> Exposure (regular or casual) to porn at a young age has some long lasting consequences. Survivorship bias. These things don't exist in a vacuum, they shape our culture.
The same could be said for Facebook or vaping or mobile phones in general. New forms of stimulating the brain always have interesting side effects. If we knee-jerk banned this kind of stuff because it’s unknown and might be dangerous, we’d still be living in the dark ages.
I think that the GP comment that kids are smart enough to get porn stands. Kids are social, so even if one kid isn’t technically inclined, some of their friends will be. I recall that access to porn was a bragging point amongst my friend groups in mid 1990s, before Internet porn was even that common.
If you are a parent and you have Internet access you are straight-up naive if you think anything the government can do will “protect” your child from online porn. Just get over it.
> The same could be said for Facebook or vaping or mobile phones in general. New forms of stimulating the brain always have interesting side effects. If we knee-jerk banned this kind of stuff because it’s unknown and might be dangerous, we’d still be living in the dark ages.
Well... the same is said about Facebook and mobile phones (attention economy, media addiction, etc.) and vaping carries long lasting consequences if you use nicotine and or other substances.
We are far past the point of knee-jerk reactions regarding mobile phones and facebook usage.
> I think that the GP comment that kids are smart enough to get porn stands. Kids are social, so even if one kid isn’t technically inclined, some of their friends will be. I recall that access to porn was a bragging point amongst my friend groups in mid 1990s, before Internet porn was even that common.
Which makes it harder to type pornsomething.com into a browser. So not "kids" but "one of them". And his methods might not be the safest/easiest (see my comment about pirate streaming website).
> If you are a parent and you have Internet access you are straight-up naive if you think anything the government can do will “protect” your child from online porn. Just get over it.
You are calling me naive and claiming I believe the government will protect child from porn and that I support the whole thing. All things that are wrong. Then you proceed to tell me to get over something I am not endorsing or promoting.
I’m actually not calling you anything, my statement was a general statement regarding the efficacy of government regulations on Internet speech as a means of “protecting children” which always end up being 100% ineffective and 100% disingenuous. I apologize if it came off as a personal attack; that was not my intent.
The average Joe today can't even type facebook.com in the address bar, let alone anything else. One day Chrome will remove the address bar and few will notice.
The same could be said for Facebook or vaping or mobile phones in general. New forms of stimulating the brain always have interesting side effects. If we knee-jerk banned this kind of stuff because it’s unknown and might be dangerous, we’d still be living in the dark ages.
I think that the GP comment that kids are smart enough to get porn stands. Kids are social, so even if one kid isn’t technically inclined, some of their friends will be. I recall that access to porn was a bragging point amongst my friend groups in mid 1990s, before Internet porn was even that common.
If you are a parent and you have Internet access you are straight-up naive if you think anything the government can do will “protect” your child from online porn. Just get over it.