Pornhub Just Purged All Unverified Content From the Platform
www.vice.com
After changing its policies to ban unverified uploaders and Mastercard and Visa's decision to drop the platform entirely, Pornhub has removed millions of videos.

11.1 million (Out of about 14 million) to be more exact. Almost 80% of all their videos.

Isn’t my main porn site personally, but still pretty lame that all that amateur stuff is gone. Looks like it’s heading the way of Tumblr.

Just a reminder that Pornhub is worth nearly 3 billion dollars and easily could've afforded as big of a moderation team as they could've wanted lol.

Edit: Alright, this got dumber than I thought it would, so I'm leaving off with this:

I can't believe I have to say this, but it does not make someone a rapist or a pedophile to suggest that a multibillion dollar company, one responsible for a site where the public can upload things to it, can afford to have a moderation team.

Literally every site that allows public uploads. porn or otherwise, runs the risk of someone uploading something fucked up to it, that's why moderation teams exist in the first place. To find and remove such content.

Yes, it sucks ass that those mods would have to even glance at such things, but Pornhub is not some crazy unique special case here. Mods everywhere have to see fucked up shit before it can be removed to protect others.

Rule-breaking content has to verified that it is, indeed, breaking the rules. That's how moderation works.

I apologize for nothing.

Peace.

    • budoguytenkaichi [he/him,they/them]
      14·
      4 years ago

      I am not "defending rape/CP" for thinking that a multibillion dollar company can afford a moderation team. You're being absolutely ridiculous.

      And once again: I wish.

      • Saint [he/him]
        6·
        4 years ago

        Can afford a moderation team? Yes. Can afford the magical omniscient moderation team that would be required to prevent videos of child porn and revenge porn to be available for anything between hours and forever? No

        • budoguytenkaichi [he/him,they/them]
          11·
          4 years ago

          Fucked up content can theoretically be uploaded to countless places on the internet where the vast majority of it's average content is inoffensive.

          Should literally all of them be purged of everything they've ever had because of that?

          • Saint [he/him]
            4·
            4 years ago

            I'm more interested in how they deal with real child porn than theoretical child porn

        • budoguytenkaichi [he/him,they/them]
          15·
          4 years ago

          You: Millions of innocent people, uploaders and wankers alike, should be collectively punished for the actions of a minority of bad actors when it could have been easily avoided entirely.

            • budoguytenkaichi [he/him,they/them]
              12·
              4 years ago

              You have to at least see that something breaks the rules before you remove it for breaking said rules, that's literally how all moderating works you fucking dumbass.

              • Bread_In_Baltimore [he/him]
                4·
                4 years ago

                If the video IS an underaged girl but there is no way to verify that, they should just keep it up? Is that your solution?

              • Saint [he/him]
                4·
                4 years ago

                Yeah that's his point. It's a shortcoming of the moderation approach that you're advocating for that doesn't exist with the verified user approach that he's advocating for

                • AStonedApe [they/them]
                  7·
                  4 years ago

                  So you would favor this approach for all video/picture uploading sites?

                        • AStonedApe [they/them]
                          4·
                          4 years ago

                          I'm not sure, but I don't see how it's relevant to your argument. Moderating pictures/videos for CP is unethical, so we need to find another way; your proposed solution is only allowing verified users to upload. Is that a strategy you'd push for other sites, or only Pornhub?

                            • AStonedApe [they/them]
                              4·
                              4 years ago

                              So any site that allows uploading of nude pictures/videos, you'd favor this approach? How do we catch and remove pictures/videos of nudes on a site like ChapoChat without employing moderators that may accidentally see CP?

                                • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                  4·
                                  4 years ago

                                  filtering, weeding out porn

                                  Who does this on ChapoChat currently? If it's humans, how is that any different than what OP proposed for Pornhub?

                                    • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                      4·
                                      4 years ago

                                      If anything I'd avocate for expanding this decision to more sites. Clearly allowing anyone to upload to ChapoChat already had some negative repurcussions, so I'll ask again: why should ChapoChat not follow suit and ban un-verified users from uploading pictures/videos?

                                      And I can see how being coerced into moderating CP by capital is worse than volunteering to do so. But why put volunteers in that position anyway if we can just fix the problem by only allowing verified users to upload in the first place?

                                        • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                          3·
                                          4 years ago

                                          We don't allow porn, but how do we get rid of it when it is uploaded?

                                            • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                              3·
                                              4 years ago

                                              Right, and if what needs removing is CP then you've subjected humans to watching CP. Is that a problem? I'm not 100% sure, but it certainly makes me uncomfortable.

                                                • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                                  4·
                                                  4 years ago

                                                  The difference is huge in both scale and use case. This is all a volunteer effort, not a for-profit porn company.

                                                  Profits or not, making human moderators look at CP in order to remove it is abhorrent. Why are we okay with that happening on our site?

                                                  in what context are we even remotely near having cp be a grey area?

                                                  I never said this was the case. Idk where you got that from, tbh.

                                                    • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                                      3·
                                                      4 years ago

                                                      I totally understand why it's easier to determine which porn to remove on here because all porn is to be deleted. But if CP is uploaded to this site, a human will have to see it before it is deleted. Why is that not bad?

                                                    • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                                      4·
                                                      4 years ago

                                                      Why does being smaller prevent us from implementing the same preventative tactic as Pornhub? If anything the fact that a billion dollar corporation is incapable of moderating their picture/video uploads is reason to think that we can't either.

                                        • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                          4·
                                          4 years ago

                                          Are you just doing this for a sake of being a contrarian?

                                          No.

                                          Fuck off

                                          Ok.

                  • Saint [he/him]
                    3·
                    4 years ago

                    Which sites are we taking about that have a problem with publically publishing child porn and revenge porn?

                    • AStonedApe [they/them]
                      2·
                      4 years ago

                      I wasn't talking about any specific sites, I just wondered if you think this strategy would benefit other sites, or only Pornhub?

                      • Saint [he/him]
                        3·
                        4 years ago

                        If there are other sites that have this problem then yes, probably. It's obviously always going to be a trade off- you can distribute illegal porn through the mail too but that doesn't mean we should ban the post.

                        But I think this is veering off into whataboutery. Yes there's a million ways child porn can be distributed and we could argue the cost and benefit of each one. We'd probably disagree about some of them. But just because there exist examples which aren't clear cut doesn't mean pornhub isn't clear cut. You should be able to defend it on its own merits. And (other than wanting a magical omniscient moderation team), budoguy is making no attempt to do so.

                        • AStonedApe [they/them]
                          7·
                          4 years ago

                          Me asking you if this approach would benefit other sites is whatabouttery? Idk, seems like if you think this decision was materially benefitial to children then you'd advocate for it to be expanded to other sites. Is there a reason only Pornhub should do this, or ought we encourage other sites to follow suit?

                          • Saint [he/him]
                            2·
                            4 years ago

                            Did you read the rest of my comment? I think I made it pretty clear that there are some channels of distribution of child porn which I think would be worth the cost of closing and some I wouldn't. Other porn sites with a similar problem to pornhub, for example, I would support going to a verified user model. Whereas I wouldn't support banning email.

                            What's your point exactly? We could probably have a long conversation and reason out exactly where I draw the line, but to what end? Are you willing to defend unverified content on pornhub on its own merits?

                            • AStonedApe [they/them]
                              6·
                              4 years ago

                              Are you willing to defend unverified content on pornhub on its own merits?

                              Until I hear a convincing argument I don't really know what to think. That's why I'm asking you questions and trying to understand the reasoning more.

                              I can't figure out why, if this decision is a good one, it shouldn't apply to YouTube or any other picture/video uploading sites as well.

                              • Saint [he/him]
                                2·
                                4 years ago

                                Okay, how much child porn is shared on YouTube?

                                • AStonedApe [they/them]
                                  5·
                                  4 years ago

                                  Not sure. How much CP is required before we should be concerned?

                                  • Saint [he/him]
                                    4·
                                    4 years ago

                                    Before we should be concerned? Any.

                                    Before they should go to verified users only? I don't know where exactly to draw the line, which is why you're trying to push the argument to that, instead of discussing whether or not pornhub is on the wrong side of that line. It's the same tactic as a libertarian arguing that sex with a 13 year old is fine because you can't justify why the age of consent should be exactly 18 instead of 17 years and 11 months, and it's very transparent.

                                    That's why I called it whataboutery. Pornhub obviously has a much worse problem with rape, child porn and revenge porn than YouTube. It also obviously has a much smaller impact of going to verified only than YouTube. No amount of sophistry is going to make that less obvious to you, me and everyone reading this.