Yup, just more “small government” BS. They want a government small enough to fit in your pocket and watch everything you do, but not big enough to reign in the businesses and those who contribute to their wallets.
I have kids, I don’t want them watching porn too young, but at the same time I’m not stupid enough to think that age blocking major websites is going to keep them out of it at all. This is nothing but theater, and it’s an invasion of privacy while they’re acting.
The only way to stop teenagers from watching porn is…
Uhh I don’t think there’s a way.
Conservatives are on a big kick for so-called “parental rights” but what about parental responsibilities? It’s a parent’s job to make sure their children have a healthy relationship with sexuality.
Back in my day you could find porn in the woods. You’ll never stop teenagers finding porn.
If all the major sites comply with the proposed law, all it means is that teenagers will be pushed to more sketchy sites that don’t have restrictions. This combined with conservatives destroying sex ed is not good for anyone.
Oh wow I almost forgot about woods porn…hi fellow old person .
Conservatives are on a big kick for so-called “parental rights” but what about parental responsibilities?
It’s always that way.
The people who scream the loudest about " muh rights" never want to acknowledge that rights come with responsibilities.
And never seem to want to demonstrate that they can act in a responsible manner.
It’s going to drive young people to less reputable porn sites with much more questionable materials.
The world is heating up, corporations are taking control of our lives, AI is going to change our world, food is expensive, wars are breaking out while countries are trusting each other less and people can’t afford a house and life is just getting more and more miserable for those at the bottom … and one of the most important topics right now is PORN?
He stopped wearing his glasses to look less smart, and it seems to be working.
He had a reputation for being our dumbest politician under Harper
And an obedient lapdog.
I wouldn’t say that, he was ostracized by his party for suggesting they fix elections so Harper doesn’t lose
https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/poilievre-open-to-changes-on-fair-elections-act-1.1777138?
Funny how someone who was ostracised is now the leader…
Back then there was more to the party than just the Reform Party
They think Scheer and O’Toole lost for not being conservative enough
And to look less like evil Milhouse. Now we get a better look at his beady little eyes… Creepy
estimate age based on a webcam scan of a user’s face.
Ummm… right… VPNs are going to have a LOT of business in Canada.
Don’t even need one for all sites outside of Canadian jurisdiction. What’re they gonna do start DNS blocking all foreign porn? Good fucking luck.
The conservatives logging their IDs and having it leaked that they’re into trans porn/mother-son/furry shit are gonna really be glad they voted that in.
I think one of the most frustrating parts of how you aren’t wrong is that that’s why they see trans people as inherently sexual. To them we’re a porn category instead of friends, neighbors, coworkers, and our own separate people.
It’s very true, and part of the reason is that most trans folks are relatively invisible (in a good way).
Imagine this scenario:
(Conversation at work): “Hey, did you know that Susan used to be a dude?” “Huh. Weird.”
And they go forward with that knowledge in the back of their mind, and hopefully treating Susan no different than they did before. But here’s the thing: They have associated Susan with “used to be a dude,” but that isn’t necessarily connected to “trans” in our brains.
So when we hear Trans, we don’t think of Susan; instead we think about the category we see on porn sites. And ‘trans = sexual’ is reinforced.
Exactly, and this is one of the principal manifestations of transmisogyny. We’re treated as sex objects but also as objects of sexual disgust and that duality creates a world in which many of us historically have struggled to support ourselves outside of sex work. We face violence for it, often sexualized. And then when we dare to have our own sexual desires or wind up with kinks or sexual hang ups they’re pointed at as proof it’s all we think about as though we hadn’t been taught that that’s our only value.
And throughout all of that we’re pushed out of public life as obscene. The people who prey on us tell others that we’re the predators.
And throughout all of that we’re pushed out of public life as obscene. The people who prey on us tell others that we’re the predators.
As an Albertan, I can absolutely confirm this. David Parker and his band of bigots are busy labelling anyone who is trans (or a teacher, or gay, or supporting any of the above groups) as a degenerate pedophile groomer.
Trying to squeeze those last few boomer votes, what a shitbag. The joke writes itself.
The proposed law would require websites to verify users’ ages before they can access sexually explicit content, and it would penalize sites that don’t comply.
But it does not specify how that would be done.
suggestions have prompted widespread concern from privacy experts about their overarching impacts
The Conservatives have not proposed any alternatives for how porn sites could verify users’ ages without such systems.
Blocking porn from the reputable sites (ie, the ones most likely to follow this law) is already trivial. Just search for the Rating: header and look for an RTA string. Parental control software already does this.
The real solution is to mandate device manufacturers support this mechanism. Support, not force upon everybody.
Yeah, how much of the issue is reputable porn sites though.
The issue is porn sites that kids can access. Yeah there’s overlap but…
I think the only way to prevent teenagers from accessing porn on the internet is to prevent teenagers from being on the internet.
I don’t know how realistic that is, I’m not an IT guy. Maybe they could make a “cleanternet” that only has Wikipedia,
CBC, climate denial, banking, and the phonebook. Obligate ISPs to offer modems (and dataplans) that can only connect to it.As I mentioned, I’m not an IT guy.
RandomPorn.cz isn’t going to care if Canada sends them a cease and desist order.
You can do that with a DNS service that won’t let teens link out to those blacklisted sites, but it only works at home. At a buddy’s house they will have full access. Unless you also install a minder app that forces a private DNS on them always. But then they will just visit a friend who’s parents don’t care ans view on somebody elses systems. It stops accidental viewing.
You can do that with a DNS service that won’t let teens link out to those blacklisted sites
that’s what I did when my wife insisted I “filter the kids internet”. I also explained to my tech savvy teenager that he should be careful about not letting his mom know if/when he figures out how to bypass it. Also that I would be interested I seeing his solution, should he do it…
I didn’t have strict enforcement with my kids, and some web content (like a streaming service) was only available in another country at that time. One day my 13 yr old daughter is on another countries service, and I’m like how did you access that. She said “oh I just setup a proxy server connection.” Me: huh ok. Friend of mine who had his kids on full internet control is like “OH, shit I better check if my kids can do that.” They will find a way :)
Mr Poilievre, if you’re that sex-deprived that you need to spy my PornHub history you just have to ask, I’ll send it to you personally 😘
Is that offer open to others?
Only PP
Start sending links to his Twitter account 😂
The Conservatives seem to gravitate to the loving of misery and the spread of it.
Even if one goes along with the premise that this bill itself or its implications and effects are all about pornography it’s still an obviously bad idea, but it seems notable that so few of the contributors to this round of press coverage of it have questioned that premise.
All major parties are in on this. I expect it’s really about getting the internet ID technology out there so it can be forced elsewhere. This needs to be fought just because of that.
Pros:
-
Anti-bot verification
-
Prevent multiple spam accounts by the same person
Cons:
-
The government can track everything you do online slightly more easily
-
Businesses can do the same
That last point is the one that kills it for me tbh. There’s no way the government doesn’t know who this lemmy account belongs to IRL already, but Facebook might not.
There’s no way the government doesn’t know who this lemmy account belongs to IRL already
I think it kinda depends on what you mean by ‘knows’. I don’t think they have a table with your username in one column and your real name in the other. But if you’ve said something that would make them care who you are, they probably do. Regardless, I’m sure the NSA could figure it out pretty quick.
Cons: the government can change their mind and rather than Porn blocking , block access to info they don’t want you (as adult) to know about. Like a protest meetup, or with a conaervative gov: a trans kid looking for trans help info. restricting freedom of the internet can quicky become state censorship like China has
Oh yeah blocking content can quickly get out of hand
-
Things like this is why I’m not overly concerned about current polling numbers. Let’s see what happens when the CPC needs to actually start staking positions.
What worries me is no matter who they’ve had for leader, they basically get the same votes. Hell they got more votes than the liberals without even having a platform.
Canadians vote out governments, but I think this is the first time one of the top two major parties has voters who literally don’t care what the policies (if any) the party has, just that they have that C beside their name.
Gun registry bad!
Porn viewing registry, hell yeah!
Hmmmmm
The party that spews small government and less spending… Right…
If Pierre feels so strongly about this, he should post his browser history from all his devices.
All the reasons we can’t police his internet usage are all the reasons he can’t control ours.
He can’t or won’t even get a security clearance. He is unfit for office.
