I’m making the assumption that you’re not deliberately daft enough to conflate the two issues of “a cheeky tug looking at some low resolution grot” and “mass casualty attack planning”, but surely you must see the difference between harmful content and porn, and why measures should be taken (however easy to circumvent) to disrupt terrorism or other large-scale atrocities?
Tom Scott is a brilliant (subjective opinion) YouTuber, and he seems to be the “Simpsons Did It” YouTube equivalent to unique and interesting topics to cover.
I was super surprised to hear him basically say - and I am paraphrasing because I forget the exact video to reference - “I don’t want to meet all my fans, you don’t know me, I’m a YouTuber putting on a polished front to make good videos”, and it was beautifully brutal in how honest he was in keeping that distance between him and his fan base. I think it’s nice to ride the wave of being cool and famous, but there must come a point where nobody’s interested in who you are, they’re just in awe of the channel you embody. That must be super tough - and it’s a tale as old as time in showbiz but for the first time, it seems like the everyman (other genders and identities are available) can end up going through this on their own without the glitzy PR campaign behind them, without easy access to medical staff paid for by big production studios, or without big Hollywood wages to cry in to at the very least.
Geoff Marshall is another fantastic UK YouTuber, someone I imagine I’d quite happily buy a pint and chat bollocks for half hour waiting for a train - but even he’s quite open about having his YouTube channel to address the world, alongside his own social media identities that are completely disconnected from his public-facing life.
I’m not sure if it’s healthy for people to have to go through this, or whether it’s just a necessary evil of wielding influence online.
I see your view and appreciate the time you’ve taken to articulate it well.
My view takes another level of abstraction from it, and ignoring the implementation detail for the moment - the question for me is “what are we trying to protect underage/vulnerable persons from?”
Sex is a natural thing and I’m not arsed either way - and some of the more extreme content (within the legal sense, non-consent and animal porn etc are another ball game) such as exploitative content or covertlyy recorded stuff really need to be addressed as society issues so that the ensuing pornography isn’t such an issue.
That said, the line defining the three (or more) groups is arbritary and different for everyone I guess.
I mean, rule #1 of firearm safety is not to point the loud end at something you don’t want to kill, certainly not a colleague… not sure what they teach on day one of Phaser School but I suspect it’s not too far off!
A colleague of mine at a different office that I went to visit asked me if I wanted tea or coffee. “Surprise me”, I said.
I got earl grey tea, with milk.
I was certainly surprised, and it wasn’t terrible by any means, quite refreshing actually. I did feel like I was violating a handful of international tea-drinking etiquette treaties at the time mind.
No idea. The Doric branch of Scots is something else, it’s wild. Even if two people local to a particular area from thirty or forty miles away are gabbin awa to each other, I can just about follow the thread of the conversation but I couldn’t pick out every single word.