• PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Bad research based on subjective opinion? I dont see how anyone would see blockchain in itself as useless. It provides a verification method without the use of a centralized system. Are all peer-to-peer systems useless now? Its not to be used as a tool for everything. It will not fix everything. I’d be more interested in research of what happens when reactionary practices are used. Such as using blockchain just because it’s the hot new trend without thoroughly thinking about the consequences of such actions. blockchain = bad / blockchain = good is not good enough, each implementation needs to be studied independently and answers derived from that. Replace blockchain with AI and it’s the same.

    • Katana314@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 days ago

      It’s a way of verification and trust in a system where no one trusts any central authority, but does trust an algorithm. That seems too specific to ever actually be useful. People will end up relying on services or instructions that make the system digestible and usable for them, but as long as they still rely on those giving the instructions, the same problem arises.

      And when an example case is brought up, it’s always one central authority that is pushing the idea - and could achieve the same more easily and without power waste using a central server.

      • PieMePlenty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        I mean, if one party pushes for use of blockchain, you’d just need to trust that specific system (algorithm, network…) and not explicitly the party pushing for it.

        I also wouldn’t call it power ‘waste’ since it does useful work - confirmation. It may be more inefficient compared to a centralized authority though. There are other ways of doing confirmations than proof-of-work as well, though each have their own drawbacks - just like a centralized system does,

    • mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      I dont see how anyone would see blockchain in itself as useless.

      it’s chewing through tremendous amounts of power and water to improve…? what?

      I have yet to see the upside.

  • djreefa@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    HA! you think the pentagon is in control? You think the people responsible for this debacle are actually following orders? These are all absconders and expats who are doing all this garbage. Pentagon is seemingly powerless to stop them.

  • upto60percentoff@kbin.run
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    201
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    A distributed pseudonymous ledger for use by a centralised authority that will hold sensitive, personal information.

    I think the paper was right.

  • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    Is it Blockchain based though?

    It is a shitty porn passport, I’m Spanish, but I didn’t hear that it was Blockchain based.

    Why? It needs a centrar register not an uncentralized one.

    • TootSweet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      8 days ago

      Yeah, I was just looking through some documentation on it. It says it uses a “digital wallet”. Maybe people are seeing that and thinking that means it’s blockchain-based? I’m not seeing anything more solid claiming there’s any blockchain involved, though. (I’m not 100% certain there isn’t any blockchain involved, though.)

      It’s BS either way. Extra super plus plus BS if it’s blockchain-based. But still BS even if there’s no blockchain involved.

    • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      8 days ago

      A blockchain does not mean decentralized. It means a public ledger where each new item validates the one(s) before it

    • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      65
      ·
      8 days ago

      No. This won’t work any better, either. Keeping anonymous porn off the internet is like trying to prevent kids from fooling around with sex by not telling them about sex.

      Unless you’re removing their genitals, they’re GOING to figure it out. The situation only gets worse with more ignorance and more control.

      • far_university1990@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Children almost infinite free time, creative mind and bored. They will find what they want to find.

        Then tell them to not do X, they gonna put ALL their energy to do X. Cannot stop them, only work with them.

        • BCsven@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 days ago

          True dat. I had a reasonable family safe network, and certain things blocked. My daughter was watching some regular movies on a shady website. Me: how did you access that, and doesn’t that need an IP in the US? Her yep, I wanted to catch up on episodes so I setup a proxy server. Me: blink blink OK. I was too glad she learned proxy server setup on her own, to suggest she not access that site.

    • shneancy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      71
      ·
      8 days ago

      bit of a futile endeavour tbh, if a kid with access to the Internet wants to see porn, they’re going to find porn. And if they don’t have access to the basic sources they’ll probably find a more dodgy, unmoderated, and possibly extreme porn than if their curiosity got sated by pornhub or something

      • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 days ago

        This is the biggest problem; you’re basically funneling kids towards those sources least likely to comply with the law.

        • shneancy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          yup, precisely. This is the same story as trying to ban alcohol or drugs - people will find a way, and that way is going to put them at more risk than if those things were avaliable by legal means and properly regulated

      • mormund@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        8 days ago

        Agreed. Even going back to sharing stuff via Whatsapp or something like that, they are going to evade control for sure. But when will society be ready to just be honest with kids about what exists and teach them how to safely explore that and give them context? I guess we’d rather have dystopian control than that

        • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          8 days ago

          Yeah, I’m not sure why so many adults try so desperately to forget what they were like as kids and teenagers. Rather than stop their biological urges, curb them or direct them towards safe release. Letting them figure it out on their own, and how else can they if you don’t actually teach them, is a recipe for disaster.

          Two of the best ways to reduce teen pregnancy are sex education and easy access to contraceptives.

          • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 days ago

            I’d wager the vast majority of us don’t actually give a shit what other people’s kids do on the internet, but also don’t have the energy to be an outspoken “free the porn” activist.

        • VirtualOdour@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          8 days ago

          And if they start looking in groups like that where you have up communicate with other people then that’s far worse and more dangerous than pornhub

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          When I was in middle school I had a kid who would pay me a dollar per picture to print out porn for him. Of course he got caught and told on me and his mom called my mom and I was just like “no, that’s impossible you put porn filters on the computer.”

          So anyway, the moral of the story is that if you want to raise your kid to be a powerful STEM overlord, and a liar, and an entrepreneur - try to take away their porn.

      • mormund@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        It is also mentioned that the rules could get superseded by EU law requiring identification as well. And with the US doing stupid stuff as well you might run out of VPN locations in the future

        • acastcandream@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          8 days ago

          Yeah unfortunately it has crossed my mind. Good news is groups like Mullvad and Proton are pretty good about spreading their servers across the world under various jurisdictions so the whack a mole game should go on for quite some time, and I don’t think any country is going to make VPNs illegal anytime soon

          • Infynis@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            8 days ago

            I don’t think any country is going to make VPNs illegal anytime soon

            They’ll just make them illegal for anyone other than a corporation

    • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      Once verified, they’ll receive 30 generated “porn credits” with a one-month validity granting them access to adult content. Enthusiasts will be able to request extra credits.

      …I’m sorry, what? Is the government keeping track of how much porn I use?

  • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    Guy who wrote a paper about Blockchain doesn’t know the difference between a “digital wallet” and Blockchain…

    • Madison420@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 days ago

      That’s the one I use for prison stuff right? You know spare key, toothbrush, razor, cellphone the basics so you still got room to spare.

  • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    What about all the games where you can shoot people? Why is that okay for kids, but a little tit here and there will destroy their view of the world?

    Didn’t these things get their starts by sucking on tits? So why hide them now?

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 days ago

      There is this famous spanish porn actor. Nacho vidal, who says that we would have a better world is kids would play around with plastic dildos instead of plastic guns.

      I don’t know the playing with plastic dildos, but it is true how wild is the normalization of giving kids a replica of a human killing instrument to play with.

      • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        well you can’t have fun running around all summer squirting water at your friends from a dildo

        at least, not without getting some truly vile looks from passersby

        also it’s just intrinsically fun to try to shoot each other with harmless little darts that let you know you’ve been hit but not do anything else

        • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          well you can’t have fun running around all summer squirting water at your friends from a dildo

          Speak for your fucking self

          • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            7 days ago

            If some company made a plastic dick that squirts water, kids would be enthralled. They wouldn’t even think it was anything sexual; as far as they’re concerned they’d all just be shooting pee at each other.

    • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      7 days ago

      I love it when people define porn as “just some titties”, and ignore all the violent hardcore shit that’s defining a generation of men who don’t understand sex or women.

      • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        And you think the solution to that is to force me to use a government porn tracking service?

        How about you be responsible for your kids, and I’ll be responsible for mine. I do not care what your kids do on the internet.

        • Firipu@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          7 days ago

          Until your daughter comes home with a boyfriend with a fucked up sense of what sex is and ruins her day/week/month/year/life.

          I’m certainly not pro government tracking anything I do, let alone porn watching, but if I see how my own kids get exposed to it through friends. No matter how much I try to educate them, friends still show them absolute vile stuff…

          • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 days ago

            Well the idea is to raise my kids not to be sexually repressed so they don’t latch on to the first thing which shows them the smallest modicum of sexual attention.

            They are free to make their own mistakes. Hopefully they learn from them. If they don’t then it is what it is. I’m not here to dismantle the western framework of individual liberty for the misguided idea that it will prevent kids from having bad sex.

            • Firipu@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              7 days ago

              Fair enough. I’m raising my kids in a similar fashion. I dislike the sexual repression in the west (from which I unconsciously still suffer). But I’m still worried about other boys :)

      • luciferofastora@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        7 days ago

        Let’s pair it with proper sex ed. Destigmatise sex work, break the taboos, but also teach people what is and isn’t okay or healthy, how arousal works for different sexes and why their dick isn’t God’s gift to womankind.

  • Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    Why would anyone chain their porn?
    Cockchains are not for that. Not really for anything, but not for that too.

  • Nougat@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    8 days ago

    One of the things blockchain could do is become a digital proof of ownership, augmenting or replacing things like property deeds and car titles. We already agree that a written record of ownership of such things is legally binding (even if the writing is stored digitally), but transfer of that ownership to another person is still a very manual process. Imagine an NFT that represents ownership of your house, and when you want to sell your house, you transfer that NFT to someone else’s custody - adding their ownership information to it. It would record the entire chain of ownership, and specific details about the piece of property involved.

    • words_number@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      Without law enforcement, which is centralized anyway, your documented ownership is worthless. So if the state or a similar centralized real life organization, whiches existence people agree on, is needed to grant and enforce that ownership, blockchain is unnecessary. They can instead just store that shit in a database.

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      8 days ago

      And who would the largest nodes on that blockchain be? The banks? Who could say and do whatever they conspired since they command >50% of the computing power and/or value?

      The average person isn’t going to build a fucking blockchain node just to keep the deed to their house.

      “Grandma, please you need to fill your basement with these ASICs or else script kiddies will steal your house”

      • Nougat@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        That’s not how that works.

        NFT is issued determining ownership to a property. Property sells, another NFT is issued, tied to the original one to maintain a chain of ownership. Issuance of a second NFT for a sale to a new owner would depend on authorization by the previous NFT holder. Lienholder information could also be stored, and linked to a mortgage NFT with payment history.

        The “NF” part of that stands for “non-fungible.” As in, once created, cannot be changed.

        • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          8 days ago

          They’re not making a technical argument but a practical one.

          Who ever owns the chain is the ACTUAL owner of the NFTs. Who ever owns the physical hardware is the ACTUAL controller of the chain.

          The problem with NFTs is … they only solve theoretical problems, not problems in the real world, where it ALWAYS takes agreement and cooperation for anything to ACTUALLY function and serve a purpose.

          Blockchains have already proven to be no more secure than a properly designed normal database, and are ALWAYS going to take more electricity, so…they continue to be nothing but a toy and a canary for the gullible tech bro.

          • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            8 days ago

            Not to mention, at scale, big things like cars and houses are sold a ton every single day…

            Having to use all that electricity to mint an NFT every single time, not to mention cases mentioned above like “Oops got it wrong”, yikes…

            Would that cost more electricity than hypothetically shifting all vehicles to electric? Now I’m curious haha.

            • 4am@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              8 days ago

              I mean, you can use other systems besides cryptographic proof-of-work to determine legitimacy of stakeholders of a blockchain. It doesn’t necessarily have to waste power.

              That being said, none of the other alternatives are really viable either. Proof-of-stake? So the “richest” people on the chain control all the money? Sounds like we just reinvented the late-stage-capitalism we already have.

            • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              8 days ago

              Nah, movement is a ton of energy be it gas or electric. Electric vehicles are still the future for the simple fact that they replace something even less economical or long term.

              NFTs replace nothing. Not with an improved version, anyways.

        • What happens if a mistake was made and an NFT is erroneously issued (for example to the wrong person)?

          What happens if the owner dies? How is the NFT transferred then?

          Who checks that the original NFT was issued correctly?

          What about properties that are split? What happens if the split isn’t represented in the NFT correctly (e.g. due to an error)?

          The whole non-fungible part can be a problem, not a solution. It very, very rarely happens that ownership of a property is contested. It happens quite often that a mistake is made during a property transfer/sale that needs to be corrected. How do NFTs deal with this, and are they a solution to a non-issue?

          • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            8 days ago

            What happens if a mistake was made and an NFT is erroneously issued (for example to the wrong person)?

            That person has it now. They mjght volountarily be willing to send it back with another transactions or the courts could force them to do so (as in give fines, request keys, send to prison, or just have the government own and ooerate all the wallet keys and simulate transactions eith blockchain just as the technology used in a very janky way)

            What happens if the owner dies? How is the NFT transferred then?

            Similarily, either the government does all the transactions with ‘your’ keys for you, or you write down the keys in your will and have someone of trust (e.g. a lawyer) do the partitioning/transactions part in your stead.

            Who checks that the original NFT was issued correctly?

            The seller and buyer beforehand, mostly

            What about properties that are split? What happens if the split isn’t represented in the NFT correctly (e.g. due to an error)?

            Rebalance by having everone affected send their portions for redistribution to a trusted entity

            As you’ve said yourself, NFTs seem wholly unsuited for keeping track of general ownership on a large scale. All the problems do have solutions, but they’re either complicated for the owners or it’s someone else controlling people’s keys, defeating the entire point.

          • xthexder@l.sw0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 days ago

            See that’s the thing. Not being able to correct transaction errors is a feature of blockchain. I’d go as far as saying it’s the #1 feature of the majority of crypto that brings in all the scammers.

            Personally I prefer my money being insured and controlled by the government.

    • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 days ago

      It could. It may or may not. I agree decentralization is a good thing, but do governments agree as well? First of all, governments are very resistant to change if that doesn’t play into their interests (real or percieved like this privacy violation). Using a traditional database to keep track of ownership seems cheaper (since they already do it) but most of all simpler. I’m not too familiar with the way blockchain functions so I may be wrong, but say someone wants to sell a car. In the current state of most countries you just draw up a paper or fill out a form, maybe get it notarized and pay taxes. A database seems flexible enough that if your sale didn’t get logged and the buyer got pulled over and questioned, they could provide the contract and clear up any questions about ownership. Or say the ownership was stripped as part of a court order. If it was a database, then changing the records is simple, but with blockchain the court would either have to get you to transfer the ownership volountarily, force you to disclose your keys or have some mechnism of forcing a transaction from the requester account (which as I understand it seems what blockchain is here to stop abd a core part of the specification). Alternatively the government just uses blockchain instead of a database, managing all the keys, wallets and identities (as in they have everyone’s keys and do all the transactions) which is the same level of centralization as a database, but with extra steps.

      Ownership was (and is) a social contract, and a flexible one at that. Things get gifted volountarily, sold, taken away lawfully and inherited in a single jurisdiction by the thousands daily, and not all of these are well documented. Blockchain seems very limited in what it can do flexibility-wise which makes it unsuitable for keeping track of ownership, and that’s not taking into account that either everyone would have to actively use the blockchain for their sales and be familiar with the technology (decentralized) or having all the wallet keys operated by the government (defeating any useful feature of the blockchain for citizens). Adding blockchain into the mix will just complicate the transfer process and centralize it (as in we either do all validation on the blockchain or none), and with the fact that all the transfer history is centralised in the blockchain (despite it being decentralised in storage, it’s still explicitly stored and accessible) it would serve as just another venue of privacy violation and opression.

      Maybe blockchain could be useful for things like, say carbon credits, or similar government-issued ‘currency’, but I don’t see it applicable to validating general ownership on a large scale for the general population, ever. The ‘digital Euro’ proposal, also being blessed by the buzzword Blockchain seems very distopian to me as well. Here, with currency being used I can see how it would be applicable in the real world (instead of heavily unstandardised land deeds, sales contracts and other proofs of ownership you have strictly defined currency units), but this also seems like a gross privacy violation as the government (and maybe anyone) can see where you got your money and where you’re spending it down to the cent.

  • mhague@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    8 days ago

    I wonder how many sites will bother checking for Spanish pornpasses. Seems they’re just playing people and waiting for the inevitable, “Turns out the Internet isn’t respecting our kids, we need to ratchet up the control. We tried to give you a good deal though, right?”

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      That’s the insidious part of all this - the government will set up captive portals which require you to verify yourself to get outside the federal network. It will start with porn, then it will be VPNs, and so on. This is just a very convenient excuse to establish the infrastructure and process framework which will eventually be used to kill the open internet by a million cuts.

    • daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Spanish government is implementing a sort of passport for people to be able to view porn.

      They want that any porn website sited in Spain would ask any visitor for credentials to enter, thus assuring it’s over 18 yo.

      We call it the “pajaporte”.