Imgur banning porn/"NSFW" and purging all inactive/unregistered account uploads on May 15th

[Gondolindrim]

"Banning porn ain't gonna make shitty people stop being groomers." That's it.

I'm beginning to notice that every single measure taken to stop groomers has basically no effect on the intended targets but plenty for the rest of us.

 

[AizomeNoel69]

I'm beginning to notice that every single measure taken to stop groomers has basically no effect on the intended targets but plenty for the rest of us.

Like how the Patriot Act was signed and brought in to " Stop Terrorists " but in the end it does jack shit , and only regular people suffer from bullshit laws. It's like the human race learned NOTHING from the Prohibition era.

 

[Deleted User]

I'm beginning to notice that every single measure taken to stop groomers has basically no effect on the intended targets but plenty for the rest of us.

Just a little tinfoil hat thought but isn't that the intended point of actions like this?
The "stop the groomers" rhetoric is meant to get normalfags to support it but the actual goal is to censor hentai (but not onlyfans).

 

[Cold3000]

Why is this world so anti-NSFW?

This current wave is primarily due to minors having wide spread access to smartphones and the ability to upload images.

A lot of modern CSEM are not "pedophiles preying on minors" but minors uploading their own images because they be horny and dumb. And we're not talking about pre-pubescent children but usually pubescent teens to young adults. And modern "child predators" are "children" themselves.

There is a lot of pressure for hosting companies to crack down on this but it is a losing battle. Even with machine learning flagging system, there is no real way to identify a pubescent minor and a young adult.

So, the nuclear option is the easiest to implement. Better than facing jailtime for "facilitating the transfer of CSEM". Technically, its shouldn't hold water. Its like trying to go after old school mailing services and photo developers for the same thing. But there is no moral way to defend this at the moment without saying, "yea, some minors are going to end up on our site no matter what."

 

[Hexasheep93]

This current wave is primarily due to minors having wide spread access to smartphones and the ability to upload images.

A lot of modern CSEM are not "pedophiles preying on minors" but minors uploading their own images because they be horny and dumb. And we're not talking about pre-pubescent children but usually pubescent teens to young adults. And modern "child predators" are "children" themselves.

There is a lot of pressure for hosting companies to crack down on this but it is a losing battle. Even with machine learning flagging system, there is no real way to identify a pubescent minor and a young adult.

So, the nuclear option is the easiest to implement. Better than facing jailtime for "facilitating the transfer of CSEM". Technically, its shouldn't hold water. Its like trying to go after old school mailing services and photo developers for the same thing. But there is no moral way to defend this at the moment without saying, "yea, some minors are going to end up on our site no matter what."

Huh. You know, the whole thing about kids sharing pictures with eachother hadnt crossed my mind before.
Yeah thats probably a big issue for the social media sites
Honestly juat another reason why social media should only be 18+

 

[Cold3000]

Huh. You know, the whole thing about kids sharing pictures with eachother hadnt crossed my mind before.
Yeah thats probably a big issue for the social media sites
Honestly juat another reason why social media should only be 18+

Realistically, it didn't help because lots of sites already introduced the 18+ toggle which horny minors simply ignore. That's why government are pushing for tech companies to do "something". But what else can they do? Only viable options I see are the nuclear option or identification system which goes against anonymity.

That's why some corners of the internet have weird discussions about lowering the age of consent, its not about having IRL sex but e-dating and sexting, which is kinda more dangerous to the minor's reputation and mental health than IRL sex.

Also why there have been weird discussion about 17 & 19 age gap being "pedophilic" because a nude pic of one of them is legally considered CSEM.

 

[Hexasheep93]

Realistically, it didn't help because lots of sites already introduced the 18+ toggle which horny minors simply ignore. That's why government are pushing for tech companies to do "something". But what else can they do? Only viable options I see are the nuclear option or identification system which goes against anonymity.

I know there's, at the moment no feasable way of checking the actual age of users. Still I think something needs to be done about it.

Out of curiosity. Does an 18+ site have the same legal responsibilities regarding their content. I mean they specifically do not cater to minors, if a parent did not properly adult filter the computer it wouldnt be the fault of the site that a minor accessed right?

That's why some corners of the internet have weird discussions about lowering the age of consent, its not about having IRL sex but e-dating and sexting, which is kinda more dangerous to the minor's reputation and mental health than IRL sex.

Also why there have been weird discussion about 17 & 19 age gap being "pedophilic" because a nude pic of one of them is legally considered CSEM.

you know I happy to say Ive never seen anyone actually argue for lowering the age of consent and honestly I rather keep it that way

I have seen the other arguments tho, along with people saying that a 21 year should still be considered a minor I think people that think like that dont like to admit that is them that havent grown up yet.

 

[Cold3000]

I know there's, at the moment no feasable way of checking the actual age of users. Still I think something needs to be done about it.

Out of curiosity. Does an 18+ site have the same legal responsibilities regarding their content. I mean they specifically do not cater to minors, if a parent did not properly adult filter the computer it wouldnt be the fault of the site that a minor accessed right?

It highly depends on where the site is hosted and where in the world the owner is. But as of now, there is a significant protection for site owners, similar to how youtube is not liable for copyright lawsuits made by users as long as there "reasonable" action taken by youtube.

But laws and rules are constantly changing so there's really no telling how things are gonna be a few months from now. For now, its a meme to go after payment processors and advertisers.

But web3.0 is still a wildcard. If web3.0 adoption become wide spread, like if someone made a new tiktok with web3.0 architecture and everyone flocked to it, then there's no central owner to go for.

you know I happy to say Ive never seen anyone actually argue for lowering the age of consent and honestly I rather keep it that way

Aww why not, its fun driving into a rabbit hole of madness.

For a bit of context about age of consent, in Japan, the age of consent is still legally considered 13, but they have a "protection of young persons act" which protect young persons against sexual exploitation by some section of the population up to a certain age, usually 16/18/20 depending on the prefecture and context. The Philippines recently raised their age of consent from 13 to 16, but added a 3 year age gap exception so a 13 and 16 age gap is not liable as sexual exploitation of a child. While the US California have a flat age of consent of 18 in all contexts, just that enforced on a case by case basis.

So the theme is not about the "age of consent" but "age of consent to what? and by who?"

The internet is a melting pot of anonymous users from all over the world living in vastly different contexts. For a lot of people, teens accessing porn is either the worst thing in the world or a big nothing burger. But a lot of people do have concerns about teens posting themselves online for safety reasons. And trying to figure out why there are so many "pedophiles" on the internet looking for minors, you just realize there's also a lot of minors looking for other minors.

And this is just the tip of the ice berg of the age of consent debate. Fascinating discussion at the cost of my sanity.

I have seen the other arguments tho, along with people saying that a 21 year should still be considered a minor I think people that think like that dont like to admit that is them that havent grown up yet.

Yup, some section of the population do think like this. But this is the effects concept creep where a genuine concern in one context is maliciously applied to another unrelated context. There are some discussion where 21 year old is the minimum age required for certain contexts, like high level contracts, like financial sectors and even professional porn. But people being people, applied the concept to an unrelated context.