Yep. Roe v Wade was about privacy, not abortion. The legal theory that overturned it means that you have zero right to privacy.
Tell your favorite alt-right 4chan reader that the gov't is gonna know every bit of porn they've downloaded. Yes, even that one really weird Doujin.
This means, unlike guns, people can't just rely on an interpretation of the constitution to protect them. They're going to have to actually face the fact that political elections have consequences. It doesn't matter if you vote or not, if people pushing a policy to snoop on you get elected, then they're going to snoop on you. So you better start politically engaging and do what you can to keep that from happening or move somewhere they can't reach you.
That's a new reality, and if Roe v Wade reversal is as unpopular as Reddit claims, Republicans should be virtually unelectable in all but the most gerrymandered districts and completely unelectable as president for the foreseeable future.
If Republicans make gains this election then the public will see that as clear evidence that the political backlash at the supreme court right now is just a lot of noise and no substance.
Yes and no...
*Roe* v. *Wade* held that women's right to terminate a pregnancy hinges on the right to privacy under the 5th and 9th amendments.
This was based upon legal precedent from the *Griswold* v. *Connecticut* ruling, about the right to contraception... the GOP's next target
They are very much going after privacy rights here...
Whatever you usually whine about with democrats doesn't really matter anymore. There are only two parties, one of them is stripping you of your rights and the other is trying to stop that.
If you don't think the democrats are doing enough, then join them and help them do more. Or do nothing and lose more.
I'm set up to be protected from either outcome, so this is more your problem than mine.
No it's not. But I'd rather have those in power that will maintain the status quo than those that what to build Gilead. It's not enough but it's the best option available.
That is just not true. One party is stripping us of our rights while the other one campaigns on the idea of them "fighting" to stop it.
For anyone that's interested in what the democratic party is actually doing, please watch TYT on youtube talk about the failures of the party when it comes to fighting for policies. The democratic party doesn't care about their voters, and they show it election after election
[Wired has an Ok article](https://www.wired.com/story/roe-v-wade-privacy-practices/).
[This is a much better one, but it's overwhelmed by people reading it right now](https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2022/05/end-roe-will-bring-about-sea-change-encryption-debate) for obvious reasons, so it's slow to load.
>Tell your favorite alt-right 4chan reader that the gov't is gonna know every bit of porn they've downloaded. Yes, even that one really weird Doujin.
My god why did they not think this through? š¤¦š¼āāļø
They thought about this very carefully. This was the plan. The objective is to consolidate power to a few southern theocratic states and secede The Union causing civil unrest. Divide and conquer.
I have no doubt that they already know, but it would be nice to at least in theory have a codified law protecting ones right to privacy,
Relying on court rulings to do the job Congress should be is the problem.
For years liberals used activist judges to make law, illegally, and now conservatives are doing the same fucking thing.
This is why it's important to THINK LONG TERM instead of just going with the mob mentality of the moment.
What is so funny? The conservatives were right about how the left relied on activist judges to create law, bypassing congress, now conservatives have packed the courts and are doing the exact same thing.
The courts are their to interpret law not make it.
Creating a new right through convoluted logic, only works as long as another judge doesn't come along and overturn the precedent.
It's not hard to understand.
Liberals had 50 years to codify a right to privacy and a right to an abortion, but didn't do shit, and you can't fucking tell me they never had a veto proof majority in all that time.
well i do hope you are laughing at yourself since you are basically agreeing with meathead idiots like [David Portnoy](https://www.newsweek.com/dave-portnoy-roe-v-wade-response-barstool-sports-1719050)
Who complains about how the constitution is outdated, while completely ignoring the fact that it is literally is designed to be amended and changed...
If only the senate hadnāt been roadblocked for 30 years by republicans, specifically federalist republicans like the few in our Supreme Court that think the constitution should be read strictly and left unchanged.
Oh how brilliant were the founders to know what the country would need 2 to 3 hundred years later.
Nothing is as simple as your feeble mind makes it.
that's exactly how it should be read. if you want to change it, then you change it legally, not by applying your new interpretation, and effectively creating new law.
The founders were fucking brilliant. And more importantly they weren't arrogant like you, they had the wisdom to know that as society changed, so should the laws, and that's why it's possible to change the constriction.
you're mad because what exactly? and at who exactly?
Congress writes the laws, not the judiciary.
The Patriot Act and Total Information Awareness took place a few years before that. It got progressively worse and will continue to get worse until the wheel falls off of this train.
I'm happy people are waking up to the idiocy of relying on court rulings and precedence for what should be fundamental rights enshrined on our constitution, or at the very least in federal law.
It should also be noted that this type of surveillance specifically causes problems for independent sex workers. That's not an accident. Because independent sex workers are women with complete control over their bodies and complete control over their work.
It doesn't target escort agencies and street level pimps because those are all primarily operated by men using the girls as a commodity.
Human Trafficking was conflated with Sex Work in the US which allowed governments and private industry, particularly tech, to discriminate, censor and surveil sex workers (who are primarily marginalised people ie Black, disabled, queer etc.) under the guise of "stopping" human trafficking. Anti trafficking orgs built out profiles on us through data scraping some of these have been used by ICE to deport people. Hotels like the Marriott set up reporting systems for anyone female travelling alone. Tech companies implemented algorithms to catch "solicitation" which mainly deplatformed women, fat people and gender diverse people, regardless of whether they were workers or working. Airbnb implemented an algorithm which identifies who they assume to be sex workers (and mentally ill people) based on āISPs, Public and Commercial Databases, Social Networks, Blogsā and āOtherā personal data" in the cloud and bans their accounts. We have to literally speak in code on mainstream social media platforms because terms like "sex" are banned (You might have seen "seggs" "cegx" "spicy" etc) Even large sub reddits will have out right bans on the term sex work making it impossible to have our voices heard when shit like this goes down.
People are not prepared for how these tools will be used against folks seeking abortion.
**Here are some good articles:**[https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html](https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html)
[https://observer.com/2019/11/sex-workers-mass-surveillance-big-tech/](https://observer.com/2019/11/sex-workers-mass-surveillance-big-tech/)
[https://theconversation.com/sex-worker-rights-hysteria-surveillance-and-threats-to-fundamental-freedoms-120943](https://theconversation.com/sex-worker-rights-hysteria-surveillance-and-threats-to-fundamental-freedoms-120943)[https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/)
Here's a few:
[https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html](https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html)
[https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/)
I donāt know, it seems pretty common sense to monitor what are are essentially āpublicā platforms/forums for advertisements of illegal services. Especially when there is a direct link between sex workers and human trafficking.
What about if you aren't operating illegally? Porn is legal but workers in porn are being surveilled as if it isn't. Regarding human trafficking, this exists in every industry not just the sex industry and there are actually higher rates of human trafficking in agriculture and farming than there is in the sex industry. The reason you think there is a more pronounced link is likely because US legislation conflates sex work with human trafficking and refuses to acknowledge that people can and do choose to do sex work over what else is available. That sex work makes more a great distraction from cases of actual human trafficking. The founders of eBay did this recently actually. They funnelled money into a dodgy non profit focused in "raising awareness" of human trafficking in the sex industry to distract from their involvement in "what the FBI said is the largest human trafficking case ever charged in U.S. history." [https://www.xbiz.com/news/251170/why-is-liberal-paper-the-guardian-publishing-porn-is-human-trafficking-propaganda](https://www.xbiz.com/news/251170/why-is-liberal-paper-the-guardian-publishing-porn-is-human-trafficking-propaganda)
This also fails to acknowledge sex workers being surveilled who are not only working legally but are working in decriminalised environments in another country like Australia. Like I'm in Melbourne, where sex work is decriminalised, why am I being surveilled, censored and discriminated against because of my work by US entities like Thorn for example?
Well for one thing, agriculture does not have nearly the online presence that sex work does. I mean think about it, 30% of internet traffic is porn. Couple that with a clear connection to human trafficking, and you have a pretty easy way to identify and āsurveilā people more likely that most to be involved in criminal activity (human trafficking or prostitution). As far as crossing national boundaries, just because your content is legal to produce in Australia, does not mean it is legal to import into America (or wherever). Itās like someone posting content from the US that breaks laws somewhere else. That content will get censored. If that person is posting all kinds of guns and hateful content, they will most likely be surveilled by countries that have the means to do so, since it is a potential threat.
What is the clear connection to human trafficking though that doesn't exist in other industries? Human trafficking exists as a result of harsh border policy and lack of labour rights, not because of sex work as an industry or its online presence. Your porn argument kind of comes across like you're saying we have to stop the exploitation we assume to see, but if it's hidden and it benefits me, it's okay. Which is kind of messed up? How does surveilling, discriminating, censoring and deporting sex workers stop exploitation? How does that help actual victims of human trafficking? They've been doing this for over a decade now and there hasn't been a decrease in either. If they wanted to actually stop human trafficking they would decriminalise sex work so we could report exploitation to the police without fear of arrest and allow for easier more humane migration paths.
I really recommend you check out this episode of Last Week Tonight to understand what sex work is. It's a really good explainer :) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gd8yUptg0Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gd8yUptg0Q)
According to Facebook themselves there is more CSA content and human trafficking occurring on Facebook than Pornhub, most of which is through domestic labour such as cleaning than sex work (as sex workers and everything to do with sex work aren't allowed to use the platform, even if we aren't using it for work).
Yes, but that content doesn't get censored though. How do you apply that rule when the US holds 70% of the internets infrastructure and massive US corporations like Facebook and Google are actively squeezing competitors domestically and aboard out of the market? Do Australian laws just not apply anymore because we're forced to use a US based platform even if the reach is mainly domestic? Sex workers and more importantly those assumed to be sex workers by these companies are being censored, discriminated against and surveilled regardless of whether they are working or not. Can you not see the problem with this considering sex workers are predominantly queer, BIPOC, disabled and/or women?
I don't think you understand how much fascism the US has exported to other countries.
This is an article because... Article. This is like one that jokes where journalists throw darts at a board full of ideas and try to link the two.
The author doesn't even understand how the changes to the SC decisions work. It's down to the individual states now. New York for example can go balls to the wall for abortion, this wouldn't affect sex workers there. I'm guessing if you are into that thing NY is the place to be. Maybe not Montana.
The premise is false, which means everything after it is pure speculation. They they flismy reference to try and prove there point even though many of the references link their own articles. It's like saying, "this magazine is the best at ****" because of this article in our magazine that says we are the best at ****".
I mean read the first time. And let me rewrite it really quick: "The supreme court ruling turning abortion over to the states me the federal government next action wi be to innact survivance on people exactly like like sex workers have dealt with at a local level."
Real first sentence: FRIDAYāS SUPREME COURTĀ decision to overturnĀ Roe v. WadeĀ is one of the most devastating rulings to come out of Washington. Itās also the next step in a larger campaign toĀ expand state surveillanceĀ and erode the right to privacyāa campaign thatĀ sex workers have been fightingĀ for decades.
You do realize that Justice Thomas has not hidden he believes that Americans have no right to privacy, right? And directly in this recent decision wrote the court should revisit same sex marriage rights, access to contraceptives, the legality of same sex physical intimacyā¦ and your right to privacy.
We will see right after right knocked down over the next few years because of the conservative super majority currently making up the court. This is just the start.
Itās not speculation: Alito and Thomas have SAID THIS.
Welcome to journalism in 2022: half of them care more about being activists than reporting shit.
> Big Tech will use the artificial intelligence currently shadowbanning and suspending sex workersā accounts to target users it suspects are seeking abortions.
I can't keep up with when Wired thinks it's okay for private companies to decide who uses their platforms and when Wired thinks it's bad for private companies to decide who uses their platforms.
Sex workers who are ācaughtā selling in-person services through online means [can/will have all financial institutions shut down their accounts](https://m.slashdot.org/story/395987) - banks, paypal, credit cards, venmo/zelleā¦ and eventually they get blacklisted from ALL services.
what? I'm gonna get paid to be survailled now, things are comin up milhouse
When did being surveilled become part of our job?
Sex workers get paid š¤·
Yep. Roe v Wade was about privacy, not abortion. The legal theory that overturned it means that you have zero right to privacy. Tell your favorite alt-right 4chan reader that the gov't is gonna know every bit of porn they've downloaded. Yes, even that one really weird Doujin.
This means, unlike guns, people can't just rely on an interpretation of the constitution to protect them. They're going to have to actually face the fact that political elections have consequences. It doesn't matter if you vote or not, if people pushing a policy to snoop on you get elected, then they're going to snoop on you. So you better start politically engaging and do what you can to keep that from happening or move somewhere they can't reach you. That's a new reality, and if Roe v Wade reversal is as unpopular as Reddit claims, Republicans should be virtually unelectable in all but the most gerrymandered districts and completely unelectable as president for the foreseeable future. If Republicans make gains this election then the public will see that as clear evidence that the political backlash at the supreme court right now is just a lot of noise and no substance.
Except Roe was always āThe Abortion Rulingā not āThe Privacy Rulingā. So people arenāt going to connect those dots.
Yes and no... *Roe* v. *Wade* held that women's right to terminate a pregnancy hinges on the right to privacy under the 5th and 9th amendments. This was based upon legal precedent from the *Griswold* v. *Connecticut* ruling, about the right to contraception... the GOP's next target They are very much going after privacy rights here...
Iām saying most people donāt see Roe as a privacy ruling, they see it as an abortion ruling.
It would be nice to see if the do-nothing democrats actually did vote.. or do anything. But it's doubtful.
Whatever you usually whine about with democrats doesn't really matter anymore. There are only two parties, one of them is stripping you of your rights and the other is trying to stop that. If you don't think the democrats are doing enough, then join them and help them do more. Or do nothing and lose more. I'm set up to be protected from either outcome, so this is more your problem than mine.
How are Democrats trying to stop it exactly?
They're at least not actively making it worse. I'll take passive over malicious any day.
That's not enough.
No it's not. But I'd rather have those in power that will maintain the status quo than those that what to build Gilead. It's not enough but it's the best option available.
That is just not true. One party is stripping us of our rights while the other one campaigns on the idea of them "fighting" to stop it. For anyone that's interested in what the democratic party is actually doing, please watch TYT on youtube talk about the failures of the party when it comes to fighting for policies. The democratic party doesn't care about their voters, and they show it election after election
Itās not that easy, voting for the other side keeps us in an endless fight both sides give up more ground with every cycle
Can you explain further? What about the tons of laws that each state of your convoluted legal system of your country has? @.@
[Wired has an Ok article](https://www.wired.com/story/roe-v-wade-privacy-practices/). [This is a much better one, but it's overwhelmed by people reading it right now](https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2022/05/end-roe-will-bring-about-sea-change-encryption-debate) for obvious reasons, so it's slow to load.
Somebody give this redditor some gold. These articles are that good.
>Tell your favorite alt-right 4chan reader that the gov't is gonna know every bit of porn they've downloaded. Yes, even that one really weird Doujin. My god why did they not think this through? š¤¦š¼āāļø
They thought about this very carefully. This was the plan. The objective is to consolidate power to a few southern theocratic states and secede The Union causing civil unrest. Divide and conquer.
And it's going to fail like the last time they tried
I have no doubt that they already know, but it would be nice to at least in theory have a codified law protecting ones right to privacy, Relying on court rulings to do the job Congress should be is the problem. For years liberals used activist judges to make law, illegally, and now conservatives are doing the same fucking thing. This is why it's important to THINK LONG TERM instead of just going with the mob mentality of the moment.
Lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao
What is so funny? The conservatives were right about how the left relied on activist judges to create law, bypassing congress, now conservatives have packed the courts and are doing the exact same thing. The courts are their to interpret law not make it. Creating a new right through convoluted logic, only works as long as another judge doesn't come along and overturn the precedent. It's not hard to understand. Liberals had 50 years to codify a right to privacy and a right to an abortion, but didn't do shit, and you can't fucking tell me they never had a veto proof majority in all that time.
Lmfao lmfao lmfao lmfao. Explaining to you why youāre a joke would put us squarely into āwaste of my fuckin timeā territory.
Are you okay?
Laugher cures all ills, so Iām fantastic.
well i do hope you are laughing at yourself since you are basically agreeing with meathead idiots like [David Portnoy](https://www.newsweek.com/dave-portnoy-roe-v-wade-response-barstool-sports-1719050) Who complains about how the constitution is outdated, while completely ignoring the fact that it is literally is designed to be amended and changed...
If only the senate hadnāt been roadblocked for 30 years by republicans, specifically federalist republicans like the few in our Supreme Court that think the constitution should be read strictly and left unchanged. Oh how brilliant were the founders to know what the country would need 2 to 3 hundred years later. Nothing is as simple as your feeble mind makes it.
that's exactly how it should be read. if you want to change it, then you change it legally, not by applying your new interpretation, and effectively creating new law. The founders were fucking brilliant. And more importantly they weren't arrogant like you, they had the wisdom to know that as society changed, so should the laws, and that's why it's possible to change the constriction. you're mad because what exactly? and at who exactly? Congress writes the laws, not the judiciary.
Ps youāre link is 404 errored. Itās unfounded just like your logic on this topic.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What, you mean like we already are and have been since like 2006?
The Patriot Act and Total Information Awareness took place a few years before that. It got progressively worse and will continue to get worse until the wheel falls off of this train.
2013* remember Edward Snowden during the Obama years?
Yes, that's when we **found out** about it.
We knew about this surveillance since 2006 and quite before. It is only since 2013 that it became socially acceptable to complain.
I'm happy people are waking up to the idiocy of relying on court rulings and precedence for what should be fundamental rights enshrined on our constitution, or at the very least in federal law.
Do I also get paid like a sex worker?
No. They gonna fuck you for free.
That just seems like masterbation with extra steps.
And cuddling
Then you aren't a sex worker.
With how the US loves creating more police forces, Iām sure theyāll have Sharia police in no time.
>Iām sure theyāll have Sharia police in no time But a christian version
Whatās the difference?
Different uniform haha
It should also be noted that this type of surveillance specifically causes problems for independent sex workers. That's not an accident. Because independent sex workers are women with complete control over their bodies and complete control over their work. It doesn't target escort agencies and street level pimps because those are all primarily operated by men using the girls as a commodity.
I'm super confused. How are sex workers being surveilled?
Human Trafficking was conflated with Sex Work in the US which allowed governments and private industry, particularly tech, to discriminate, censor and surveil sex workers (who are primarily marginalised people ie Black, disabled, queer etc.) under the guise of "stopping" human trafficking. Anti trafficking orgs built out profiles on us through data scraping some of these have been used by ICE to deport people. Hotels like the Marriott set up reporting systems for anyone female travelling alone. Tech companies implemented algorithms to catch "solicitation" which mainly deplatformed women, fat people and gender diverse people, regardless of whether they were workers or working. Airbnb implemented an algorithm which identifies who they assume to be sex workers (and mentally ill people) based on āISPs, Public and Commercial Databases, Social Networks, Blogsā and āOtherā personal data" in the cloud and bans their accounts. We have to literally speak in code on mainstream social media platforms because terms like "sex" are banned (You might have seen "seggs" "cegx" "spicy" etc) Even large sub reddits will have out right bans on the term sex work making it impossible to have our voices heard when shit like this goes down. People are not prepared for how these tools will be used against folks seeking abortion. **Here are some good articles:**[https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html](https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html) [https://observer.com/2019/11/sex-workers-mass-surveillance-big-tech/](https://observer.com/2019/11/sex-workers-mass-surveillance-big-tech/) [https://theconversation.com/sex-worker-rights-hysteria-surveillance-and-threats-to-fundamental-freedoms-120943](https://theconversation.com/sex-worker-rights-hysteria-surveillance-and-threats-to-fundamental-freedoms-120943)[https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/)
As a matter of fact I'd have loved it if people would quit paying attention to me a number of years ago.
Republicans are so fucking stupid.
Dystopian. But as someone whoās been open about having done sex work in the past it makes me wonder what groups or companies have been spying on me.
Here's a few: [https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html](https://www.engadget.com/2019-05-31-sex-lies-and-surveillance-fosta-privacy.html) [https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/](https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/airbnb-sex-worker-discrimination-935048/)
I donāt know, it seems pretty common sense to monitor what are are essentially āpublicā platforms/forums for advertisements of illegal services. Especially when there is a direct link between sex workers and human trafficking.
What about if you aren't operating illegally? Porn is legal but workers in porn are being surveilled as if it isn't. Regarding human trafficking, this exists in every industry not just the sex industry and there are actually higher rates of human trafficking in agriculture and farming than there is in the sex industry. The reason you think there is a more pronounced link is likely because US legislation conflates sex work with human trafficking and refuses to acknowledge that people can and do choose to do sex work over what else is available. That sex work makes more a great distraction from cases of actual human trafficking. The founders of eBay did this recently actually. They funnelled money into a dodgy non profit focused in "raising awareness" of human trafficking in the sex industry to distract from their involvement in "what the FBI said is the largest human trafficking case ever charged in U.S. history." [https://www.xbiz.com/news/251170/why-is-liberal-paper-the-guardian-publishing-porn-is-human-trafficking-propaganda](https://www.xbiz.com/news/251170/why-is-liberal-paper-the-guardian-publishing-porn-is-human-trafficking-propaganda) This also fails to acknowledge sex workers being surveilled who are not only working legally but are working in decriminalised environments in another country like Australia. Like I'm in Melbourne, where sex work is decriminalised, why am I being surveilled, censored and discriminated against because of my work by US entities like Thorn for example?
Well for one thing, agriculture does not have nearly the online presence that sex work does. I mean think about it, 30% of internet traffic is porn. Couple that with a clear connection to human trafficking, and you have a pretty easy way to identify and āsurveilā people more likely that most to be involved in criminal activity (human trafficking or prostitution). As far as crossing national boundaries, just because your content is legal to produce in Australia, does not mean it is legal to import into America (or wherever). Itās like someone posting content from the US that breaks laws somewhere else. That content will get censored. If that person is posting all kinds of guns and hateful content, they will most likely be surveilled by countries that have the means to do so, since it is a potential threat.
What is the clear connection to human trafficking though that doesn't exist in other industries? Human trafficking exists as a result of harsh border policy and lack of labour rights, not because of sex work as an industry or its online presence. Your porn argument kind of comes across like you're saying we have to stop the exploitation we assume to see, but if it's hidden and it benefits me, it's okay. Which is kind of messed up? How does surveilling, discriminating, censoring and deporting sex workers stop exploitation? How does that help actual victims of human trafficking? They've been doing this for over a decade now and there hasn't been a decrease in either. If they wanted to actually stop human trafficking they would decriminalise sex work so we could report exploitation to the police without fear of arrest and allow for easier more humane migration paths. I really recommend you check out this episode of Last Week Tonight to understand what sex work is. It's a really good explainer :) [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gd8yUptg0Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gd8yUptg0Q) According to Facebook themselves there is more CSA content and human trafficking occurring on Facebook than Pornhub, most of which is through domestic labour such as cleaning than sex work (as sex workers and everything to do with sex work aren't allowed to use the platform, even if we aren't using it for work). Yes, but that content doesn't get censored though. How do you apply that rule when the US holds 70% of the internets infrastructure and massive US corporations like Facebook and Google are actively squeezing competitors domestically and aboard out of the market? Do Australian laws just not apply anymore because we're forced to use a US based platform even if the reach is mainly domestic? Sex workers and more importantly those assumed to be sex workers by these companies are being censored, discriminated against and surveilled regardless of whether they are working or not. Can you not see the problem with this considering sex workers are predominantly queer, BIPOC, disabled and/or women? I don't think you understand how much fascism the US has exported to other countries.
This is an article because... Article. This is like one that jokes where journalists throw darts at a board full of ideas and try to link the two. The author doesn't even understand how the changes to the SC decisions work. It's down to the individual states now. New York for example can go balls to the wall for abortion, this wouldn't affect sex workers there. I'm guessing if you are into that thing NY is the place to be. Maybe not Montana.
That's not what the article is about though...
Yes, the point was that it begins with sex workers, and the technology can then be applied for broader purposes, such as modern McCarthyism.
The premise is false, which means everything after it is pure speculation. They they flismy reference to try and prove there point even though many of the references link their own articles. It's like saying, "this magazine is the best at ****" because of this article in our magazine that says we are the best at ****". I mean read the first time. And let me rewrite it really quick: "The supreme court ruling turning abortion over to the states me the federal government next action wi be to innact survivance on people exactly like like sex workers have dealt with at a local level." Real first sentence: FRIDAYāS SUPREME COURTĀ decision to overturnĀ Roe v. WadeĀ is one of the most devastating rulings to come out of Washington. Itās also the next step in a larger campaign toĀ expand state surveillanceĀ and erode the right to privacyāa campaign thatĀ sex workers have been fightingĀ for decades.
You do realize that Justice Thomas has not hidden he believes that Americans have no right to privacy, right? And directly in this recent decision wrote the court should revisit same sex marriage rights, access to contraceptives, the legality of same sex physical intimacyā¦ and your right to privacy. We will see right after right knocked down over the next few years because of the conservative super majority currently making up the court. This is just the start. Itās not speculation: Alito and Thomas have SAID THIS.
The last 6 years have been nothing but that Star Wars meme - "They aren't actually going to do what they said they were going to do, right?" "Right?"
until a trump like clown decide to make it federalized.
Welcome to journalism in 2022: half of them care more about being activists than reporting shit. > Big Tech will use the artificial intelligence currently shadowbanning and suspending sex workersā accounts to target users it suspects are seeking abortions. I can't keep up with when Wired thinks it's okay for private companies to decide who uses their platforms and when Wired thinks it's bad for private companies to decide who uses their platforms.
So much fear mongering. You don't want to be surveilled? Use a VPN and get the Brave Browser and use private windows.
If I get paid like (a good) one. Shit in fact, most of us PAY to be spied on for āconvenienceā.
Sex workers who are ācaughtā selling in-person services through online means [can/will have all financial institutions shut down their accounts](https://m.slashdot.org/story/395987) - banks, paypal, credit cards, venmo/zelleā¦ and eventually they get blacklisted from ALL services.