Porn age checks - Surely a good thing?

[Vimtolady]

Just read a ‘debate’ on the BBC News website about the pros and cons of age verification of porn websites. Weirdly I was verified for the first time myself last night (I am a porn user but not all the time) so was interested to read it.

j get that it was a debate but I honestly don’t see how anyone could object. Last night I wasn’t expecting to be verified but the process was simple, took about a minute and I don’t think I’d have easily been able to circumvent it. Obviously there are security concerns but no more so than with any other website.

I think these checks are great! My eldest DC is 13 so probably getting to (or at) the age when porn might become interesting to her, and this would make it much more difficult to access which would doubtless be a good thing, no?

Does anyone disagree?! I’d be interested to hear arguments against because I can’t really think of any and that makes me suspicious I’m being narrow minded.

Just block all at the ISP level, instead of this hotch botch law, which is so easily circumvented.

I agree it may indeed stop a significant number of children accessing harmful content, but that alone doesn't make it "a good thing".

It ignores the rights of others to access otherwise legal content, and compromises their security a privacy.

For example, a website such as this contains content that may be deemed "harmful", and require you to prove your age, which may reveal your identity.

In the event that MN gets hacked, or some other forum you use, would you want your identity to be linked to your comments, let alone your banking details?

Its not legal content at all, try buying a DVD from a uk supplier showing hardcore sex?
British board of film censors have far stricter content rules, than what a UK isp can allow you to view.

Age verification is so easy to bypass using a free VPN, that this law is meaningless. It's so meaningless in fact, that it makes me wonder why they bothered.

It guess it's a bit of good PR.

I don't think it's conspiracy-theoryish to think this is a step towards more government control over info (seeing what you access, controlling access with methods that actually work).

I do think some IT-naive parents will now just assume their kids can't access porn.

Then you would be blocking access to people over 18.

Don't forget this isn't just porn, (legal or illegal) it's about restricting access to content that may be harmful to under 18's. E.G. Content that's suitable for over 18 to access. (i.e. parts of MN)

No, it's not the same thing! If the company doesn't do age checks, they will be blocked at ISP level.

If they do age checks, but under 18s bypass them with a VPN, then nothing will happen.

The online age restriction. applies to legal porn, and content deemed "harmful" for under 18's.

Illegal Porn, is illegal.

I hate that it’s being called the porn law/ porn age checks, as it actually goes far beyond that, it’s wide ranging, fairly wooly and can pretty much apply to any website on the internet. The online safety act is a terribly written law which will probably do very little to help

No it wouldn't, adults can provide AV per device, easily done on the mac address.
ISPs have all this information.

They can fund this via the 10% pa increases to our internet costs.

Ive got mixed feelings. On one hand i think its a good idea to try and hinder kids from accessing stuff, making it harder than clicking "i am over 18" button.

That said, is the age verification only coming from legit (for want of a better word) sites? Would kids be able to access stuff from other areas of the web that is possible more extreme and darker in nature?

As a pp said, it might stop younger kids, which is a good thing, but I've no doubt a tech savvy teen will be easily able to circumvent this.

Lastly, given hackers etc, I can imagine people having their ID and ccard info stolen, but also more likely to be blackmailed if the info is obtained from a porn site. Pornhub preferences likely to be a lot more blackmail worthy than shopping preferences at m and s or the co-op.

I think it's clearly a good thing, as you say OP an adult wants to access that material they can age verify or get a VPN. Very young children will now experience considerably more friction when trying to access pornographic material and the chances of them happening across it is now vastly reduced.

There was a thread on here recently where lots of people argued that it would be pointless because kids would still be able to browse reddit and twitter for access to porn but they have age verification too so that won't be the case. I know others say age kids will just download a VPN but most VPN that a child could access for example browser based options or free VPN's are not particularly functional and if they are they are very limited in terms of the amount of data you can stream though them. Parents can also set up controls where they need to verify any app the child tried to download on their device and so they can block any attempt to access a VPN. Due to how it works, Tor and access to the "dark web" is often cumbersome and painfully slow (especially for streaming) and it is not currently home to a lot of porn.

The research is clear that accessing porn at a young age increases the risk of escalation to extreme content and harmful attitudes and behaviours as the article says.

While the man in the BBC article raises some valid concerns he seems more worried about porn consumers being made vulnerable by having to verify than the harms to women, children and indeed many young men from porn. He suggests that he viewed porn as a teen and he is ok so its not an issue and yet he is clearly late 40's to 50's in age so would not have been as exposed to unlimited hardcore porn at a young age as todays kids are, so I don't think his point is really that valid.

Roxy in the article also makes the point that there isn't enough consideration about the harms that porn does to the adults who consume it either and I think that is valid. I am anti-porn, not because I am a prude or because I think sex is dirty but because I think porn harms and exploits the women who work in the industry, and indeed many of the men who perform also. I think it is a supernormal stimuli that taps into our neurobiology and can lead to maladaptive behaviours in those who consume it, not always but frequently as it can be for many, especially young men highly addictive.

Getting a bit away from the legislation, but blocking at the ISP level isn't really a workable solution, easy to spoof a MAC address, and unworkable on a shared computer, which many people do.

Adult content isn't just porn. It's also defined as including sites which discuss self harm, suicide and eating disorders

I didn't see it say "glorifying" these. Just discussing them

Which could lead to useful, self help type groups being ID walled. Groups teenagers might want to access without telling their parents whilst looking for help.

I don't trust anything which can potentially link you to supposedly inappropriate content

And what counts as "porn" can slowly start to become more broad. Until you won't be able to access those smutty books on Amazon. Or the AI running it will block a health site because it talks about sex and shows naked bodies for health reasons. Or an art gallery for nude paintings. Or something it just reads as nudity when it's not. Or it starts blocked LGBTQ+ content.

This has all happened before btw

Totally agree. I am in my early 40s and first saw porn as a mid-teenager on VHS in the late 90s. I wouldn’t say I became addicted but it certainly increased my exposure and altered my behaviour. The proliferation and extremity of porn now is so much worse, and whereas in 1998 I had to furtively route through my mum’s knicker drawer, wait till I had complete privacy in the whole house, make sure the tape was rewound to exactly the right place afterwards etc etc and only had that one video of reasonably normal sex, now the extreme content is everywhere instantly.

The industry is horrible (one reason why I restrict my own usage as much as I can) and the harms on teenagers are so easy to predict and see. Even if this law makes it only a fraction more difficult for people to access porn, it’s a good thing.

They're calling thr Porn Law to gain support and hide the rest of what they have define

Until people find that even accessing MN or FB or Amazon requires ID checks and the realise how poorly done the law is and how far reaching the "adult content" description is

I haven't voted. I think the law has a noble aim- no-one normal wants kids to have access to pornography.

But, even with my limited IT knowledge I think it will be easily bypassed and ignored, particularly by the group it's supposed to protect. Meanwhile it could produce all kinds of unintended consequences.

The laws are poorly thought out and will be ineffectual.

They will encourage greater use of VPNs which will actually make the job of policing the net a lot harder.

They also risk user data leaks. If the government can't even keep a list of secret agents safe, what kind of idiot would believe that a porn company can keep it's user data safe ?

What the government should be doing is working on better tools to allow parents to control the use of devices for children rather than trying to discriminate against adults.

It's a step in the right direction. At the very least it makes it less likely that a child will access porn unwittingly, and it sends out the message that it is for adults only. Many teenagers use fake id to buy alcohol and to get into clubs and pubs, but that doesn't mean that we should scrap the age limit for purchasing alcohol.

You could set an example and reduce demand, by not viewing it yourself, OP.

Why isn't it? its costly to monitor but thats just an excuse by ISPs/Ofcom who want to maximise profits.

Blocking at the ISP level is done by many countries who want to ban certain sites.

Shared computers? really? i'd want to know if my partner was accessing porn.

Spoofing a mac address only goes so far, if the ISP has blocked the porn in the first place, what exactly would it gain the user?

Surely the whole age verification thing needs to be about anything that has harmful content, not just porn( I think that is the aim) Tik Tok, Facebook etc all have content that isn’t really appropriate for under 16s, but the issue always seems to be porn

How on earth do you view porn accidently? unless its sent in a message etc, which this law will not prevent as the rules don't apply to meta tiktok etc.

True. And in the cold light of day I dislike the fact that I use it too. But one of the malevolent facets of porn is that it takes advantage of natural urges which make it hard to resist. I am as guilty as many others are for my failure to resist those urges sometimes.
I use it less than I did. And I don’t view extreme content. But yes, I accept, like most women I am an occasional porn user and without porn users there’d be no porn industry. So I am in part to blame. That’s why I have no issue verifying that I’m over 18 and think it’s a good thing to have to do so.

@Vimtolady Exactly the scale and scope of availability is way beyond anything adult who were kids 25 or 30 years ago could have imagined. Its negligent and so unfair to let young kids contend with all of that, this is a step in the right direction.

It's not just porn...