Eh? It’s the exact same law that’s being used, with the exact same problems. The reason it’s not been done yet is because Twitter is not - or was not - a porn site, so it escaped scrutiny. But the sites failing to comply with the Online Safety Act aren’t just deleted from the internet immediately, there’s an investigation first.
As far as I understand (going from what was reported on this in the last couple of days) Grok’s ability to create porn is recent, so that explains that.
I don’t use it, but my impression was that, Grok aside, the content is primarily not porn, which would make it not a porn site, surely.
It is a porn site. Not a site that sometimes people break the rules and post porn to. It is a site that deliberately and intentional hosts pornography.
Fair enough. But it also (I just checked) requires age verification like regular porn sites, so I don’t really get the raising of the treatment of twitter as some kind of double standard.
Do you mean that Twitter itself is not forcing all users to undergo ID verification, like for example Pornhub does?
Because that can be explained by the law not requiring a site which hosts adult content to go to those lengths if such content is not shown to those whose age is not reliably known. If you think the law is being applied unfairly maybe it would be worth being specific about what exact provision of the law is being applied to porn sites and not to twitter.
The OSA was always a shit law, but the fact that it has not forced twitter users to undergo ID verification is not reflective of that. It’s not a problem that the law doesn’t force all sites that host adult content to age-verify all users because those sites can instead just not show the adult content to those unverified users.
But because it’s a bad law, people will validate literally any complaint about it because it aligns with their other opinions.
Eh? It’s the exact same law that’s being used, with the exact same problems. The reason it’s not been done yet is because Twitter is not - or was not - a porn site, so it escaped scrutiny. But the sites failing to comply with the Online Safety Act aren’t just deleted from the internet immediately, there’s an investigation first.
It is a website that hosts a shit ton of porn and even features a tool for creating porn. How is that not a porn site?
As far as I understand (going from what was reported on this in the last couple of days) Grok’s ability to create porn is recent, so that explains that.
I don’t use it, but my impression was that, Grok aside, the content is primarily not porn, which would make it not a porn site, surely.
Twitter has always hosted a considerable amount of porn GROK being deliberately developed into a CSAM machine is just the most recent thing.
To be clear, Twitter (and now X) explicitly permit pornographic content by policy:
https://help.x.com/en/rules-and-policies/adult-content
It is a porn site. Not a site that sometimes people break the rules and post porn to. It is a site that deliberately and intentional hosts pornography.
Fair enough. But it also (I just checked) requires age verification like regular porn sites, so I don’t really get the raising of the treatment of twitter as some kind of double standard.
They ARE NOT being subjected to the same age verification process as regular porn sites. That is the entire thing that we are talking about here.
Do you mean that Twitter itself is not forcing all users to undergo ID verification, like for example Pornhub does?
Because that can be explained by the law not requiring a site which hosts adult content to go to those lengths if such content is not shown to those whose age is not reliably known. If you think the law is being applied unfairly maybe it would be worth being specific about what exact provision of the law is being applied to porn sites and not to twitter.
Congratulations, you just caught up to where the rest of us started this discussion.
Right, so it’s being upset for no good reason.
The OSA was always a shit law, but the fact that it has not forced twitter users to undergo ID verification is not reflective of that. It’s not a problem that the law doesn’t force all sites that host adult content to age-verify all users because those sites can instead just not show the adult content to those unverified users.
But because it’s a bad law, people will validate literally any complaint about it because it aligns with their other opinions.