|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » Google says no more porn ads. |
| 1-37 of 37 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 06-10-14 05:52pm - 3848 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Google says no more porn ads. LOS ANGELES — A recent e-mail from the Google AdWords Team to advertisers employing its popular service for getting visitors to websites, warns of upcoming changes to the company’s advertising policies that will limit its use by adult content marketers: “Beginning in the coming weeks, we’ll no longer accept ads that promote graphic depictions of sexual acts including, but not limited to, hardcore pornography; graphic sexual acts including sex acts such as masturbation; genital, anal, and oral sexual activity,” the Google e-mail states. “When we make this change, Google will disapprove all ads and sites that are identified as being in violation of our revised policy … We ask that you make any necessary changes to your ads and sites to comply so that your campaigns can continue to run.” Predicted this a year ago first legislation and now advertisers. And you all laughed at me ??  Guess they can afford to now they are so big. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 06-11-14 07:51am - 3847 days | #2 | |
|
AWpress (0)
Active Webmaster  Posts: 118 Registered: Nov 20, '12 Location: The Netherlands |
Oooh, some affiliates aren't gunna like that one. | |
|
||
| 06-11-14 04:09pm - 3847 days | #3 | |
|
LPee23 (0)
Active User  Posts: 399 Registered: Jul 14, '13 Location: USA |
"We ask that you make any necessary changes to your ads and sites to comply so that your campaigns can continue to run." That last line is funny in a cynical way. Translation: please stop advertising porn and remove it from your sites so that you can sill keep spending your money on us. Google really sucks for caving in to pressure from Morality in Media on this one. Is Google done standing up for freedom of expression? Will we never again see a naked CGI Larry Page talking about tentacle porn (see article below). Seriously, please read this article, it is hilarious. http://www.wired.com/2013/05/on-google-island/ Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. | |
|
||
| 06-11-14 05:26pm - 3847 days | #4 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Google does suck for this decision, albeit not as much as Morality in Media, an organization that comes off as so hostile to the 1st Amendment that they would be more honest calling themselves Fascism through Faith. Still, in this day and age, this is no longer surprising from Google, which is less "Don't Be Evil," and more "We're So Big, Ethics Are Whatever We Say They Are." And if you have problem with doing something, even in private, then simply don't do it. Seriously, that's the view of their chairman, Eric Schmidt: "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place." Admittedly, I probably have shared my love of porn with more people than can be considered polite or even necessary, but there are still people best left in the dark about it, regardless of the opinions of Mr. Burns-like executives. Or maybe most normal human beings understand privacy to include the freedom to have personal thoughts, opinions, and creative ideas without subjecting them to the microscope of public opinion. How much liberty do we really have if we must prescreen every single thing we do or think as if it were going to be reviewed by an employer or FBI agent? "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 06-11-14 07:24pm - 3847 days | #5 | |
|
graymane (0)
Suspended  Posts: 1,411 Registered: Feb 20, '10 Location: Virginia |
Sirs, and/or ranking women of AWpress website ...(webmasters) Just wanna say, I've been following your recent posts in our forum with a good deal of interest. Always useful, and certainly something pleasantly different. During the last five years, of which I've been quite active on this forum, some of my fondest memories was having webmasters around. I've certainly missed them. So I guess it goes without saying ....and I trust speaks collectively, that we're really glad to again have webmasters aboard. Edited on Jun 11, 2014, 07:38pm | |
|
||
| 06-12-14 05:47am - 3846 days | #6 | |
|
WeeWillyWinky (0)
Active User  Posts: 243 Registered: Jun 03, '07 Location: Havasu City, AZ USA |
Absolutely. Hi all!  You know what I hate the most about selfish people? It's that they don't think enough about MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!! | |
|
||
| 06-13-14 01:41am - 3845 days | #7 | |
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
Google's just another company that's forgotten what built them up. Their search engine settings have been changed for months now, eliminating the ability to search for completely uncensored results. Fortunately, there are alternatives for anything they offer. Web searches, image searches, maps, shopping... all can be found by other means. Bing Dogpile Webcrawler Yahoo Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. | |
|
||
| 06-13-14 11:45am - 3845 days | #8 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
It's weird how the maturity of a company can be measured as an increase in poor judgement. But hey, look at Microsoft. I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 06-13-14 02:28pm - 3845 days | #9 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Though I'm not sure it would qualify as immature, rather than just the inevitable abuse of power and influence that comes with growth, but Google as a corporation has become quite creepy over the years. There's the issue of using its Street View project to not just photograph roadways but vacuum up information from unsecured networks. Or Google Glass, also raising concerns about privacy (as well as the risk of looking like a time-traveling nerd).  And creepiest of all, the friendly relationship its executives share with the NSA's leadership.  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 06-14-14 09:14pm - 3843 days | #10 | |
|
biker (0)
Active User  Posts: 632 Registered: May 03, '08 Location: milwaukee, wi |
I closed out of Google. If Google feels I'm not moral enough for them, then it is time to part company. Warning Will Robinson | |
|
||
| 06-15-14 07:23am - 3843 days | #11 | |
|
LPee23 (0)
Active User Posts: 399 Registered: Jul 14, '13 Location: USA |
I remember when Steve Jobs said, "Folks who want porn can buy an android phone." I took his advice and did buy an android, and I am very happy with my S4 mini right now. I don't even use porn apps or watch porn on my S4 mini, but it's the principle of it. When you're looking at spending $400 on a smartphone, and iPhones and Androids are both very good, I'd rather spend my money with a company that is committed to openness. Unfortunately, today's post-IPO corporate Google has lost touch with one of it's core defining principles - openness. Their biggest selling point used to be that they would provide you the absolute best search results, gmail, and other services for free, in exchange for some ads that are well targeted to what you may actually want. Now, porn is harder to find with their new algorithms, and their ads can't promote porn even if users want it. Google used to be about a tradeoff of privacy for the best free services and search. Now they're about trading ever more privacy for ever crappier free services. Eventually users will get fed up and leave. Like biker, I'm at that point myself. Never thought I'd say it, but it looks like Bing is my new Google. Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. | |
|
||
| 06-15-14 12:09pm - 3843 days | #12 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
Although I agree with everybody that this is a corporation trying to play the moral card when their business practices are far from moral but is anyone really a loser in this particular decision? Let me explain. I rarely use Google for porn search because 99.9% of all my results are tube and torrent sites. The days where I could enter certain key words and actually get decent links are long gone. It's much better for a porn site to go the route of TBP/PU or similar review sites. I know you'll say there are no other sites similar to TBP/PU and you are correct but there are still some decent porn review sites. Sites might as well save whatever money they were using for U because they might get a lot more traffic and it's great for customers because they can get access to some great deals by using the TBP/PU links. Porn is in deep financial trouble in large part because people can easily find free porn just by Googling for it. Advertising has not helped prevent that so the fact that sites can no longer advertise on Google should not affect their bottom dollar. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 06-15-14 06:51pm - 3843 days | #13 | |
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I find it hilarious that Steve Jobs hated porn while being head of a company whose hardware and software has been used to produce a lot of porn. It's a sort of poetic justice for a guy who may have only hated animal products more (which are probably being gobbled up by those horrible porn peddlers anyway).  Just speaking for myself, the amount of porn I've saved and viewed with Macs alone could have busted a few turtlenecks. But I don't take these corporate philosophies and politics too seriously, which seem to get more superficial the "greater" the cause. Hence the pinkwashing of products that really have nothing to do with "fighting" breast cancer, much less improving health. Or just as worse, the constant corporate calls of "Support the Troops" to get consumers to buy shit from American companies that squirrel away billions in income overseas. (Yes, including Apple, as well as numerous other corporate tax-evaders.) Maybe this is why they ask us to do the supporting, since they're doing everything imaginable to avoid supporting them through paying taxes. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | |
|
||
| 06-16-14 12:03pm - 3842 days | #14 | |
|
biker (0)
Active User Posts: 632 Registered: May 03, '08 Location: milwaukee, wi |
I know my protest doesn't amount to anything, I just feel any censorship is wrong. What will be next? When you choose to censor, there is no boundary. Will other views or ideas be prohibited? When a boulder starts rolling down hill it only speeds up and starts others tumbling with it. Warning Will Robinson | |
|
||
| 06-17-14 09:38am - 3841 days | #15 | |
|
AWpress (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 118 Registered: Nov 20, '12 Location: The Netherlands |
Hey Graymane, cheers for the kind words! To clarify; I'm not one of the ranking ladies, more of the 'sir' variety- but this is a shared account, so anyone could pop on and say 'hi'. | |
|
||
| 06-17-14 10:17pm - 3840 days | #16 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
I have and online business, to look at it from Googles point of view. Its my company and I can do what I want with it, don't like it shop elsewhere. Its a hard call ( no pun intended ). We want to not have censorship, and yet a business has a right to sell what they want to what target audience they want. After all places like Toys R Us, and Bass Proshops, and even Walmart all sell to a target audience. Paypal,and Amazon as well as Ebay have limits on what legal items they will allow. So even if its legal many places will not sell items they could. So it ties in to American is a capitalist country and well Google is taking advantage of this. Personally there should be a porn search engine and advertising company. Maybe someone will catch that and run. But to close, Google has the the right to sell what they want when they want to whom they want, after all porn exists due to that exact set of circumstances. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 06-19-14 08:47am - 3839 days | #17 | |
|
AWpress (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 118 Registered: Nov 20, '12 Location: The Netherlands |
This is basically what TGP and tube affiliate sites are/do (with wildly varying success). | |
|
||
| 06-19-14 07:52pm - 3838 days | #18 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Changing of the Guard ? BARCELONA — The ExoClick ad network is hoping to see increased business as Internet giants Google and Bing change their ad word policies this June. What with the Google’s AdWords porn ad ban announcement and word of Microsoft closing Bing Ad Express by the end of July, ExoClick feels it’s poised to benefit from the changes. The company said that Marketing Dive reported that Microsoft is to close its Bing Ad Express by the end of July. Bing Ad Express was meant to be an automated ad system to help businesses that didn't have time, money, or experience to manage paid search, ExoClick said. The closure is because Bing believes that automating the ad process took away important control from the campaigns that brands and businesses needed. “Unlike Bing and similar automated ad services, the ExoClick ad network offers the option of an additional resource in the form of a dedicated account manager based on eligibility and meeting certain criteria which can be reviewed on our website in our FAQs. The account managers role is to advise clients on how to maximise the impact of their campaigns and help them scale their business," said Richard Cottrell, ExoClick's global sales director. Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 06-30-14 08:33am - 3828 days | #19 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
Google continues by going after anything it deems morally unacceptable in nature. This will include firearms,ammo and related even hunting target shooting, bows, knives. It will include fireworks from now on too. More people are killed in cars and bathrooms then anywhere else in the world. Perhaps next they will ban Car ads and Toilets. I am sure many of you are going to say well sure firearms, and if you choose to think that, well you can blame that same thinking for porn being eliminated. Our first and second amendment rights protect taking away porn shows the control, taking away firearms is about control. Many people ignorantly look at firearms and think ending the use ends violence, no it ends your constitutional right. Stripping porn from the internet is the same thing, accept it goes after our first amendment rights. No one has to like or want firearms, no one has to like or want porn. But you start attacking the right that allow us the choice it will end badly. I saw this happening to porn two years ago and posted it here, people kinda chuckled, I knew it would occur because people were going after our 2nd amendment rights, now they are talking about limiting what people can blog about, and even put on your tube. Freedom is not about, guns, churches,porn, or speech. Its about the right to be free to enjoy them as we choose. We remove one, we allow them all to be removed. That coffee is brewing we better all wake the fuck up and smell it.  Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 06-30-14 09:38am - 3828 days | #20 | |
|
biker (0)
Active User Posts: 632 Registered: May 03, '08 Location: milwaukee, wi |
As I said earlier. There is no boundary once this gets started. They own and operate it, so they are within their rights. I think most people won't even know it is even happening. I certainly haven't heard anything about these actions, outside of here. If the media reports it, it must well back from the front page. It's like joining a porn site without reading terms and conditions and not learning there is a download limit. You discover it when you suddenly reach that limit. It is hard to keep an eye on what is happening around you, when there is so much that requires looking at. Warning Will Robinson | |
|
||
| 06-30-14 06:26pm - 3828 days | #21 | ||
|
RagingBuddhist (0)
Disabled User Posts: 893 Registered: Jan 23, '07 |
Agreed on both accounts. I've stopped using Google and sent them a message telling them why. I don't expect an answer. Sarcasm is a body's natural defense against stupidity. | ||
|
|||
| 07-01-14 01:57am - 3827 days | #22 | |
|
AWpress (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 118 Registered: Nov 20, '12 Location: The Netherlands |
Allow me to play devil's advocate. I don't think there's any infringement here, nor do I expect any real detriment. So google adwords will be porn free, and no longer viable as a marketing option for adult sites. Just like facebook, youtube, television, newspapers, and highway billboards at the moment. Our sites will still be indexed in google, and search engine optimisation will still be a valid method of increasing one's page rank to get more traffic from google. Most likely, google has done this not to appease moralistic puritans, but in the pursuit to aid in the transfer of relevant information. It could well be that, like youtube, they don't want relevant content getting drowned out by high-bidding, less relevant, arguably spammy adult ads. Or to not have adult ads take precedence in keyword 'grey zones'. They almost certainly have taken a paycut in making this move, so it's not for the money. But, yeah, my feeling this is another step in Google's diabolical scheme to offer ads that know so much about you, and your current context, their relevance is real (and appreciated). | |
|
||
| 07-01-14 07:03am - 3827 days | #23 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
It's the standard statement that is heard from almost every person that is pro gun but I think that it's an incorrect one as it implies that the Founding Fathers wanted every American to own a gun when they wrote the Constitution. Let's say for argument sake that it's exactly what they wanted. The weapon of choice in the 1600 to 1700 was a musket rifle. A very nice and efficient weapon but by no means was it an easy weapon to use, reload and fire. A bow and arrow was probably an easier weapon to use and you could shoot a lot more arrows than you could load and fire a musket. Range and damage inflicted was where a musket was superior to bows. I'm Canadian so it's understandable that I have a different view on guns than my US neighbor because most Canadians don't own a gun and those that do tend to keep it at the firing range. A Rifle is more common but again the number is still quite small when compared with the total number of people living in Canada. Enough of my rant on guns. I don't think you can use the argument that Google wanting to remove porn adds is an attack on your First Amendment Rights. It's only one corporation doing this. I agree that it's a huge one but the last corporation to have drawn a line in regards to porn was the technological fight between VHS and Beta. We all know who lost that battle and why they lost. No porn adds on Google does not prevent anyone from joining a porn site. All it does is make it harder for honest porn sites to advertise but it also makes it hard for dishonest tube sites from advertising which might be a good thing for porn. I'm willing to bet that Google will bring porn adds back the day it starts to hurt their pocket book. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 07-01-14 02:09pm - 3827 days | #24 | |
|
Parsnip (0)
Active User Posts: 39 Registered: Oct 29, '13 Location: Atlanta, Georgia |
Mmmmm. That's wild. I somehow doubt the founding fathers, when they framed the amendment about not having an established religion, expected it to be used to protect someone's "right" to set 6 guys onto a girl, beat her senseless, slap, beat, punch her to oblivion, split her orifices apart, rip her insides out, and film it for psychos to masturbate to. Anymore that they expected the amendment about well regulated militias to be used to allow whackjobs to march into their local bar and slap multi-shot assault weapons on the table. All these rights have restrictions, they aren't unlimited. Behave responsibly and they won't be threatened - and if they are you will be defended. Insist on using them to abuse, injure and intimidate others and you'll find you're on your own. Oh - and google aren't doing anything against any part of the constitution. What business they choose to accept is up to them. | |
|
||
| 07-02-14 02:01am - 3826 days | #25 | ||||||
|
AWpress (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 118 Registered: Nov 20, '12 Location: The Netherlands |
I suppose the first thing that strikes me with these founding father's hypotheticals is the relevance of what they intended. I mean, they were slave-owning, tax avoidant, industrialists who sponsored a rebellion to dodge unfair, crippling taxes. Not saints. Their constitution was pretty good, certainly ahead of it's time, and aspirational to many other fledgling nations along the line. But that was centuries ago; the constitution of then wasn't equipped for the problems of now (thus all the extra amendments). I don't think their intentions hold all that much weight.
I don't think provocateurs like that cause all that much harm, nor do their shocking assault rifles. The overwhelming majority of gun related deaths and crimes are caused by handguns. The NRA would have a fit; but the obvious thing to do would be to just get rid of handguns entirely. Want a gun? Go for it; have any full sized rifle or shutgun you want. Enjoy your hunting, target shooting, collecting or whatever. Want to carry it in public? Fuck it, why not- expect some weird looks, though. Good luck surprising anyone, or concealing/disposing of the damned thing.
/rant | ||||||
|
|||||||
| 07-02-14 06:34am - 3826 days | #26 | ||
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
In a way, both porn and gun rights are about people going around shooting off at inappropriate times and places.  (Sorry, it just seems that criticisms of porn and guns frequently degenerate into ad hominem attacks about sexual inadequacy.) Personally, I don't really mind porn (obviously) or guns, but their respective cultures definitely create problems that I do not identify with. To outsiders, I'm sure the porn industry comes off as a depraved, greedy, misogynist business with the moral compass of Alex from A Clockwork Orange. Just read some of the negative comments on that article I linked in the recent thread I started about rosebuds (not the plant, for those who didn't experience the joy of learning what that term means in porn). Likewise, the gun industry, and the culture at large that supports it, appears much the same way to those who aren't enthusiasts, much less gun owners. Just take the open carry movement, and its penchant for making the news every time it stages a "protest," or whatever, at a certain chain and people freak the fuck out when a Target shopper walks into the store with a gun on his hip. (To be fair, the store is named Target--even I had to smile at that.) Open carry is controversial among gun owners, yet obviously has its supporters. And it's there; just like someone as controversial as Max Hardcore is in porn, and has his fans/rubberneckers. Neither of them may be good PR for the rights they are ultimately defending, but that doesn't mean banning them will necessarily do much good either.
So glad you said this, CT. I've lost count of the number of times I've read or heard something in defense of "liberty," only to realize the person had no idea what the fuck that word actually meant.  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | ||
|
|||
| 07-02-14 07:46am - 3826 days | #27 | ||
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
I doubt if citizens or militia could really be armed as well as the state even back then. Militia and minutemen brought their own weapons when then could, but it's not as if any owned a cannon or warship. And the Founding Fathers likely understood the difference and limit of what "arms" practically meant, even if they could never conceive of things as destructive as white phosphorous, depleted uranium, or nuclear bombs. But they also understood the value of having citizens participate in the militia, another part of the same amendment. It's just that the U.S. is about as far away from a citizen's army or Revolutionary War-style militias as possible. (The closest modern day example would be neutral Switzerland, which has mandatory conscription and a large reserve force, who store their personal military weapon at home. The U.S. doesn't allow anything close to that.) Instead we have a rather large standing, all-volunteer force, mostly separate from the rest of the population in terms of economic and education. "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | ||
|
|||
| 07-02-14 12:17pm - 3826 days | #28 | |
|
jberryl69 (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,000 Registered: Nov 27, '10 Location: neverland |
^ Great point Turbo. I didn't particularly like being in the military - pretty mickey mouse at the time. But I've always thought that if you wanted to live here, you should give back with service. Didn't necessarily have to be military per se, but something that gets you involved one way or another. The only reason why not necessarily the military is ppl's beliefs and we'd have a over sized army... especially these days. But I'd vote for mandatory service of some kind in an instance. If it ain't grits, it must be a Yankee. If you're going to lay her head over the pool table and fuck her throat, get your fucking hand off her throat! | |
|
||
| 07-03-14 11:56am - 3825 days | #29 | |
|
Cybertoad (0)
Disabled User Posts: 2,158 Registered: Jan 01, '08 Location: Wash |
You guys would all be pretty surprised ( maybe not ) how far in I am about our Constitutional rights. I like my freedom to do what I feel I need to live my life as a free man. If it means owning a gun, watching porn, getting married if Gay, or running a church. The US Constitution gives us all rights to support what we enjoy in the pursuit of life and happiness. Say if I do not like Catholics, oh well get over its its a Constitutional Right, How about i'm gay and wanting to get married do not like it too bad I have rights to pursue my happiness. I want to own 3000 guns don't like it too bad its my constitutional right. I want to watch porn and jerk off 24/7 you don't like it too bad. I have the right to do so. Don't like what I say or write ? TOO BAD. LOL I also have that Constitutional right. Point is not Porn, Gay Marriage,Gun, Religion, what we we have are our rights and therefore we all must agree? NO.......... the point is whether we hate it or not we must support anothers right to keep and hold their right to their own personal freedoms. The Anti-gun Anti-gay Anti-porn movements are horrible as they will only remove rights and will forever tarnish our freedoms if we allow others to take these away just because they do not like what we believe in. We all know if we really look at it, Gay people and their lives do not affect us unless we let it, Guns and porn the same way. It is the over the top paranoid actions of those whom do not agree that make it far worse then any of these things are. Being Gay does not make you less of a person, owning a gun does not make you a criminal and watching porn does not make you a child molester. Yet we allow others to dictate these freedoms. Its wrong no matter what side you are on to allow these to affected is a travesty of our freedom. Google steps way over the the top on this and I am surprised they didn't include homosexual ads. I mean maybe they are ??? I'm going to be using Bing !! Since 2007 | |
|
||
| 07-03-14 06:46pm - 3825 days | #30 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
^I don't want to attack you but that sentiment is exactly why the US is up shits creek when it comes to gun deaths. We aren't talking about freedom of speech or freedom of religion where often the worst that can happen is that someone's feeling are hurt. We are talking about allowing anyone and I mean anyone to buy weapons that are designed to kill as quickly and as efficiently living things and sadly these living things tend to be other human beings. No ones freedom should include the right to own an assault rifle with large magazine and a large part of the reason is that when you own a weapon and you don't like Catholics, Jews, Blacks, Hispanics blondes, brunettes or girls under the age of 12 than all you have to do is buy bullets walk outside and start shooting at whatever target annoys you. A man walked into a school and shot 20 children under the age of six and you are telling me that it was his freedom to own those guns? You are certainly not going to tell me that he was mentally unstable and he shouldn't have had access to those weapons because nowhere in the constitution does it say that only sane people should have those guns. I'd be willing to bet that mostly mass shootings involved a person that was mentally unstable. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 07-03-14 07:11pm - 3825 days | #31 | |
|
Reveen (0)
Active User Posts: 96 Registered: Apr 06, '09 |
The rights under your constitution are not absolute. The state can enact reasonable laws that curb rights, for example you cannot own a fully automatic machine-gun, you cannot marry your sister, you cannot libel or slander people with impunity, you cannot go into a crowded place and shout fire and cause a panic that kills people. Choosing not to run porn ads doesn't seem like too chilling a curb on speech. Now if it was a ban on porn searches then that would be different but then porn searches on google are largely useless as they usually bring up tube sites rather than actual websites that produce porn...thank the flying spaghetti monster for places like pornusers  | |
|
||
| 07-03-14 07:52pm - 3824 days | #32 | ||
|
turboshaft (0)
Active User Posts: 1,958 Registered: Apr 01, '08 |
Maybe not; you've been pretty outspoken here at PU (the more the merrier, I say). I just wish more understood that this works both ways. For example, I was reading an article the other day about how "patriotic"/flag clothing looks gaudy and, as some liberals like pointing out, technically goes against the Flag Code, though perhaps only in the sense that they think conservatives are wearing it. But the idea that there should even be a Flag Code, much less that it's something that should be enforced, is completely missing the point of what living in a free society means. You'd think one issue Americans could agree on is that it's usually a bad idea having laws telling people how to fucking dress!
Man, that's going to be one big ass, heavily armed gay wedding! Again, like the flag issue above, all shades of the political spectrum seem to confuse "liberty" and "compulsion." Marriage freedom is not forced gay marriages, nor are gun laws meant to be minimal arsenal requirements, or even registering for a draft. (Seriously, we make registering for Selective Service less onerous than renewing a driver's license.) --- And on that hopeful note, have a Happy 4th!  "It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual. Certainly without any choice. That's the way your hardcore Commie works." - Gen. Jack D. Rippper, Dr. Stranglove | ||
|
|||
| 07-05-14 02:07am - 3823 days | #33 | |
|
jd1961 (0)
Active User  Posts: 296 Registered: Jun 07, '07 |
Not long now until the internet is like television, which has been prophesied since the beginning. Constant ads everywhere (but not nasty porno of course) and a government license required to have a website, including completely controlled news and entertainment. | |
|
||
| 07-05-14 09:03am - 3823 days | #34 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
^Let's beginning to analyze what you wrote. I'll use the US for my post. 1-Of course the internet wants to be live TV. Once upon a time there were only 3 channels to chose from and they each shared in the great pie of TV advertising. Than Fox came unto the scene to make it 4 networks and then a few more joined the party. Not long after Fox there appeared this magical thing called cable and that opened up some amazing new territories that network TV could never venture into. All of these things have one thing in common. They all have ads that generate profit for them. Networks have more of them but they are much bigger and by default cost more to operate. 2-If you think the porn made today is les nasty than what they were making a decade ago than you clearly haven't watched any new stuff. I will say that there is a lot less being made now but Tube Sites are responsible for that. 3-You don't need a license to operate a porn site at this moment so your statement is incorrect. It may be that some day you will need one but who knows when or if it will happen. 4-In a sense you are correct that there is controlled news and entertainment but it's certainly not controlled by the government. If it was than Fox news would not exist while the Democrats are in power. The people that control news and entertainment are in fact filthy rich corporations out to do one thing. Make obscene amounts of money. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 07-05-14 12:10pm - 3823 days | #35 | |
|
biker (0)
Active User Posts: 632 Registered: May 03, '08 Location: milwaukee, wi |
The tube sites aren't hurting porn. It is porn forums like Forumophila. People upload porn to storage sites and allow others to upload there stash through the various forums. This includes the works major porn sites as well as full movies. People are getting the complete works of DDF and Wicked Videos for free, downloaded into their own computers. It is illegal, but the sites flourish and if one is closed down, another springs up to take its place. Type porn forum and see what pops up. Warning Will Robinson | |
|
||
| 07-05-14 12:25pm - 3823 days | #36 | |
|
LPee23 (0)
Active User Posts: 399 Registered: Jul 14, '13 Location: USA |
It is both the tubes and the pirate forums that are hurting the industry. Porn sites that track and analyze their users surfing patterns generally seem to report that the average user spends 20 minutes surfing for porn before moving on to other things. Most potential customers fall into this category, and they want streaming video and quick gratification. Then there are the more dedicated surfers for porn. These are the users who surf for hours on end and are more likely to build up large collections. These are the people who are more likely to put in the time to find forums, register, and wait for the downloads. I think both tubes and free forums are poaching customers from paysites. Tubes might be poaching a greater number of customers, but the forums are probably poaching a more dedicated crowd. Better to be pissed on, than to be pissed off. | |
|
||
| 07-08-14 02:59am - 3820 days | #37 | |
|
AWpress (0)
Active Webmaster Posts: 118 Registered: Nov 20, '12 Location: The Netherlands |
Off the record, it's my opinion that tubes, forums, pirates, and the whole bag are just symptoms of the internet. If not them, then someting else. While the aforementioned symptoms have been causing media industries (not just porn) a lot of trouble, I'm not sure we can sensibly qualify it as a 'problem'; unless we want to go ahead an forsake the internet, with which these problems come bundled. So what then? 'What' indeed. The immediate and obvious response has been to seek legislative and judicial solutions, but on the scale we're talking, it's just not practical. Some might argue that it's foolish to use legislation to stifle technological and cultural progress in defense of extant business models, too. Business models is what it comes, to, though. Probably. My guess is that media will change (or is changing), profit models will innoculate themselves against the infinite anonymous replication of data that the internet offers. Information as a service, rampant advertising, microtransactions, crowdfunding; these are all expeditions after that same goal. Advertising driven media has probably done the best, but the race is far from over. Additionally, it's not as much an option for the adult industry (who're incapable of attracting the mainstream advertising market). | |
|
||
| 1-37 of 37 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
