this post was submitted on 23 Dec 2023
239 points (98.8% liked)

Canada

7218 readers
437 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 91 points 11 months ago (2 children)

These boomers have lost their fucking marbles.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 11 months ago

You have to have marbles first to lose them

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I think most of the government isn’t boomers.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I was born during the baby boom era. I've concluded that "boomer" has long since lost its literal connection to "my" generation. It is now used as a metaphorical disparaging label that means "selfish and clueless because of age."

It's kind of like the trope of technologically clueless grandparents. At this point, the only grandparents who are technologically clueless are those with the same mindsets and experiences as all the GenX and Millenial people who are technologically clueless. And there is certainly no shortage of them.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

And there is certainly no shortage of them.

The problem is that they are the majority in every generation. The majority of people don't understand the distinction between http and https, that PMs on Facebook are readable by Facebook staff, or that there in an entire sector dedicated to collecting and selling personally identifiable information.

It's hard to drum up support for a cause that most people can't even understand.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 61 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If it's legal for women to be topless in public, why would pictures of topless females be in this law?

Our government really is dumb. Plus, it's only going to expose the kids to sketchier and possibly illegal stuff. If big porn players step up and do verifications, there would surely be dozens of sketchy sites popping up left and right to fill the void of providing porn.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (2 children)

If it's legal for women to be topless in public, why would pictures of topless females be in this law?

FWIW, I think the original Ontario law stated topless women can't behave in a sexual manner. I don't know if that has changed or been enforced.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

law stated topless women can't behave in a sexual manner

That law seems rather... open to interpretation.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

To be fair, the bill doesn't really say it's only for images of a sexual manner.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago

But it distracts from our fucked up immigration and housing issues

[–] [email protected] 53 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Ok I don't understand this push to block porn at a country wide level.

Who wants this and why?

I honestly don't see why. Most to the time they tell you follow the money but I can't think how blocking porn helps anyone but VPN providers, and old school porno mag and video publishers.

Maybe this is a fundamentalist puritanical thing? But how is it getting such wide support? Are there that many but hurt virgins in the Senate and House of Commons?

Argh so many questions and this feels so absurd.

[–] [email protected] 73 points 11 months ago (2 children)

I think they want the precident of being able to require id verification to access websites. It's a great spying tool for the government, if they can legitimise it's use. First they go for the porn sites to 'protect children'. Then they've got a foot in the door with the infrastructure in place to expand it to other 'objectionable' sites, and perhaps even further.

Maybe I'm just being paranoid and it's just puritanical BS pushed by out of touch politicians who are trying to appeal to the moral busybodies in society.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

No it's not paranoia if they are actually out to get you.

If they are out to get us it's just baffling to me. The internet was originally designed as a communications tool to survive large parts being damaged in the event of a major disaster/attack.

It got hijacked by people first who used it to share less and scientific information and more for the lack of a better word human information. Then corporations came and wanted to extract value from it some how. So we had the Dotcom bubbles and pop-up ads.

Now I don't have the hindsight now to succinctly explain what happened next but then Facebook became a dominant social media platform. And everyone gave them info about themselves contrary to the previous advice about never using your real name on the internet.

Now we have governments world wide actively trying to police porn a good 50 years after it existed on the internet. 20 years since it was freely and widely available as streaming video? What's the goal trying to tax free porn somehow?

I think the genie is out of the bottle at this point.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago

The conservatives along with the NDP and Bloc are apparently the ones who want this.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

I think its a step towards decentralizing the internet and requiring government backed profiles to access it by having all your online access linked to a profile that is linked to your real world information.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's wild because back in the day they told us don't let anyone know your real name or where you live if you can help it. Now it's let's see your driver's license to verify you before you can look at cat videos...

But how much of this is actually new trying to build a world order and how much is just ignorance in the capabilities of the technology of the members of the Senate and House of Commons

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If someone is incapable of understanding or respecting the capabilities and implementation of a technology, they are unfit to govern it.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's why they have lobbyists...

In theory there are also panels and advisory boards for technical things. Of course, the same monied interests who pay the lobbyists also try and get people into those roles. Heck, I would wager a good chunk of the lobbying is in the form of a non-governmental policy advisory group.

Elected representatives don't need to be experts in everything, but they should be able to get technical advice. Unfortunately this is where much of the lobbying comes in.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

decentralizing the internet and requiring government backed profiles

Requiring a centralized auth is not decentralization.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 42 points 11 months ago (2 children)

First, this is so obviously going to be used against the LGTBQ community. Second it’s dangerous as fuck.

Third, if they actually cared about this they need to actually think about this rights restricting law. You could use browser attestation or APIs and not violate anyone’s rights, but our MPs don’t know shit about technology.

I’m not in favour of this option either, but it’s better giving the government a list of everyone who wants to access Grindr or buy a trans rights book, or read a forum about guns, or whatever other hot button issues the government decides is controversial.

Creating such a list is the most dangerous thing a government could possibly do.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Already implemented in my home state here in the US. I’m glad I am more tech literate and constantly run a VPN (as well as other privacy software) but most people don’t. These laws are so horribly invasive and open dangerous doors.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Just curious: what software besides a VPN?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Little snitch + Firefox + uBlock origin + proton VPN

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Tails on a usb key for OS, Tor browser for everything, all under protection of VPN and spoof the device MAC address between sessions.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (3 children)

You’re dreaming if you think there’s a technological way to enforce access restrictions. You can’t do it with “browser attestation” or “APIs”.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 34 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Looking forward to learning what porn my MPs are watching.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago (1 children)

No no no, only the peasants have their information exposed. Can't have the wealthy at risk, see?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Reminds me of the (sadly defunct) twitter account which tweeted anonymous Wikipedia edits that were made from Canadian Government IP addresses. Someone should create a Mastodon bot as a spiritual successor.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

This comment makes me want this law so bad

[–] [email protected] 28 points 11 months ago

Better headline: "Tech-illiterate wanks suggest having to verify your identity prior to letting you wank"

[–] [email protected] 17 points 11 months ago

Anyone supporting this should be volunteering for test trials.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago (4 children)

Everyone wanting to look at porn needs to send a letter to their MP first, requesting permission.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It would be funny if people just sent a letter to their mp every time they accessed those sites something like:

Dear honorable insert MP name

In advance of bill S-210 I am writing to inform you of my internet usage habits what follows is a list of hyperlinks to videos I have accessed today:

  1. ...

I hope this information helps you in determining my sexual interests to aid in your reelection campaign.

Sincerely xyz ABC of qwerty riding

And in the smallest print capable of your printer ( if you would like to unsubscribe from this mailing list please consider your vote on this matter)

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 11 months ago (4 children)

At this point, "let kids watch porn" is almost worth the hassle as a contrarian rebuke. The US has conservatives flipping out over the barest hint of sexual information reaching... teenagers. Everywhere has conservatives mumbling their way toward spying on adults to stop the apparently unprecedented possibility of children seeing boobs.

A contra-positive "what are you fucking worried about?!" is so much easier to rally than some wishy-washy "yes, but--" nitpicking. Like it's on us to address these people's insane goals. The nature of bad faith is that there is no right answer. They're just picking something vaguely gross to minimize dissent - and to easily slander anyone who speaks up.

So fuck it. I'm not terribly bothered if kids see gross shit on the internet. It doesn't need to be illegal, for sites to keep undesirable content hidden by default or excluded entirely. The US has no laws against being an outright Nazi, but on any site not run by and for Nazis, that shit is not welcome. If logged-out Twitter users are one click from seeing what furry smut peddlers post, apparently that's not the end of the world. Pretty far from the worst thing Twitter's ever done.

I'm short on reasons not to tell people - big whoop, and mind your damn kids.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago

There are far more pressing things to worry about anyways. The moral panic over porn and LGBT+ people is so 20th century.

Go to a nude beach. Realize everyone kinda looks similar. Realize it's not a big deal. Go back to reading your book or talking with friends on the beach. The north American continent is so unhealthy with nudity and sex.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

We're lucky the biggest porn monopoly in the world is based in Canada (much as I loathe monopolies and think the government should break them up)

I'm fairly sure MindGeek will lobby for this not to pass. Corrupt cronyism will get us a win for once.

A broken clock is right twice a day

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Anyone who wants to monitor how everyone else jerks off should automatically be required to have their Internet activity monitored, because they sound like perverts.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 11 months ago

Anything a politician does in relation to their position should be recorded on a bodycam, same as police. You work for the public, being paid with public funds, your actions and decisions should be 100% auditable.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

VPN and torrents will get you anything you want.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

Websites not in the system will get you anything you want

[–] [email protected] 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's like they are trying their hardest to have no chance of winning the next election.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 6 points 11 months ago

I was being mostly sarcastic. I realize its a non-partisan bill. But still, I don't see how this is popular.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

Bro if you want some links, just ask.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 11 months ago

Think of the children. That poor Thirteen yo boy who doesn't have the luxury of Sears catalogs on the coffee table. Or hustler magazines on display in every corner store. He just wants the see a pair of boobies /s

[–] [email protected] 8 points 11 months ago

Do they want a barage of global requests for porn? Because this is how you get a barage of global requests for porn.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Not that that will stop them from doing something completely retarded. It hasn't before and the pieces of human garbage in power will continue to push any regurgitated trash thrown their way by corporate entities so long as it comes with a fat bribe.

Keep in mind these are the same people selling weapons from Canada to every single dictator and authoritarian in the world, with our weapons somehow still landing in enemy hands more than a decade after the initial inquiry into how US soldiers were being killed by Canadian weapons in Iraq and Afghanistan (See russia/afghanistan list of weapons by both sides)

load more comments
view more: next ›