Privacy @lemmy.ml tsugu @slrpnk.net 8mo ago

e621, a furry image forum, will be forced to verify their users identities if this bill passes

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.

48 comments

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

https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence
- Mostly the party of small government.
  
  They just want to keep children safe... from the LGBTs.
  
  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.
oh, no, not the furries! but honestly:

FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE FURRIES AND I DID NOT SPRAK OUT
- I mean, laws like this don't just effect furries. It's a privacy issue for everyone in the state, and everyone who who usesa website based out of the state.
This is not a witch hunt against that site. It's probably the only site residing in arizona that cares and which you visit. They could easily relocate, which they probably do if the bill is passed.
- My bet is that it is a law against porn, and furry porn would be inside that
  
  They just outlawed 99% of the internet?
At this point, I honestly expected it to have been moved to some European country... I mean, what site? Never heard of it.
...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.
- I don't know the site that much, but I know that "harmful to minors" can mean anything.
  
  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.
- How much is a "substantial amount"? There's not thaaat much porn on e621, most of it is marked safe
  Well a lot of it is...
  Well some of it is...
  I'm relatively sure i saw one marked safe once...
- I'm pretty sure that viewing pornography can be harmful to young children.
  
  Not all "minors", but some people forget that the phrase includes both 17 year olds and 4 year olds in some states...
  
  If a 4 year old is exposed to furry porn, I don't think the culprit is the website.
WHY CANT I JUST GOON TO PICS OF KRYSTAL FROM STAR FOX IN PEACE
Why not moving the website on another country/continement ? Or even better federating it
Fuck
I assume there are more issues preventing them from simply relocating to another hosting?
- 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.
The politicians in Arizona

Which ones? The republican minority?
- Hi. That is incorrect. Sorry.
Obligatory "yiff in hell" post
"furry" is like a new terminology for zoophilia?
- Sort of in the same way that "christian" is new terminology for pedophilia.
  
  New?
  
  Well, I mean…
  
  Bad example, brother.
- 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.
  
  Lola bunny, creating an entire generation of furries.
- 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
  
  Zoophiles are generally shunned in the furry communities I know.

48 comments