Recently, the United States has implemented new rules for ID verification on pornographic websites, which has attracted widespread attention. The new rules have already been implemented in some United States states, such as Texas and Arkansas, and other states are also actively advancing. The purpose is clear – to prevent children from being exposed to pornography. However, the new rule has also brought about a lot of controversy, with different voices for and against. Let's talk about this in detail today.
Click on the video to watch it
Loading...
First, let's see what this new rule is all about. According to the latest legal requirements, large sites like Pornhub must now require users to provide proof of identity before visiting. This means that users will need to upload an ID to verify their age to ensure that they are not minors. These rules are already in effect in several states, and in some places even blocking these sites. Hey, it seems that if you want to see content on these websites in the future, you have to prepare your ID card first.
Proponents of the new rule argue that such a measure, like the need to show ID when we buy cigarettes, is designed to protect minors. You see, we all know that teenagers are very curious about pornography, especially on the open platform of the Internet, where they have more access to it. Proponents argue that by requiring ID verification, it can effectively prevent minors from easily seeing the content, thereby protecting their physical and mental health.
However, this policy has also met with a number of opposition. Opponents fear that such a measure could not only violate users' privacy, but could also lead to some more serious problems. Some people say that ID verification can lead to the leakage of personal information, which makes the cybersecurity problem even more serious. Moreover, such verification measures may make it easier for some criminals to obtain this personal information, creating more security risks. Others feel that this is simply shifting the issue, and that minors may find other, less secure channels to access the content.
Some netizens said on social media, "This new regulation is so weird, is it that the privacy of all of us has been violated like this?" Sacrifice everyone's privacy to keep your kids safe? It's so unrealistic! Another netizen commented: "Isn't this causing trouble for online freedom? The Internet used to be an open platform, but now everyone is being monitored! ”
In fact, the argument between supporters and opponents can be said to have their own reasons. Proponents argue that while the new rule may be a bit problematic in terms of privacy protection, it is worth it to protect children's safety. Opponents fear that such a measure could lead to more privacy breaches, cyber risks, and may even restrict freedom of information.
To complicate matters further, the United States legal system is also looking at this issue. The United States Supreme Court is said to have decided that it will hear cases related to age verification, which means that the future of this policy may change. If the Supreme Court decides to overturn these laws, the new rule could be revisited or even repealed. Someone said on the forum, "I hope the Supreme Court will hear this case wisely and not let the protection of children become the price of privacy violations." ”
As this policy progressed, many people began to feel uneasy about the future. Some commentators have mentioned that there may be other alternatives suggested by technologists, such as device-based age verification systems. Such a system may reduce the collection of personal information while protecting children. "It would be great if we could find a solution that protects children without violating privacy," one said. ”
Overall, the implementation of this new rule in the United States has sparked a lot of discussion, both for and against. As the law progresses, there are also expectations and worries about the future. We can see that this issue is not just a problem for the United States, but may also have implications for other countries, especially in discussions about Internet security and privacy protection. The future development deserves our continued attention.