• Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 day ago

    I’ve been worried about that since all these fools started talking about “banning porn.”

    The sites that already broke the law (by hosting illegal content) were never going to comply with age-verification laws. If the more ethical porn options are law-abiding, then these laws create a feedback loop - sites that comply suffer from reduced traffic, while sites that ignore the laws become more popular.

    I have zero doubt that, right now, there are people wandering onto truly harmful and disturbing material that they never would have discovered if they hadn’t been pushed to explore the fringes of the internet in search of porn.

    • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Among the younger folks, I expect most just turned to Discord or Telegram to get their porn fix. Those that don’t want to bother with messaging groups probably just went to page 3+ of their search result. I wonder whether duckduckgo’s “safesearch:off” is working for brits

      • WALLACE@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        20 hours ago

        Search engines aren’t affected by the law so yeah safe search being off still works

      • jacksilver@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Yeah, I think that’s a safe assumption. While discord and telegram aren’t inherently bad, I think they carry more risks than just going to some site like pornhub.