Playboy about to make a comeback
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2026
429 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
86093 readers
3554 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Its Schumers bill, so it'll be about crushing any opinions that oppose the zionists and related big business.
Secret smut stash in the woods is about to be a thing again.
Looking forward to the Epstein class vetoing this when they realize they can’t watch their preferred type of porn any more
The Epstein class desperately wants this. They can get around it easily, and this way anything bad you say about them can be tied directly to your identity. This will never catch a rich person, it's about persecuting dissenters who threaten their power.
Its not like they could just create a company that collects almost every child's image through the years which can then be tied directly to parents addresses anyway.... /s
I wouldn't be surprised if the Epstein Class uses this to find "product" for their islands.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Most Americans will accept deep surveillance and the arrests that will follow, without complaints. "Nothing To Hide, Nothing To Fear"
They said they take away the liberties of young people - they took away the liberties of all people.
At this point they're the ones creating false premises and the people dont have any real way of challenging that.
What's interesting is that this is far more an example of a social, rather than political, failing of our society. We can all agree that social media is harmful to everyone in many contexts, but can also provide a certain benefit in the sharing of knowledge, information, and ideas. How many of us had something of a queer awakening after being exposed it on social media? I sure as heck fall into that boat.
I once heard it equated to drinking, your taught from your parents what a responsible (or not) way of in taking alcohol is. Same with driving, same with work. In all these things were there is a fine balance of harm and benefit, we are taught be the older generation. But what if there is no older generation to teach us? Well, as is the case with certain indigenous communities in Alaska where no alcohol existed, you find yourself with no one being responsible. For the regulators, the obvious solution is an outright ban. But banning subsistence that are "bad" for you if addictive, never works. Prohibition, and the war on drugs are key examples of that.
We see this and scoff, because we are the ones who, though trial and error, found something approaching that balance. We see the harm is not in the social platforms themselves, but rather in the algorithmic monetization creating great psychological harm for everyone. We see that anyone using the internet is (more or less) a pseudonymous peer, and attempting to classify groups by geography and/or age is quite foolish. We also see the abuse and harm that attempting to do so would cause. Unfortunately, but rather predictably, the politicians are corrupt ass hats in the pocket of big-tech and invariably, make exceedingly stupid laws greatly to the detriment of the people. It is, therefore, of my opinion that the only reasonable solution is to get rid of them in their entirety Ⓐ.
I am not sure I agree with this. Many if not most here grew up, and were raised on social media. We saw the risks, saw the dangers and were warned, and instead of teaching the next generation about those things, we shoved iPads in front of them and said we were too busy to pay attention.
Same thing is happening with AI. A generation learning about it, being involved with it, and instead of recognizing the pit falls, they are offloading their brains to it so they can watch Netflix and order Doordash.
Society is cooked, and the signs have always been there but we ignored them and decided to yolo instead.
I'd turn that vote tally into a six-seven "joke", but that would require more critical thought than what every politician put into drafting and/or voting that law through Congress.
They are all about freedom and small gov until they are in power.
My Democratic house member (who ran unopposed in his last two primaries) voted for the KIDS acts. I am so glad I get to vote for him this year in the general election. I love living in my very healthy and functional democracy.
Situation is shit now, but I really love that people made spaces such as this one - small, and calm, without too much (of course they are) normies looking around. Hell, the best defensive mechanism against normies appears to be "pick your server" question when registering.
And looking forward, internet will pop and transform thanks to such small spaces that will emerge out of nowhere, against the stupid laws and censorship, even if access will be limited it will work as sifting for low-efforders.
I love it. Now it's time to take my meds and go to bed. 👴
Fortunately thanks to VPNs I'm Canadian. I can just keep changing the settings the more and more countries implement dumb laws.
Now I'm sure some politicians have come up with a bright idea of banning VPNs and I'm just looking forward to the drama when that idea is tabled.
Oh they're definitely gonna ban VPNs too.
I think, this is a nice move, but thinking maybe there are other important matters that needs to be addressed first before this
This is why you don't get rid of the filibuster.
While I disagree with the premise of the bill, I only take issue, when it comes to application and enforcement, with sec 103 not explicitly stating what is stated in other sections that the verification method shouldn't be based off of government Id. However, saying that, I think that if it were possible I would be okay with this legislation, but I cannot fathom a way in which you verify someone's age without using government id, considering that the only proofs of age as far as I am concerned is birth certificate and the documents that are based off of it.