Collective Shout, a small but vocal lobby group, has long called for a mandatory internet filter that would prevent access to adult content for everyone in Australia. Its director, Melinda Tankard Reist, was recently appointed to the stakeholder advisory board for the government’s age assurance technology trial before the under-16s social media ban comes into effect in Australia in December.

    • proton_lynx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Don’t be fooled, that’s not the real reason. Parents that shove iPads in front of their children are not even remotely worried about what their kids are watching online. This is purely about control, has nothing to do with children.

    • lowleekun@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Governments and some religious nutjobs.

      They only pretend to care about children. It is about power and control. Always has been, always will.

  • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Keep the pressure on.

    Collective Shout got them to change their position and they’re a small group. We are legion, as the kids say

    • Booboofinger@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      That’s something we all have to remember. We have to be just as vocal as these idiots or they take over. They are not the majority, they are only the most vocal.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        That’s really what I don’t get. Why make it impossible for people to give you money. That doesn’t seem to be the way capitalism is supposed to operate if something is popular then you should allow it.

      • reactionality@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        18 days ago

        They’re the ones at risk of losing money if they get sued by reintroducing said content. You’re not going to stop using the payment processors because there’s literally no other option. This is performative.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          17 days ago

          Sued for what? They aren’t stopping illegal content from being sold. That, as is implied by the word “illegal”, was already not allowed on these stores. They’re stopping legal, but potentially (not my opinion) objectionable, content from being sold. There’s no legal risk for allowing it.

          • reactionality@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            I’m not saying there is illegal content. Read my comment.

            I’m saying the possibility of there being illegal content only exists if they allow the reintroduction of those titles. They’d need trust in the store moderation, in the lack of bad faith actors, in a lot of things.

            And it would be an absolutely stupid business decision for them.

            I am NOT condoning what they did, nor what they are doing. I am explaining, from their business perspective, why allowing potentially illegal content back on the platform is a non-argument and you cannot convince them otherwise.

            • Cethin@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              I’m saying the possibility of there being illegal content only exists if they allow the reintroduction of those titles.

              Again, no. If there were illegal content before then it’s already breaking the rules. If you’re breaking rules once, why would adding more rules change anything?

              They’d need trust in the store moderation, in the lack of bad faith actors, in a lot of things.

              What? Yeah, the store moderators have to enforce the rules. I don’t know what this has to do with anything. Illegal or just banned, they have to be removed by the moderators. What difference does it make? This doesn’t make any sense. Adding more rules doesn’t magically remove the content. Moderators still have to do it. If they weren’t doing it for illegal content, why would they do it for only banned but legal content?

              The reason they did it is because they were pressured by a weird group who has a lot of influence. It wasn’t because they were worried about illegal content, which is obvious because that’s not the rule they applied. If the rule was “you’re not allowed to sell illegal content” (which is obviously always true) then it’d be fine. Instead they made a rule for not allowing specific types of legal content.

              • reactionality@lemmy.sdf.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                16 days ago

                You’re not great at risk assessment, are you?

                They have a risky move, which in 1/10000 cases leads to an illegal game being paid for through their payment platform.

                And they have a safe move, where this never happens. Literally.

                If the expected risk is positive in case 1, they will opt for case 2.

                You must at least be able to understand this simple logic, right? If not, then I’m afraid this conversation is over because you’re not even remotely trying to understand their logic, and you’re just looking for a reason to be mad. Your irrationality makes me nauseous.

  • Telorand@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Somebody should check their PCs and internet history; after all, name a better duo than Conservatives and Projection.

  • floo@retrolemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Maybe it’s just because I’m so focused on my own issues as a US citizen… But how the hell did some Australian Christofascist group get this powerful? Like, the RIAA and MPAA combined couldn’t get the United States government to make this much movement on “objectionable content” (piracy at the time, and also now, and all of the time between then and now), but even the crypto fascists of yesterday year couldn’t get this much traction. Probably because people like Frank Zappa and Fred Rogers came forth to criticize the ridiculousness and the consequences of such a position and search policies.

    May 1, 1969: Fred Rogers testifies before the Senate Subcommittee on Communications

    And 16 years later:

    Frank Zappa at PMRC Senate Hearing on Rock Lyrics

    • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Probably because they didnt go throught the government, which takes a long time to move on anything, and just put pressure on some profit seeking corporations that just want to get a bother to go away, but which also unfortunately have been put in a position of practical power equal to some types of legislation.

    • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      But how the hell did some Australian Christofascist group get this powerful?

      It’s Australia, we only laugh when China does it, otherwise it must be good if we’re doing it.

      Want to have backdoors to chat apps, done, allow the siezure and forced unlocking of computers and phones at the border, done. Inter refigees in our own offshore concentrarion camps for decades until they suicide and make it illegal to report on, done. Regularly kill our first nations peoples amd have the jailed ? Done. We’re a fucken’ embarrassment!

    • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      They got together enough people to mass email, that is all it took.

      Companies tend to multiply received responses to represent the total number of people who were to lazy to complain, so Visa and MasterCard saw 1,000 emails as 10,000,000 in their risk averse actions.

      Now 4chan is pissed and have started their own mass email and phonecall campaign, so we shall see where this goes…

    • Scrollone@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      In Italy, there’s a debit card circuit called PagoBancomat.

      Italy also has a digital-only payment system called Satispay. Denmark and Finland have MobilePay (which is way better than Satispay). Sweden has Swish.

      Your country may have something similar, look it up. And then you can always pay with PayPal by connecting your bank account directly, with no cards involved (at least in Europe).

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Discover, American Express, Diner’s Club, and the one that still rules them all, Cash. There are probably others, but Visa and Mastercard are the two largest.

        • theneverfox@pawb.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          You can in Japan apparently. They have a system where you can go to convenience store and pay by scanning a code

          You can also sorta use zelle, but the technical integration is not great. It’s a very manual process as it is

          Ultimately, the problem is we let two companies dominate commerce itself. We just need to let the governmet do payment processing, and require compatibility

          • xep@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            Japan also accepts bank transfer for online payments. So you don’t even need to leave your house.

        • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          How hard can you throw?

          Amex gift cards. Cashapp uses Block(Square) for their payment processing, which is easier to use because you can transfer funds to that from your bank.

      • dragontamer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        Discover and Diners Club merged a few years ago btw. Discover also has an alliance with JCB.

        So Discover network is actually really, really big.

      • kungen@feddit.nu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        Diners Club is Discover, and they got bought up by Capital One a couple months ago. So you’ll only really have Amex left.

        • dragontamer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          What’s wrong with Capital One? I feel like Discover/Capital One / Diner’s Club network is a good thing for Discover customers.

          • kungen@feddit.nu
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            17 days ago

            What benefits would Discover customers get from Capital One’s acquisition? Discover acceptance in the US has been almost on-par with Visa/MC for many many years.

          • seralth@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            It’s more visa and MasterCard are cheaper by abusing their duopoly and connections. While amex is the normal costs.

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        There are a lot of places going cashless these days. Heck some of my kids friend went to target and couldn’t buy anything because target didn’t have the staff to run anything but the self checkout, which at this place didn’t accept cash. They had to leave empty-handed.

    • Lyra_Lycan@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      At the cost of a less stable value, you can convert your currency to BTC, store it on a physical wallet like those made by Ledger and self-host BTCPay Server to make receiving money easier (alt cryptocurrency available via integrations). As for spending, that depends entirely on the recipient cooperating and accepting BTC.

      • sleen@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        Unfortunately crypto is already complicated as is. And as the other user said bitcoin isn’t the best choice. Monero would be as close to the overall goal as it is possible.

        Now using monero would be more anonymous than credit/debit cards making it a better option - but not many vendors support it, and cash is just simpler than any other option.

            • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              17 days ago

              Whoah whoah whoah! They need to keep that cash in a wallet, don’t wave it around, look out for pickpockets, don’t carry too much, and a slew of other common sense things that I won’t list now but will mock you for not doing later.

      • Lfrith@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        How is an even more niche process that involves having to go to an exchange to buy crypto then safe guard it and it being a taxable event when buying goods with it in some countries a solution?

        People are wanting a mainstream alternative that the companies that they buy from use, and if the companies don’t care to use it then it doesn’t matter for the average person.

        Even people actually into crypto are less interested in spending it because it exposes their balance if they aren’t using coin mixers or monero which can make them a target. Not to mention most just see it as stock they hope goes to the moon as opposed to going through the cumbersome process of buying for the purpose of spending it like a depreciating asset.

  • MithranArkanere@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Let’s say it like it is: after the world of hundreds of developers is undermined, and the property of thousands of customers is compromised.

  • Whirling_Ashandarei@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    18 days ago

    Good on her parents for putting Tankard in her name since you need at least one to deal with her bullshit. Bad on them for releasing her into the world instead of into a rectum where she belongs.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Yeah there doesn’t seem to be any alternatives in my country other than cash which doesn’t work for online purchases.

      Apparently there is a complicated thing I can do where I have to go to the post office and then I can send money directly to a company. But that’s really inconvenient (it’s like a 30-second walk from my house, I’m not doing that) and I don’t think steam accepts that payment method anyway. In fact I’ve never heard of anyone except that payment method so I don’t really understand why it exists.

  • ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    Feels like we’re going back to the 90s/00s “Christian parents against video games” moral panic era. But this time, they’re being appeased more heavily.

    I despise conservatism. It destroys everything it touches.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      Just as long as they get rid of dungeons and dragons. Everyone knows that’s the real danger in our society.

        • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          It’s amazing how they have a book that tells them to love everybody and somehow they’ve taken that, and turned it into oppress everybody.

          • madcaesar@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            17 days ago

            Ugh… This shit again…

            The fucking Bible is FULL OF FUCKING HATE. Hate for women, hate for blacks, hate for gays, hate for the “other”.

            I’m really sick of people trotting out two lines from that book of fairytales and doing a pikachu face “how could people read this and be evil?!?”

            Easily, because the Bible is filled with vile shit. Because it’s made up bullshit that let’s you argue every side of every point because it’s a amalgam of garbage written by idiots with the occasional line of wisdom sprinkled in.

            • Katana314@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              17 days ago

              Kind of like how we love watching old Tom and Jerry cartoons, but would generally prefer to lightly forget how those cartoons contained frequent racist caricatures towards indians, island natives, black people, etc.

  • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    18 days ago

    What’s even the argument here? Steam already has parental control options, age gates, and content filters… if you don’t want your kids seeing that shit on steam, then, like, don’t let em?

    …meanwhile, let’s just continue shoving blatant gambling down minors’ throats in the form of lootboxes.

    • Lebensmittel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      The argument is control. Religious zealots are all about controlling society and subduing people to follow their rules (that they themselves tend to break all the time)

      • Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        That’s their goal for sure, what I mean is how are they pretending to justify it?

        There’s usually some on-paper benevolent veneer to wrap their hateful bullshit up with.

        For example, they hate trans people, but they don’t campaign on that out loud - they justify that hated under the guise of shit like protecting bathrooms.

        But this is fucking Steam - access to that bathroom is already under lock and key behind an armed guard. They can’t just pull the “think of the children!” card when the children already have a myriad of protections.

        …or maybe they can, considering what just happened. We live in stupid times.

        • stratoscaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          They are quite literally lying about the content of games like GTA V. They pulled the whole “the goal of the game is killing women” schtick

        • Lebensmittel@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          They precisely can and they kinda just did. “Think of the children” is the magic phrase to shut down critical thinking and give you carte blanche to do whatever you want.

          • ApatheticCactus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            Not always. School shootings happen and suddenly crickets on gun control. “Think of the children” only applies to moral outrage, not tangible physical threat prevention. Also applies to school lunches and any other actual tangible thing to ACTUALLY benefit general child welfare.

        • Beero@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          18 days ago

          They want a nanny state to do their parenting for them, cus they are shit parents who spend their time petitioning the government about things they could just fucking unplug.

          • FosterMolasses@leminal.space
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            18 days ago

            Bingo. They’re just projecting their failures as inadequate parents because they didn’t realize how hard child rearing would be after knocking up their high school sweetheart and buying a white picket fence. It’s always the same case.

        • mriswith@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          That’s their goal for sure, what I mean is how are they pretending to justify it?

          The same way they always do: “WONT SOMEBODY THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?!?!?!1111”

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      This group isn’t interested in protecting children they’re just interested in pushing their own beliefs on everybody else. The easiest way they can do that is to pretend that they’re interested in children. Which I’m sure some of them are, but not in the capacity that anyone wants them to be.

      It’s a classic right-wing tactic. Because nobody wants to be against a law that protects children.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      And the reason sexual things had to be filtered was that they are harmful and skew kids’ perception of healthy sexuality.

      Gambling wasn’t considered healthy even where and when marrying a toddler was normal. After all, a traumatized person with unhealthy sexuality does generally understand they are traumatized, a person taught that addiction is normal - not.