • Moon
     • feld
     @Moon @feld @cjd the new libertarian tactic should be to do all business in the bedroom so the left will agree that government should keep out of it
   • Moon (moon@shitposter.club)'s status on Tuesday, 31-Jan-2023 23:55:11 JST Moon

     in reply to

     • Moon
     • LS
     • feld
     @feld @cjd @lain side note isn't it weird how free speech has literally become a dirty word for tons of left wing people until and only when you're talking about pornography and at that point they can go toe to toe with any libertarian
   • feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 00:31:53 JST feld

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Zettour
     Good thing we don't have the morality and decency standards of the 1960s. Go look at movies, TV shows, pop culture, music, art. You can't argue that most porn is exceptionally obscene and point to what is accepted in society today as the basis for your new standard.
     
     :pressf:
   • feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 00:31:53 JST feld

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Zettour
     • feld
     Like, we literally just had a "grab them by the pussy" president who cheated on his wife with a porn star and tried to pay off her to keep quiet. 50% of the country voted for this man while knowing these facts.
     
     How are you going to successfully argue that modern porn is "obscene" when society is OK with this behavior?
     
     HELLO????????????? IS THIS THING ON???????? 🎙️
     LS likes this.
   • Zettour (zettour@gearlandia.haus)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 00:31:54 JST Zettour

     in reply to

     • LS
     • feld
     @feld @lain @cjd All it takes is for the courts to actually enforce obscenity even slightly and 99% of porn currently sold goes away. The legality of it hinges on "whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value." as your article says, and by that standard pretty much none of it should exist. There is the possibility for porn with artistic/literary merit but I can't think of a single filmed example made in decades.
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 00:42:18 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     "Congress shall make no law" does not mention the states. To use the 1st amendment against a state requires leveraging the 14th which is a can of worms.
     LS likes this.
   • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta: (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 00:42:19 JST iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @Zettour @feld @lain @cjd the constitution never makes a delineation between offensive speech or inoffensive speech. There shall be **no law**.
   • 🌲Number 1 Pleroma Criminal on XBL 🇵🇱|🇺🇸 (phenomx6@fedi.pawlicker.com)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:24:19 JST 🌲Number 1 Pleroma Criminal on XBL 🇵🇱|🇺🇸

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @Zettour @feld @lain @cjd video games and shit from Japan tbh
   • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️ (caekislove@gleasonator.com)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:13 JST Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️

     in reply to

     • NEETzsche
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @NEETzsche @feld @icedquinn @Zettour @lain @cjd You get me wrong. I don't want a king (well, unless it's me, I guess). I'm just pointing out that the current system is mere window dressing around the same kind of shit they allegedly fought a revolution to overthrow.
   • NEETzsche (neetzsche@iddqd.social)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:13 JST NEETzsche

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld

     That’s fair, sorry for misunderstanding you. I guess the unfortunate reality is that all these institutions are being treated like obstacles to overcome rather than things that are to be respected. You’ll notice the two “sides” in America will bluntly reject the legitimacy of SCOTUS, the presidency, whoever, if they don’t get their way. That’s not a good sign for the republic.

     LS likes this.
   • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️ (caekislove@gleasonator.com)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:14 JST Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️

     in reply to

     • NEETzsche
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @NEETzsche @feld @icedquinn @Zettour @lain @cjd Another thing "democracy" has in common with hereditary monarchy. It would be far more efficient to cut out all the bullshit and crown a King and then stick up a sign outside the castle saying "If you don't like it, bring yer guns!", because that's more or less what we have now minus the sign.
   • NEETzsche (neetzsche@iddqd.social)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:14 JST NEETzsche

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld

     Well, that’s the thing. It’s all cyclical. You’re only saying you want a King now because so much of the population is irreparably corrupted. America during its founding wanted a republic because the King at the time was a sack of shit and the general population was pretty virtuous.

     “Bro just crown a hereditary line which never has a corrupt or retarded prince”

     Lol, good luck, lmao. We’re just going to start with this shit all over again.

     “Bro we’ll just replace the corrupt king with another non-corrupt king”

     That’s not how it worked out either, in Western history. The monarch in the UK gradually lost direct control. It’s how we got “democracy” in the first place.

   • NEETzsche (neetzsche@iddqd.social)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:15 JST NEETzsche

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld

     The Constitution does say that all cases brought under it will go to one supreme court, so there is a provision for it. But the thing with all documents is that they’re just paper if unenforced. Part of getting to the point where a document does get enforced, however, involves making the general population believe in that document.

   • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️ (caekislove@gleasonator.com)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:16 JST Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️

     in reply to

     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @icedquinn @feld @Zettour @lain @cjd The main problem with the US Constitution is that there's no explicit enforcement mechanism for anything written there. Sure, the US Supreme Court kinda sorta took those powers up on their own in Marbury v. Madison, but there's no constitutional provision granting anyone the power of constitutional review.
     
     Frankly, if appointed judges with lifetime terms are making all of the important decisions in government, I don't see that as being materially different than a monarchy.
   • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta: (icedquinn@blob.cat)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:17 JST iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:

     in reply to

     • LS
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @feld @Zettour @lain @cjd they can't, but the amendments are scoped. there are some clauses such as speech written as *congress shall enact no law* and others directly state *shall not be infringed*.
     
     a plain reading would lead one to believe some of those things apply to the fed, and others apply to all, though much handwavium has been done by judges to ignore whatever the point of the document was to begin with.
   • feld (feld@bikeshed.party)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:32:18 JST feld

     in reply to

     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     The states can't make laws that violate the amendments either
   • bot :kiwi_dumbbell: (bot@seal.cafe)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:21 JST bot :kiwi_dumbbell:

     in reply to

     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     • teknomunk
     t. globalist cashless society advocate
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:22 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     • teknomunk
     Destroy the money printer, everything will work itself out.
   • teknomunk (teknomunk@apogee.polaris-1.work)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:23 JST teknomunk

     in reply to

     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     • teknomunk
     I agree with your reading on how things should be. Looking around it is clear that we are not there. I just don't know how we get from where things are now, to a mostly moral society, but if things continue withoug changing something, I expect it to get worse, not better. Individual effort is certainly needed, but I have doubts that alone will be enough to stand against the collective.
   • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z: (skylar@misskey.yandere.love)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:24 JST スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:

     in reply to

     • teknomunk
     @teknomunk @cjd that would be a decent first step if we couldn't go all the way to banning it entirely
     requiring something like
     >submit a photo of yourself holding government issued photo ID
     >pay with a credit or debit card with a name and billing address that matches that ID
     >this has to be verified by a human employee and then kept on file for as long as the customer maintains their subscription + 1 year
     >a bunch of regulatory requirements on ID verification, recordkeeping, and cybersecurity
     would have an excellent chilling effect on both consumption and the number of sites willing to go through all that work and expense just to be allowed to distribute porn. especially the sort of high-value targets like social media sites where SFW and NSFW user generated content coexist.
     
     similar measures could be taken on the production side from an anti human trafficking angle. want to produce or distribute smut? better be able to show authorities the signed and notarized consent forms from every actor involved or it's big time fines + criminal charges if someone turns out to be underage or a victim of human trafficking.
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:24 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     • teknomunk
     I think what this comes down to is "you can't legislate morality". Morality exists within a person, and it is costly to build up. You can't write a law that says people are now moral anymore than you can write a law which says that people are now wealthy. Trying to do so will not work and will have bad unintended consequences.
     
     I like to think of porn like alcohol. A little bit is not inherently damaging but too much is, Children should not have access to it, and a healthy society is one where people can have it but mostly choose not to.
   • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z: (skylar@misskey.yandere.love)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:27 JST スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:

     in reply to
     @cjd making pornography more difficult to access is a damn good start. making folks get out the credit card or cryptocurrency to buy a VPN service is a significant barrier to kids randomly stumbling upon some seriously fucked up porn on ordinary, popular web sites as well as teens being able to access it conveniently and secretly.
     while there will probably always be small groups of the most dedicated coomers sharing porn with one another, loads of folks pay for streaming services cause they're too lazy and technically inept to use a torrent client, the same effect would happen with porn.
     
     it's more effective to target the producers and distributors than have a bunch of secret police going 1984 on the consumers. seize the domains and servers of the largest dedicated pornography distributors on day one, give social media sites a chance to have the jannies clean the place up and remove the newly illegal material and ISPs a chance to work out the technical details of blocking foreign porn sites.
   • teknomunk (teknomunk@apogee.polaris-1.work)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:27 JST teknomunk

     in reply to

     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     I agree that creating barriers to access in general, and harder barriers for under-18s, is a good idea. There is a lot of room between "showing porn in kindergarden" and "anti-porn inquisition" to work within.
     
     It doesn't even need to be made illegal. Making age verification a requirement would help a lot. Actual verification, not click-thru "yes I'm 18, wink, wink". Ensuring privacy while preventing access to most minors would be the main issue any technical solution would have.
   • xianc78@gameliberty.club's status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 01:53:57 JST xianc78

     in reply to

     • bot :kiwi_dumbbell:
     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     • teknomunk

     @bot @teknomunk @cjd @skylar ANYTHING can be used as a currency. Gold, silver, eggs, crypto, bottle caps, seeds. You don't need fiat.

   • teknomunk (teknomunk@apogee.polaris-1.work)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 03:16:47 JST teknomunk

     in reply to

     • xianc78
     • bot :kiwi_dumbbell:
     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     • teknomunk
     The issue is that not all these have the same utility as money and society is not setup to handle multiple mediums of exchange.
   • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z: (skylar@misskey.yandere.love)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 03:16:52 JST スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:

     in reply to

     • bot :kiwi_dumbbell:
     • teknomunk
     @cjd @teknomunk @bot things won't look good for bitcoin (or any other digital currency or payment processing) after a world war, or even a regional china/taiwan thing.
     
     supply chain issues from COVID still haven't been resolved, and companies will be catching up on delayed maintenance/equipment replacement for years to come. throwing more wrenches into the semiconductor supply leads to a future where half the businesses in town have a "sorry, credit card machine is down, cash only" sign taped to the door when nobody can replace infrastructure faster than it fails.
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 03:16:53 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • bot :kiwi_dumbbell:
     • スカイラー🎄🇷🇺 :z:
     • teknomunk
     The world will settle on Bitcoin, it might take a world war or two but it will happen.
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 23:50:09 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon:
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     This is why I like thinking of ways to achieve a better (more long term happieness for the average person) system via incrementalism and power-amplification.
     LS likes this.
   • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️ (caekislove@gleasonator.com)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 23:50:10 JST Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️

     in reply to

     • Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon:
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @cjd @Leyonhjelm @feld @icedquinn @Zettour @lain Sweeping reforms are impossible within the framework of the current system, anyways. A system imposed at the end of a gun following a war doesn't need to be "popular", it only needs to endure long enough to become the status quo. (Washington didn't ask the Loyalists nicely if they consented to being governed)
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 23:50:11 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon:
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     The idea of vote-per-household is interesting, but taking votes away from women would be highly unpopular. I think a more realistic target would be to take voting away from non-landowners.
     
     OR: Just make prisons really comfortable so that most people who are not serious about their civic duty commit a felony at some point for the free housing and lose voting rights as a result.
   • Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon: (leyonhjelm@social.lovingexpressions.net)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 23:50:12 JST Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon:

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @cjd
     
     That and women's suffrage basically ruined what was left of the intended system of government.
     
     @feld @icedquinn @Zettour @caekislove @lain
   • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️ (caekislove@gleasonator.com)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 23:50:13 JST Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️

     in reply to

     • Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon:
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @Leyonhjelm @feld @icedquinn @Zettour @lain @cjd When I said "enforcement", I meant enforcement of the "Congress shall not" parts. If state sovereignty should reign supreme over federal government, perhaps they should have some sort of veto besides starting a civil war. The US Constitution provides none.
   • cjd (cjd@pkteerium.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 23:50:13 JST cjd

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon:
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     It provided state govt nominated senators, but that was since changed (imo bad idea).
   • Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon: (leyonhjelm@social.lovingexpressions.net)'s status on Wednesday, 01-Feb-2023 23:50:14 JST Leyonhjelm :ek2_ribbon:

     in reply to

     • Caek Islove 🍰 ❤️
     • LS
     • iced quinnsmas :blobcatsanta:
     • Zettour
     • feld
     @caekislove
     
     >The main problem with the US Constitution is that there's no explicit enforcement mechanism for anything written there
     
     That's not a problem. That's the point of the constitution. To keep the feds weak and maintain state sovereignty. We've been post- constitutional since at least the 1860s
     
     @feld @icedquinn @Zettour @lain @cjd