Pornhub

KiKi III

suicide_circus wrote: »

Excuse my ignorance but when we say "rape videos" are these videos of actual rapes taking place or simulated rape fantasy type stuff?

Both. Also, in many cases it’s difficult to tell the difference and thus feel assured that the people being “raped” are consenting adult actors.

suicide_circus

Good lord

HBC08

I can only speak for myself but i imagine id be in the majority,been on Pornhub a long time,never paid them a cent and never seen an illegal rape video.

Dravokivich

Pintman Paddy Losty wrote: »

The reason the vast majority of people pay for streaming services like Spotify and Netflix is not because they want to pay for things. It's because torrenting is a pain in the hole and a barrier to entry for most users.

Kids still do it. It isn't hard at all. The comparison here isn't Netflix though. It's regarding tube sites. Porn is accessible without those tube sites being used directly. And thats what Kiki's issue was that I was engaging earlier. They added YouTube and Netflix as simple services then decided they didn't want to pursue it any further.

KiKi III

HBC08 wrote: »

I can only speak for myself but i imagine id be in the majority,been on Pornhub a long time,never paid them a cent and never seen an illegal rape video.

How do you feel about them profiting off your usage (through advertising) while hosting that content?

Goodshape

KiKi III wrote: »

How do you feel about them profiting off your usage (through advertising) while hosting that content?

The same why I feel about Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, YouTube, and Google profiting off my usage while inadvertently hosting questionable (and downright illegal at times) content.

That is, I don't feel great about it but acknowledge that there's some messed up people out there and I'm happy enough that none of these services (PornHub included) are putting any of that content anywhere where I might see it by accident.

And I don't think any of them (PornHub included) should have their business singled out and effectively destroyed for not being an extra 10 steps ahead of the curve on tackling this problem.

km991148

HBC08 wrote: »

I can only speak for myself but i imagine id be in the majority,been on Pornhub a long time,never paid them a cent and never seen an illegal rape video.

Maybe, but maybe not.

Not depicting rape, sure - but do you know all the actors were doing it of their own choice? Where is the line? What about using coercive control/intimidation/abuse to make porn? I am not saying that porhub should be shut down, just raising the question that some level of control/auditing is useful because you never really know what goes on behind the camera.

km991148

Goodshape wrote: »

The same why I feel about Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, YouTube, and Google profiting off my usage while inadvertently hosting questionable (and downright illegal at times) content.

Reddit does seem the better of that lot. They at least tried to bring some sanity back by getting rid of a bunch of subs (as far as I am aware, I am sure someone will tell me how naive I am).

The rest are absolute scumbags. Amazon too - they can get to fu(k.

Goodshape

km991148 wrote: »

Reddit does seem the better of that lot. They at least tried to bring some sanity back by getting rid of a bunch of subs (as far as I am aware, I am sure someone will tell me how naive I am).

They took down a lot of the more popular overtly nasty and illegal (or legally questionable) sub-reddits but there's still plenty available for posting unverified images and videos of whatever.

But they have a starting point in people minds of being a discussion forum, so nobody is really grabbing the pitchforks and taking them to task for the bad stuff they also host. Well, not as many people anyway.

PornHub have a starting point of moral outrage for many people who just don't like porn, so any excuse to raise a challenge to the whole site's existence is seized upon.

HBC08

KiKi III wrote: »

How do you feel about them profiting off your usage (through advertising) while hosting that content?

Not arsed as I don't think that's actually happening.

GreeBo

KiKi III wrote: »

Would you say it’s less or more accessible than PornHub?

If you think file sharing is complicated or that kids aren't doing it I'd suggest that you are uninformed.

KiKi III

Goodshape wrote: »

The same why I feel about Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, YouTube, and Google profiting off my usage while inadvertently hosting questionable (and downright illegal at times) content.

That is, I don't feel great about it but acknowledge that there's some messed up people out there and I'm happy enough that none of these services (PornHub included) are putting any of that content anywhere where I might see it by accident.

And I don't think any of them (PornHub included) should have their business singled out and effectively destroyed for not being an extra 10 steps ahead of the curve on tackling this problem.

Ten steps ahead? They did f*ck all until they were shamed into it by the NYT story and MasterCard pulling their services.

Facebook is pretty strict in that sense (Yes, problematic content exists on it, but they have skews of content moderators to tackle it)

I’ll reiterate my view, pay your favourite adult creators directly if you want to watch porn ethically.

Gruffalux

[Deleted User] wrote: »

How far down this rabbit hole are we going?

Are we allowing tech companies to decide what is and isn't illegal...

Are we including posting copyrighted music/images in this drive...

Well one can be sued for using copyright material.

Stone Deaf 4evr

km991148 wrote: »

Maybe, but maybe not.

Not depicting rape, sure - but do you know all the actors were doing it of their own choice? Where is the line? What about using coercive control/intimidation/abuse to make porn? I am not saying that porhub should be shut down, just raising the question that some level of control/auditing is useful because you never really know what goes on behind the camera.

Ah here.
where does one end with this fact checking craic? - This is like the plot of 'the good place', where it turns out that even the best person on the planet goes to hell, because of something like buying organic tomatoes, but it turns out the seed supplier used questionable labour practices.

Feisar

km991148 wrote: »

Maybe, but maybe not.

Not depicting rape, sure - but do you know all the actors were doing it of their own choice? Where is the line? What about using coercive control/intimidation/abuse to make porn? I am not saying that porhub should be shut down, just raising the question that some level of control/auditing is useful because you never really know what goes on behind the camera.

One can say that about a lot of porn though, not just the unregulated stuff. It chews up young women and spits out broken people.

km991148

Goodshape wrote: »

They took down a lot of the more popular overtly nasty and illegal (or legally questionable) sub-reddits but there's still plenty available for posting unverified images and videos of whatever.

But they have a starting point in people minds of being a discussion forum, so nobody is really grabbing the pitchforks and taking them to task for the bad stuff they also host. Well, not as many people anyway.

PornHub have a starting point of moral outrage for many people who just don't like porn, so any excuse to raise a challenge to the whole site's existence is seized upon.

ye thats bs. tbh - I am happy for pornhub to tighten things up and as leader in the industry I think there is some responsibility on them to make the industry better. Stopping abuse etc and whatever else goes on behind the scenes of some producers.
From what I understand tho - this was forced (by payment providers and marketing) on them (ironically?!) and it would be preferable that they were leading the way on their own.

But the sh!t the other companies mentioned (Google/Fb and their different brands) get away with is far worse and damaging to society (and I am not talking just about porn).

GarIT

km991148 wrote: »

ye thats bs. tbh - I am happy for pornhub to tighten things up and as leader in the industry I think there is some responsibility on them to make the industry better. Stopping abuse etc and whatever else goes on behind the scenes of some producers.
From what I understand tho - this was forced (by payment providers and marketing) on them (ironically?!) and it would be preferable that they were leading the way on their own.

But the sh!t the other companies mentioned (Google/Fb and their different brands) get away with is far worse and damaging to society (and I am not talking just about porn).

The people behind the NYT article run fundamentalist Christian organisations. Have campaigned against Porn, sex work, gay marriage and abortion in the past.

I'm in the camp of thinking the outcome is good, but the people pushing for it are bigots with poor intentions.

Dual wheels

Gruffalux wrote: »

Surprised this has not a thread.
Pornhub - the biggest provider of porn on the planet and beloved of many it would seem - has removed 80% of its content. It has gone from 13.5 million videos to about 3 million. All content from unverified users has been removed.

This is supposedly because of an investigation by the New York Times that found it hosted large amounts of rape and abuse content.
But I think it was because Mastercard and Visa stopped allowing their cards to be used on the site. The reason I think this is there have been long and vocal campaigns by people like Laila Micklewait and girls who themselves found their underage and rape videos to have content removed, and almost nothing was done about it. Now that they are hit in the purse strings they suddenly get a conscience.
Classy place to hang out. It's owners have all made hundreds of millions from the cesspit of a site.

I was wondering where my video went

km991148

Stone Deaf 4evr wrote: »

Ah here.
where does one end with this fact checking craic? - This is like the plot of 'the good place', where it turns out that even the best person on the planet goes to hell, because of something like buying organic tomatoes, but it turns out the seed supplier used questionable labour practices.

You might not like the question, but its a valid question and when it comes to the porn industry, I don't think its fair to trivialise it by comparing it to growing tomatoes.

Sure in that case, why don't I just stop paying for food altogether and threaten the checkout staff with a knife and take what I want?

Goodshape

KiKi III wrote: »

Ten steps ahead? They did f*ck all until they were shamed into it by the NYT story and MasterCard pulling their services.

"f*ck all" is bit too relative and subjective. I'd challenge you to spend 10 minutes browsing categories on PornHub, or any of their affiliated sites, and another 10 minutes on any similar porn site which accepts user uploads (which I'm sure are seeing user numbers soar this week) and I think you'll see PornHub aren't doing too badly at all.

KiKi III

Goodshape wrote: »

"f*ck all" is bit too relative and subjective. I'd challenge you to spend 10 minutes browsing categories on PornHub, or any of their affiliated sites, and another 10 minutes on any similar porn site which accepts user uploads (which I'm sure are seeing user numbers soar this week) and I think you'll see PornHub aren't doing too badly at all.

No, thanks.

Edited to add: I don’t think “slightly better at hiding their most disturbing content” is a massive accomplishment.

km991148

GarIT wrote: »

The people behind the NYT article run fundamentalist Christian organisations. Have campaigned against Porn, sex work, gay marriage and abortion in the past.

I'm in the camp of thinking the outcome is good, but the people pushing for it are bigots with poor intentions.

Sorry - I wasn't saying your comment was BS - I meant - that attitude (any excuse to raise a challenge) is BS.

I am not advocating to take away the porn - don't take my porn away!!

Gruffalux

Oh. We are at "the everyone who is really offended by rape and sex trafficking videos being hosted on the 10th biggest site in the world is a frigid pearl-clutching pointy-head who would faint at the sight of a co(k" stage of the argument.

km991148

KiKi III wrote: »

I’ll reiterate my view, pay your favourite adult creators directly if you want to watch porn ethically.

Its actually a good point - I am always of the camp "who the F pays for porn on the internet". But when you look into it, there is a lot of dodgy out there.

GarIT

KiKi III wrote: »

Ten steps ahead? They did f*ck all until they were shamed into it by the NYT story and MasterCard pulling their services.

They already required ID verification to make money even before the NYT article between the article and payments no longer being processed they had started requiring ID to upload anything at all.

Other than hiring more moderators (which they have said they are going to triple) I don't think there is much more they can do.

There are plenty of much worse sites that need to be targeted now. If anything PornHub is now the most ethical free porn site.

km991148

Gruffalux wrote: »

Oh. We are at "the everyone who is really offended by rape and sex trafficking videos being hosted on the 10th biggest site in the world is a frigid pearl-clutching pointy-head who would faint at the sight of a co(k" stage of the argument.

I am sick of this these days - everything seems to be polarised bs.

Few topics can be discussed without extreme comparisons being brought into it.

Gruffalux

GarIT wrote: »

The people behind the NYT article run fundamentalist Christian organisations. Have campaigned against Porn, sex work, gay marriage and abortion in the past.

I'm in the camp of thinking the outcome is good, but the people pushing for it are bigots with poor intentions.

Well ya know...Republicans ended slavery...so evil bastards do good stuff by accident. I'll take it!

GarIT

km991148 wrote: »

Sorry - I wasn't saying your comment was BS - I meant - that attitude (any excuse to raise a challenge) is BS.

I am not advocating to take away the porn - don't take my porn away!!

I didn't think you were I don't think. Some confusion somewhere along the communication line

KiKi III

km991148 wrote: »

Its actually a good point - I am always of the camp "who the F pays for porn on the internet". But when you look into it, there is a lot of dodgy out there.

My ex subscribed to an $11/month exclusive content thing from his favourite porn star. No ads, no underage girls, no one being exploited. No issue with that at all.

km991148

GarIT wrote: »

I didn't think you were I don't think. Some confusion somewhere along the communication line

ye - I mis-read it - I bolded my own comment and thought you did :pac:

remember folks - too much porn makes you blind...