Also, it always starts as the porn block, the Antifap; it is always about saving the teenagers, the part of the population that wants and needs to explore their sexuality the most. The it's a few...
Also, it always starts as the porn block, the Antifap; it is always about saving the teenagers, the part of the population that wants and needs to explore their sexuality the most. The it's a few bits misinformation here and there, given the plumbing is already there. And is that some opposition idea that we can pass as fake news or treason?
On the one hand most of the "low-hanging" pornography out there is horrible, with middle aged women with fake boobs the size of a soccer ball, branded as teens, fetishising sky-scraping penises and having absurdly expressive orgasms the moment something with a phallic image even approaches their vaginas. Step sisters fucking everybody in the household. No page ceases to include something truly incest. It is really hard to find something affectionate, clean and not resemblant of rape or exploitation in some regard. It becomes even harder when you need to deal with technological hurdles, I can say as a resident of Turkey.
OTOH, censorship and reduction to illegal never helps when a thing is not inherently illegal or immoral. And porn is one such thing. There is nothing immoral about consenting adults making movies involving sexuality, and people watching it. Adolescents have sex, most developed countries allow able teenagers of similar ages have sex. And they will do it if the govt does not allow it, because that is human nature. Those who make these bans are probably so old that they have forgot their teens. All that's possible to do is to allow people to live these most humane experiences while protecting them from exploitation.
Lawmakers all over the world are struggling with the internet. They're unable to enforce existing laws, regulations and standards that're in place throughout society in online settings. The...
Lawmakers all over the world are struggling with the internet.
They're unable to enforce existing laws, regulations and standards that're in place throughout society in online settings.
The internet isn't some free-wheeling entity separate from meatspace.
Do we change the existing laws, or do we regulate the internet to conform to the rest of society? Those are our two only options; the internet is such an integral part of modern society.
For adult content, government is unable to effectively age-gate content, prevent revenge-porn, remove child porn, get rid of extreme content that different nations have banned.
Other areas have other and similar difficulties in almost every legal area. The internet is under-regulated, and laws are under-enforced online.
Every politician is charged with taking the best steps they can see to try to resolve that conflict.
Or politicians would have to get a mandate from their electorates to give up on some of the fundamental values our democracies are built on. That would imply throwing our hands in the air and effectively saying "we lost control of the internet. We'll just have to live with it"
A tiny minority of loud people doing things online they'd never want to be connected back to them in meatspace will bemoan every attempt at regulating the internet as government overreach. They want the government to just give up so the status quo is maintained. They cannot be allowed to set the premises for the debate.
I don't think electorates want to let children watch porn, or to allow bestiality, to allow posting porn without the consent of those depicted etc. That's what's de facto happening online right now.
Politicians have a responsibility for regulating the web better.
How should they do that?
Politicians have a terribly difficult task crafting that internet regulation.
Especially since so much of the web is outside of any single jurisdiction, but available everywhere.
Every time I read articles on regulating the web, there are few better alternatives presented. It's easy to point out how these hamfisted policies are less than perfect, or simply bad.
The web is out of control. We're beyond the time of naivety where we simply assume the Internet is inherently a force for good so it should be left alone to do its thing.
Internet isn't broken. Broken people are using it. If a problem needs fixing, the first step is to understand the problem correctly and identify the source. The source of the problem is sexual...
Exemplary
Internet isn't broken. Broken people are using it. If a problem needs fixing, the first step is to understand the problem correctly and identify the source. The source of the problem is sexual offenders (I'd include things like revenge porn or intimate content hacked out of people's digital storage spaces here, and also both the watchers and producers of movies that involve those who can't give consent, like children, handicapped people, etc), and that there are people wanting these people's products (which might be classified as sexual offenders too, possibly). Blocking this content from the internet is trying to fix the symptom, not the illness itself. This is digital material, it finds a way to get disseminated, there's no way to block it.
There are two major things to fix that'd really help with this situation. First would be to kill this attention economy, the ad-ridden internet, the advertisement bubble. It's almost %100 scammish, and it keeps so many things not worth existing alive, and makes people rich out of clickbait. It is also what drives the inhumane surveillance and creates beasts like Cambridge Analytica. The internet ad industry is one big evil, and most of the abhorrent stuff on the internet exists because it's absurd enough to get clicked, and help the websites steal money. So one good regulation would be to enforce the use of dumb ads and make sure only those who has stuff worth buying can earn money.
The other major thing is a war against patriarchy and widespread, quality sex-ed. It's a horrible fact that in many countries most kids have learnt, in the last century, about maths, physics, religion and even how to walk on a pavement etc. in the school, but nobody has told them anything about freedoms and concepts that pertain to sexuality and gender or things like consent, their ownership of their own bodies, how to say no, what to do when refused etc. This is the thing we need to fix, and push everybody else to fix it for themselves.
Above all, it should be a fight against the patriarchal society, that has set up sexual relations such that it's always about exploitation, and that has denied and still denies in many parts of the world a healthy sex life to many people. Stop seeing sex as a one-sided conquest.
Blocking content is the equivalent of a parent that closes their kid's eyes when a kissing scene appears in a movie they're watching in their television. Does more bad than good. When denied like so, the kid learns from untrustable sources, like ignorant friends and absurd videos on websites the govt failed to block. Or they find stuff on thousands of non-porn platforms like Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat or Youtube, or worse. The only real defence is information. Teach the kids. Don't give your childrens phones and computers that you don't control. Don't allow them to access internet before they are the age to learn about facts of life. And that age is earlier than many thinks. It should all start when the kid asks how was I born? Teach parents how to teach their kids.
Any other alternative, including this sort of censorship amounts to masturbatory acts of politic nonsense.
Any argument for blocking/restricting porn can be applied to other content in just the same way. That's because we're talking about frameworks the government put in place, then criteria for what...
Blocking this content from the internet is trying to fix the symptom, not the illness itself. [...] This is digital material, it finds a way to get disseminated, there's no way to block it.
Any argument for blocking/restricting porn can be applied to other content in just the same way. That's because we're talking about frameworks the government put in place, then criteria for what those frameworks block.
We very much should have national/international systems for blocking illegal content and standards for age-restricting other content just the same way we do in other parts of society.
Some of these filters work incredibly well and are completely uncontroversial. If you stumble upon a site that regularly posts child porn from a Norwegian IP address, you hit a Norwegian police page saying why that domain is inaccessible.
That's not a masturbatory act of politic nonsense; that's enforcing Norwegian law in Norway and protecting people from seeing absolutely heinous images.
The political issue is where and how that content should be blocked, how best to block children from exposure to heinous things like videos of beheadings or torture, things they shouldn't sit through on their own without proper support around them.
I completely agree that the way to stamp out this stuff is to get rid of the economy. The most effective way of doing that is blocking access. You cannot happen on or don't know about terrible pieces of content if you can't find them or access them.
That's stamping out the entirety of the market for those selling/distributing that content. You have to go way, way out of your way and seek out specific things to get there.
The content isn't normalized (think what /r/jailbait on reddit did to normalize revenge porn in its users' minds).
The arguments that go for porn follow for all other types of dark web activity, like murderers or hire or illegal drug trafficking that benefits organized crime.
Blocking sex between people and animals from view isn't equivalent of a parent closing their kid's eyes during a kiss. It's preventing real harm to the minds not just of children, but adults.
Some people like brushing that off as "trigger warnings." Other groups put warnings on way too many things which hurts the cause of warnings in the first place.
In Norway it'd be trivial to require people to log in with their national identity service to verify their age. (that's not the case today, but it's used for all sorts of things like accessing your online banking, messages from government, applications etc.)
I'd say that mainstream porn in the last few years has flipped way beyond embracing sexuality in feminist ways to normalizing insanely masculinity behavior.
I think a large part of the appeal of anal sex (now almost omnipresent in freely available porn) is the power dynamic of dominating the woman. They feel pain for you to feel pleasure.
Then there's all the causal choking and slapping, that wasn't there in online porn 10 years ago.
I won't ever defend someone's argument that stumbling upon random porn when you're 8 or 10 or 14 is better sex ed than no sex ed. You're right that society has a huge responsibility to do better here, but no porn exposure until you're older is better than that being how you expect sex to play out and copying it when you're experimenting as a young teenager.
The only reason you can randomly stumble on non-porn platforms is that these don't restrict that content in effective ways. That could easily be done and be required by law.
As you say, it'd hurt page views and engagement which really isn't a loss.
It'd also be easy to legally require these platforms to have sufficient oversight over their platforms to remove or tag/hide bad content behind appropriate restrictions within a reasonable amount of time. (or to design platforms such that only platform-approved content is available to those who haven't verified an appropriate age)
It's impossible to restrict children from accessing the internet before they're old enough to handle all types of content. Why shouldn't an 8-year old be able to watch age-appropriate videos or look something up?
No, the task here is proper regulation of the internet. Regulation of the internet is broken.
Just like the task in the past (and also now) is appropriately regulating walking down the street and all our interactions in meatspace.
I highly doubt one can just stumble upon such websites. As a guy in my mid 20s, I haven't once. I believe one needs to want to go to these websites, and learn of their existence through other...
Some of these filters work incredibly well and are completely uncontroversial. If you stumble upon a site that regularly posts child porn from a Norwegian IP address, you hit a Norwegian police page saying why that domain is inaccessible.
I highly doubt one can just stumble upon such websites. As a guy in my mid 20s, I haven't once. I believe one needs to want to go to these websites, and learn of their existence through other means like forums etc. But that might well be the effect of the crackdown on this sort of content, and maybe even blocking, but I find it hard to believe that it's effective in disallowing those who are determined to access say child pornography from accessing it. An example from a different field, in Turkey websites like Imgur and Wikipedia are blocked, besides porn platforms like Pornhub, and also VPNs. But people find ways to use these websites nevertheless. Even non-techies.
Honestly I'd rather see international crackdown on child pornography and other horrible content, mainly aiming at the producers thereof. And regulate the porn industry like any other artistic industry. Make peace with it. It'd be incredibly good, and promote ethical content there.
I'd say that mainstream porn in the last few years has flipped way beyond embracing sexuality in feminist ways to normalizing insanely masculinity behavior.
That's correct and incorrect. On the one hand more absurd fetishes have made it to mainstream, but OTOH porn movies and erotica were always filled with completely patriarchal stereotypes, and it's in these days that content that ranges from more tolerable to excellent becomes available thanks to independent adult models and producers, like Lucie Blush, off the top of my head, that are aware of the ethics of sexuality and consent.
I think a large part of the appeal of anal sex (now almost omnipresent in freely available porn) is the power dynamic of dominating the woman. They feel pain for you to feel pleasure.
Coupling anal sex with pain is wrong. Anal stimulation is possible and easily reachable, for both sexes, both via copulation and masturbation. I suggest watching somevideosfrom the great sexology and sex-ed channel Sexplanations (warning: sex toys and explicit language, but no nudity or pornographic content). Altho sexual fantasies and video niches about hurtful and violent (physically and psychologically) anal sex exist, watching and experiencing safe, clean and pleasurable anal sex is possible. Again, education is important so that people can choose and do better.
I won't ever defend someone's argument that stumbling upon random porn when you're 8 or 10 or 14 is better sex ed than no sex ed. You're right that society has a huge responsibility to do better here, but no porn exposure until you're older is better than that being how you expect sex to play out and copying it when you're experimenting as a young teenager.
As someone who received no sex ed neither from parents nor in school, I think you're totally wrong. First of all, it's impossible to not stumble, because most peers will be watching it and talking about it. Only two options exist: the kid will watch it hidden and whatever comes up with minimal to no knowledge of realities, or they'll watch informed by sex ed and good guiding. A third option is nonexistent. Banning kids from larget, more quality sites will only force them to smaller, lesser known, almost definitely worse websites that the censor missed.
It's impossible to restrict children from accessing the internet before they're old enough to handle all types of content. Why shouldn't an 8-year old be able to watch age-appropriate videos or look something up?
Just like it's impossible to disallow a 12yo finding porn on internet. Thing is, a parent or a caregiver otherwise can more easily control the internet use of their kids for long enough that they're ready for sex ed.
And I save this for the last:
In Norway it'd be trivial to require people to log in with their national identity service to verify their age. (that's not the case today, but it's used for all sorts of things like accessing your online banking, messages from government, applications etc.)
I haven't heard a thing more horrible than this w.r.t. internet censoring. Tying something as private and intimate as sexuality to your national identity card is an horrible, horrible, horrible violation of privacy, regardless of purpose. There is no good in that, and a hell of a lot of bad. Hopefully no Norwegian or otherwise politicans are perusing Tildes...
Ultimately, when a person wants to access some digital resource, that's almost impossible to completely ban it. Also, it's impossible to regulate all porn websites out there, and those that miss the net will most probably be the smaller and potentially worse ones. Blocking kids off of mainstream, corporate, easily regulatable platforms (and the absurdly horrible ID-login proposal is practically this too) will lead them to either compromise their digital privacy and security to use these platforms or push them to less controllable, more horrible resources. It'd be way more effective to collaborate with the porn industry and allow adolescents to use safer, regulated options. That'd both leave other user's privacy intact (because everybody's need be compromised when filtering connections), and be orders of magnitude more effective. Horrible content that I don't want to name again and again is better extinguished via attacking the producers and the consumers directly. The fake economy of internet ads needs to be killed. And, above all, good sex ed must become a human right. It should start before adolescence to prepare the kids for adolescence (because the discovery is fearsome otherwise for the kids), and include actual lessons on sexuality and other relations and related concepts after adolescence.
There are 2 rules that are almost universally true on the internet. Websites collect and store every bit of information they get access to. Eventually all websites get hacked and their database...
In Norway it'd be trivial to require people to log in with their national identity service to verify their age. (that's not the case today, but it's used for all sorts of things like accessing your online banking, messages from government, applications etc.)
There are 2 rules that are almost universally true on the internet.
Websites collect and store every bit of information they get access to.
Eventually all websites get hacked and their database will be leaked publicly
If porn websites required you to enter ID to access them that means your ID will eventually end up on a torrent website connected to every video you watched and comment you left.
The way I see it, internet censorship and tracking is basically the same situation as antibiotics. The more you use the tools you have the less they become effective. If governments build spyware...
The way I see it, internet censorship and tracking is basically the same situation as antibiotics. The more you use the tools you have the less they become effective. If governments build spyware and use it purely for very serious crime then they work pretty well but as soon as they start using those tools to track everyone all the time so they can catch people for minor crimes or simply so they can control the population then developers start to come together to build tools around the spyware and censorship. If it wasn't for oppressive governments going after journalists and other average people we wouldn't have nearly as many privacy tools we have now. The devs of these tools don't build them to help terrorists and pedos. They build them to save good people living under bad governments. It just happens that the real bad people can also use these tools.
Blocking porn is one of those pointless steps that causes people to move to more resistant platforms and tools and in turn makes government tools useless to deal with real crime.
Also, it always starts as the porn block, the Antifap; it is always about saving the teenagers, the part of the population that wants and needs to explore their sexuality the most. The it's a few bits misinformation here and there, given the plumbing is already there. And is that some opposition idea that we can pass as fake news or treason?
On the one hand most of the "low-hanging" pornography out there is horrible, with middle aged women with fake boobs the size of a soccer ball, branded as teens, fetishising sky-scraping penises and having absurdly expressive orgasms the moment something with a phallic image even approaches their vaginas. Step sisters fucking everybody in the household. No page ceases to include something truly incest. It is really hard to find something affectionate, clean and not resemblant of rape or exploitation in some regard. It becomes even harder when you need to deal with technological hurdles, I can say as a resident of Turkey.
OTOH, censorship and reduction to illegal never helps when a thing is not inherently illegal or immoral. And porn is one such thing. There is nothing immoral about consenting adults making movies involving sexuality, and people watching it. Adolescents have sex, most developed countries allow able teenagers of similar ages have sex. And they will do it if the govt does not allow it, because that is human nature. Those who make these bans are probably so old that they have forgot their teens. All that's possible to do is to allow people to live these most humane experiences while protecting them from exploitation.
Lawmakers all over the world are struggling with the internet.
They're unable to enforce existing laws, regulations and standards that're in place throughout society in online settings.
The internet isn't some free-wheeling entity separate from meatspace.
Do we change the existing laws, or do we regulate the internet to conform to the rest of society? Those are our two only options; the internet is such an integral part of modern society.
For adult content, government is unable to effectively age-gate content, prevent revenge-porn, remove child porn, get rid of extreme content that different nations have banned.
Other areas have other and similar difficulties in almost every legal area. The internet is under-regulated, and laws are under-enforced online.
Every politician is charged with taking the best steps they can see to try to resolve that conflict.
Or politicians would have to get a mandate from their electorates to give up on some of the fundamental values our democracies are built on. That would imply throwing our hands in the air and effectively saying "we lost control of the internet. We'll just have to live with it"
A tiny minority of loud people doing things online they'd never want to be connected back to them in meatspace will bemoan every attempt at regulating the internet as government overreach. They want the government to just give up so the status quo is maintained. They cannot be allowed to set the premises for the debate.
I don't think electorates want to let children watch porn, or to allow bestiality, to allow posting porn without the consent of those depicted etc. That's what's de facto happening online right now.
Politicians have a responsibility for regulating the web better.
How should they do that?
Politicians have a terribly difficult task crafting that internet regulation.
Especially since so much of the web is outside of any single jurisdiction, but available everywhere.
Every time I read articles on regulating the web, there are few better alternatives presented. It's easy to point out how these hamfisted policies are less than perfect, or simply bad.
The web is out of control. We're beyond the time of naivety where we simply assume the Internet is inherently a force for good so it should be left alone to do its thing.
How should today's broken internet be fixed?
Internet isn't broken. Broken people are using it. If a problem needs fixing, the first step is to understand the problem correctly and identify the source. The source of the problem is sexual offenders (I'd include things like revenge porn or intimate content hacked out of people's digital storage spaces here, and also both the watchers and producers of movies that involve those who can't give consent, like children, handicapped people, etc), and that there are people wanting these people's products (which might be classified as sexual offenders too, possibly). Blocking this content from the internet is trying to fix the symptom, not the illness itself. This is digital material, it finds a way to get disseminated, there's no way to block it.
There are two major things to fix that'd really help with this situation. First would be to kill this attention economy, the ad-ridden internet, the advertisement bubble. It's almost %100 scammish, and it keeps so many things not worth existing alive, and makes people rich out of clickbait. It is also what drives the inhumane surveillance and creates beasts like Cambridge Analytica. The internet ad industry is one big evil, and most of the abhorrent stuff on the internet exists because it's absurd enough to get clicked, and help the websites steal money. So one good regulation would be to enforce the use of dumb ads and make sure only those who has stuff worth buying can earn money.
The other major thing is a war against patriarchy and widespread, quality sex-ed. It's a horrible fact that in many countries most kids have learnt, in the last century, about maths, physics, religion and even how to walk on a pavement etc. in the school, but nobody has told them anything about freedoms and concepts that pertain to sexuality and gender or things like consent, their ownership of their own bodies, how to say no, what to do when refused etc. This is the thing we need to fix, and push everybody else to fix it for themselves.
Above all, it should be a fight against the patriarchal society, that has set up sexual relations such that it's always about exploitation, and that has denied and still denies in many parts of the world a healthy sex life to many people. Stop seeing sex as a one-sided conquest.
Blocking content is the equivalent of a parent that closes their kid's eyes when a kissing scene appears in a movie they're watching in their television. Does more bad than good. When denied like so, the kid learns from untrustable sources, like ignorant friends and absurd videos on websites the govt failed to block. Or they find stuff on thousands of non-porn platforms like Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat or Youtube, or worse. The only real defence is information. Teach the kids. Don't give your childrens phones and computers that you don't control. Don't allow them to access internet before they are the age to learn about facts of life. And that age is earlier than many thinks. It should all start when the kid asks how was I born? Teach parents how to teach their kids.
Any other alternative, including this sort of censorship amounts to masturbatory acts of politic nonsense.
Any argument for blocking/restricting porn can be applied to other content in just the same way. That's because we're talking about frameworks the government put in place, then criteria for what those frameworks block.
We very much should have national/international systems for blocking illegal content and standards for age-restricting other content just the same way we do in other parts of society.
Some of these filters work incredibly well and are completely uncontroversial. If you stumble upon a site that regularly posts child porn from a Norwegian IP address, you hit a Norwegian police page saying why that domain is inaccessible.
That's not a masturbatory act of politic nonsense; that's enforcing Norwegian law in Norway and protecting people from seeing absolutely heinous images.
The political issue is where and how that content should be blocked, how best to block children from exposure to heinous things like videos of beheadings or torture, things they shouldn't sit through on their own without proper support around them.
I completely agree that the way to stamp out this stuff is to get rid of the economy. The most effective way of doing that is blocking access. You cannot happen on or don't know about terrible pieces of content if you can't find them or access them.
That's stamping out the entirety of the market for those selling/distributing that content. You have to go way, way out of your way and seek out specific things to get there.
The content isn't normalized (think what /r/jailbait on reddit did to normalize revenge porn in its users' minds).
The arguments that go for porn follow for all other types of dark web activity, like murderers or hire or illegal drug trafficking that benefits organized crime.
Blocking sex between people and animals from view isn't equivalent of a parent closing their kid's eyes during a kiss. It's preventing real harm to the minds not just of children, but adults.
Some people like brushing that off as "trigger warnings." Other groups put warnings on way too many things which hurts the cause of warnings in the first place.
In Norway it'd be trivial to require people to log in with their national identity service to verify their age. (that's not the case today, but it's used for all sorts of things like accessing your online banking, messages from government, applications etc.)
I'd say that mainstream porn in the last few years has flipped way beyond embracing sexuality in feminist ways to normalizing insanely masculinity behavior.
I think a large part of the appeal of anal sex (now almost omnipresent in freely available porn) is the power dynamic of dominating the woman. They feel pain for you to feel pleasure.
Then there's all the causal choking and slapping, that wasn't there in online porn 10 years ago.
I won't ever defend someone's argument that stumbling upon random porn when you're 8 or 10 or 14 is better sex ed than no sex ed. You're right that society has a huge responsibility to do better here, but no porn exposure until you're older is better than that being how you expect sex to play out and copying it when you're experimenting as a young teenager.
The only reason you can randomly stumble on non-porn platforms is that these don't restrict that content in effective ways. That could easily be done and be required by law.
As you say, it'd hurt page views and engagement which really isn't a loss.
It'd also be easy to legally require these platforms to have sufficient oversight over their platforms to remove or tag/hide bad content behind appropriate restrictions within a reasonable amount of time. (or to design platforms such that only platform-approved content is available to those who haven't verified an appropriate age)
It's impossible to restrict children from accessing the internet before they're old enough to handle all types of content. Why shouldn't an 8-year old be able to watch age-appropriate videos or look something up?
No, the task here is proper regulation of the internet. Regulation of the internet is broken.
Just like the task in the past (and also now) is appropriately regulating walking down the street and all our interactions in meatspace.
I highly doubt one can just stumble upon such websites. As a guy in my mid 20s, I haven't once. I believe one needs to want to go to these websites, and learn of their existence through other means like forums etc. But that might well be the effect of the crackdown on this sort of content, and maybe even blocking, but I find it hard to believe that it's effective in disallowing those who are determined to access say child pornography from accessing it. An example from a different field, in Turkey websites like Imgur and Wikipedia are blocked, besides porn platforms like Pornhub, and also VPNs. But people find ways to use these websites nevertheless. Even non-techies.
Honestly I'd rather see international crackdown on child pornography and other horrible content, mainly aiming at the producers thereof. And regulate the porn industry like any other artistic industry. Make peace with it. It'd be incredibly good, and promote ethical content there.
That's correct and incorrect. On the one hand more absurd fetishes have made it to mainstream, but OTOH porn movies and erotica were always filled with completely patriarchal stereotypes, and it's in these days that content that ranges from more tolerable to excellent becomes available thanks to independent adult models and producers, like Lucie Blush, off the top of my head, that are aware of the ethics of sexuality and consent.
Coupling anal sex with pain is wrong. Anal stimulation is possible and easily reachable, for both sexes, both via copulation and masturbation. I suggest watching some videos from the great sexology and sex-ed channel Sexplanations (warning: sex toys and explicit language, but no nudity or pornographic content). Altho sexual fantasies and video niches about hurtful and violent (physically and psychologically) anal sex exist, watching and experiencing safe, clean and pleasurable anal sex is possible. Again, education is important so that people can choose and do better.
As someone who received no sex ed neither from parents nor in school, I think you're totally wrong. First of all, it's impossible to not stumble, because most peers will be watching it and talking about it. Only two options exist: the kid will watch it hidden and whatever comes up with minimal to no knowledge of realities, or they'll watch informed by sex ed and good guiding. A third option is nonexistent. Banning kids from larget, more quality sites will only force them to smaller, lesser known, almost definitely worse websites that the censor missed.
Just like it's impossible to disallow a 12yo finding porn on internet. Thing is, a parent or a caregiver otherwise can more easily control the internet use of their kids for long enough that they're ready for sex ed.
And I save this for the last:
I haven't heard a thing more horrible than this w.r.t. internet censoring. Tying something as private and intimate as sexuality to your national identity card is an horrible, horrible, horrible violation of privacy, regardless of purpose. There is no good in that, and a hell of a lot of bad. Hopefully no Norwegian or otherwise politicans are perusing Tildes...
Ultimately, when a person wants to access some digital resource, that's almost impossible to completely ban it. Also, it's impossible to regulate all porn websites out there, and those that miss the net will most probably be the smaller and potentially worse ones. Blocking kids off of mainstream, corporate, easily regulatable platforms (and the absurdly horrible ID-login proposal is practically this too) will lead them to either compromise their digital privacy and security to use these platforms or push them to less controllable, more horrible resources. It'd be way more effective to collaborate with the porn industry and allow adolescents to use safer, regulated options. That'd both leave other user's privacy intact (because everybody's need be compromised when filtering connections), and be orders of magnitude more effective. Horrible content that I don't want to name again and again is better extinguished via attacking the producers and the consumers directly. The fake economy of internet ads needs to be killed. And, above all, good sex ed must become a human right. It should start before adolescence to prepare the kids for adolescence (because the discovery is fearsome otherwise for the kids), and include actual lessons on sexuality and other relations and related concepts after adolescence.
There are 2 rules that are almost universally true on the internet.
Websites collect and store every bit of information they get access to.
Eventually all websites get hacked and their database will be leaked publicly
If porn websites required you to enter ID to access them that means your ID will eventually end up on a torrent website connected to every video you watched and comment you left.
The way I see it, internet censorship and tracking is basically the same situation as antibiotics. The more you use the tools you have the less they become effective. If governments build spyware and use it purely for very serious crime then they work pretty well but as soon as they start using those tools to track everyone all the time so they can catch people for minor crimes or simply so they can control the population then developers start to come together to build tools around the spyware and censorship. If it wasn't for oppressive governments going after journalists and other average people we wouldn't have nearly as many privacy tools we have now. The devs of these tools don't build them to help terrorists and pedos. They build them to save good people living under bad governments. It just happens that the real bad people can also use these tools.
Blocking porn is one of those pointless steps that causes people to move to more resistant platforms and tools and in turn makes government tools useless to deal with real crime.