this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2024
210 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

787 readers
15 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

Chat rooms

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Here's a link to the news. https://e621.net/news_updates

Edit: As people in the comments pointed out, this bill targets all websites hosting porn. e621 just happens to be hosted in Arizona, and it therefore affects them directly.

top 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 53 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I have no idea how government regulation of the Internet has become so normalized.

https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 26 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Mostly the party of small government.

They just want to keep children safe... from the LGBTs.

[–] schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 5 months ago (3 children)

From your article:

Despite this, KOSA enjoys bipartisan support, including a July endorsement from President Joe Biden.

The worst laws in the US are usually supported by both parties.

[–] LWD@lemm.ee 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

But in reality, bigots tend to be Republicans.

Is this you?

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ji59@kbin.social 25 points 5 months ago (1 children)

...PUBLISHES OR DISTRIBUTES MATERIAL HARMFUL TO MINORS ON THE INTERNET FROM A WEBSITE THAT CONTAINS A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF MATERIAL HARMFUL TO MINORS...
Since furry porn isn't harmful, they should be ok.

[–] blujan@sopuli.xyz 34 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don't know the site that much, but I know that "harmful to minors" can mean anything.

[–] FilterItOut@thelemmy.club 9 points 5 months ago

Think of the children!

I'll believe they're thinking of the children when they use that phrase to make laws that agree with the environmental groups and governing bodies.

[–] delirious_owl@discuss.online 21 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

oh, no, not the furries! but honestly:

FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE FURRIES AND I DID NOT SPRAK OUT

[–] PoliticallyIncorrect@lemm.ee 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

"furry" is like a new terminology for zoophilia?

[–] jak@sopuli.xyz 65 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not really. It’s people who enjoy art of personified/anthropomorphized animals. Sometimes it’s sexual, sometimes it involves personas and costumes, sometimes it’s just rabbits in bankers’ outfits. It’s viewed as weird by a lot of people because they assume it’s all costumes and sex, but looney tunes technically also counts, so it’s much more widespread than people identifying with it is.

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 29 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Lola bunny, creating an entire generation of furries.

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 25 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Before that it was Disney's Robin Hood.

[–] SharkEatingBreakfast@sopuli.xyz 22 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Furries have been around for a long long looooong time.

Have you seen depictions of the old Egyptian gods? Wild.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.ml 2 points 5 months ago

The medieval monks literally made up an entire subspecies of humans with dog heads which they actually believed to be real!

[–] wahming@monyet.cc 11 points 5 months ago

Oh right, how could I forget.

Rip Disney animators, you did your jobs well

[–] onlinepersona@programming.dev 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Robin Hood is a human, isn't he? Or did the film reveal something in the credits?

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[–] RobotToaster@mander.xyz 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Disney turned him into a fox boy, for reasons.

[–] knightly@pawb.social 2 points 5 months ago

Ooh-de-lolly~

[–] Gabu@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

Also, Lady Marian

[–] thyme@leminal.space 63 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Sort of in the same way that "christian" is new terminology for pedophilia.

[–] maynarkh@feddit.nl 26 points 5 months ago
[–] hydroptic@sopuli.xyz 20 points 5 months ago

Well, I mean…

[–] Gabu@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

Bad example, brother.

[–] satxdude@lemm.ee 20 points 5 months ago (1 children)

There's almost certainly way more zoophiles among the furry population, but most(?) furries aren't attracted to literal animals AFAIK. Or don't act on it. Uh

[–] Takios@feddit.de 29 points 5 months ago

Zoophiles are generally shunned in the furry communities I know.

[–] Gabu@lemmy.ml 11 points 5 months ago

At this point, I honestly expected it to have been moved to some European country... I mean, what site? Never heard of it.

[–] neutron@thelemmy.club 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I assume there are more issues preventing them from simply relocating to another hosting?

[–] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 9 points 5 months ago

I don't think that matters if they have a business nexus presence in that state. Like if (most of) the developer(s) working on it are in the state they could be subject to the law.

[–] Titou@feddit.de 7 points 5 months ago

Why not moving the website on another country/continement ? Or even better federating it

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The politicians in Arizona

Which ones? The republican minority?

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 5 months ago

Hi. That is incorrect. Sorry.