Technology

71998 readers

2822 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related news or articles.
Be excellent to each other!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

L3s@lemmy.world

enu@lemmy.world

technopagan@lemmy.world

L4s@lemmy.world

L3s@hackingne.ws

L4s@hackingne.ws

186

Supreme Court (SCOTUS) upholds a Texas law that requires porn websites to verify that their visitors are 18 or older, rejecting a First Amendment challenge to the law (www.eff.org)

submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) by Pro@programming.dev to c/technology@lemmy.world

54 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Today’s decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton is a direct blow to the free speech rights of adults. The Court ruled that “no person—adult or child—has a First Amendment right to access speech that is obscene to minors without first submitting proof of age.” This ruling allows states to enact onerous age-verification rules that will block adults from accessing lawful speech, curtail their ability to be anonymous, and jeopardize their data security and privacy. These are real and immense burdens on adults, and the Court was wrong to ignore them in upholding Texas’ law.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 2 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I could point out how content on YouTube is absolutely not rated or restricted, or share anecdotes about some of the shocking things that have shown up on the grandkids phones, but none of that matters because it’s clear that you are staunchly authoritarian.

We get it. You get think people shouldn’t be trusted to raise or monitor their own kids and need Big Brother to infringe on the expressive rights of everyone else as a result. That these “liberal perverts” lose what little privacy they have left as a result is the cherry on top, I’m sure. Everyone here knows where you are coming from, what you believe, and what you want. It’s no mystery. There isn’t some mystical angle that we’ve all somehow overlooked. The disconnect is, the things you are trying to argue in favor of are deeply unethical, oppressive, irrational, and evil. Why are you even on Lemmy if you hold such perverse totalitarian fantasies in your heart? The mere existence of this software is a monument against such sick ideology.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au -3 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

YouTube absolutely has age restricted content, what are you talking about?

https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2802167?hl=en

Age-restricted content

Sometimes content doesn't violate our Community Guidelines, but it may be incompatible with YouTube's Terms of Service or not appropriate for viewers under 18. In these cases, we may place an age-restriction on the video. This policy applies to videos, video descriptions, custom thumbnails, live streams, and any other YouTube product or feature.

Did you really not know this was a thing? I can’t even listen to half of the music I like on YouTube without being signed in because of age restrictions lol.

You think I’m authoritarian? You could not be more incorrect if you tried lol. I think parents should be more responsible for the content their kids consume and what they do - but I also believe that age restrictions on content should exist to prevent access when even the best of parents can’t be there to stop it. I’m one of the few people on Lemmy who actually argues FOR free speech and less censorship lol