13 downvotes, zero replies. Interesting.

I do not care. I’ve seen and felt personally the effects of Pornography, and I will never back down against it.

To be clear, I do not believe the government should be allowed to censor media, or that the whatever American political party is behind a law.

All I know is that as long as children have access to pornography, I will fight to my dying breath against it.

Why? Simple. I do not want another human being to experience what I have.

So, downvote me all you like.

I wish everyone a pleasant day.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

My setup (it has been destroyed by Gabe)

As someone who has struggled with addiction to lust and pornography from a very young age, I’m disappointed by some of the reactions I’m seeing here.

Prince of Persia looks super cool and is dirt cheap right now. I’ll for sure check it out.

I’m semi-into city building. Thanks for the tip

Sounds interesting! Thanks for the tip

Okay, I’ve seen that games cover a thousand times. What is it about?

Alright then. Good to know. Thanks for the tip.

2, Brotherhood and Revelations are all Ezio trilogy, right? So is it more content or more of the same.

FC4 is getting some rave reviews

Def gonna check it out on steam. (Better deals) Thanks for the confirmation tho. Have a good one

Splinter cell looks super cool, I’m about to buy watch_dogs on steam I’ve got FC3, but 4 looks sick Never heard about for Honor, sounds neat might check it out Really enjoying AC2 right now, might pick up BF

Thanks for the recommendations!

Definitely interested in the Far Cry series, I’ll have a look at 5, thanks!

Until kids learn to bypass Net Nanny by using the Tor network.

I think the system is broken, but my opinion isn’t of much value as I don’t have a solution for the problem. It’s a classic debate question.

I appreciate the comment!

If you’ve ever been a kid with stricter parents, you’ll know that there’s always a way around child-proofing. It’s an unfortunate reality. Additionally, if you’ve ever been in a school, you’ll know that if you add ‘unblocked’ to the end of your Google search, you’ll find exactly what you wanted to find. Restrictions can only go so far. (Sorry, I don’t mean this to sound snarky.)

I believe there is a fine line between censorship and limited availability. For instance, many of the internet’s ‘big brother’ algorithms will recommend suggestive content right off the bat. I think, (and this is my personal opinion) that larger services such as social media sites, search engines, etc. should be held responsible for the content that their platform shows to children. I definitely think that a little checkbox saying “I’m over 18” is a token effort at best.

I’m conflicted on this matter, as I believe strongly in privacy and anonymity and in the open, collaborative nature of the Internet; but, on the other hand, allowing children unfettered access to said Internet has been proven to be a bad idea. So, I’m somewhat undecided on the issue as far as the role of government or the role of service providers.

Parental roles are clear, however. Thanks for your comment ant have a lovely evening.

Precisely! Modernized, relevant internet safety courses! The current systems, at least what I’ve experienced, have really amounted to “don’t talk to strange people in chat rooms” and I…

Oh.

Is there an r/woosh alternative?

Based and kenel oops-pilled

I think everyone can agree that child safety is important. But the fact internet as it stands is not safe for kids is completely undeniable.

As always, however, censorship is not the solution, especially not if it’s headed by government. I’m honestly not sure what the solution is.

Actually, if it would mean that they’d stop asking me for money every time I use it, I could get behind that

It’s nice to meet someone willing to have a real, civilized discussion, even though we have different views. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify what I meant in the first quote. Breaking laws, purely for the sake of breaking laws accomplishes nothing. Breaking laws in order to help someone is another matter, and I agree, is justified (to an extent). I have a lot of respect for the law, and I understand that many people do not share that respect. But I agree that the sole purpose of the law is to codify and mediate justice. And if there is an unjust law, it should be made just. Thanks for discussing with me! I really appreciated your points! Many people treat debates as a competition to be won, but I prefer to see them as opportunities to learn about yourself and others and to be able to think critically!