Pixiv Blocks Adult Content, but Only for US and UK Users

&gt; users whose account region is set to the US or UK<p>there seems to be a really simple workaround unless I&#x27;m missing something.<p>By the way if a website asks me for my date &#x2F; year of birth it&#x27;s always 1969 because why the fuck not?<p>specifically <i>1969-12-31</i>

I could see this being really bad for the site. A lot of Japanese illustrators were already treating it as an afterthought compared to X&#x2F;Twitter, and if the new terms actively make Pixiv worse for artists in the rest of the world then its importance could decline even further.

Never forget it&#x27;s about VISA and MasterCard, vote with your wallet.

I don’t get the recent moral fight against adult content. Not just in terms of illustrations or graphical novels as described here, but also other recent developments like identity verification laws for porn, or laws against AI-generated content (like deepfakes). We all have imaginations. People fantasize about their partner, or celebrities, or someone they are interested in. It’s normal. It’s just thought and expression. So what is wrong with people sharing their real (pornographic) or fake (digital) version of all this? On deepfakes or generative content, I can see it being misleading or defamatory perhaps, but if it is explicitly marked as content that is not real, is it really a bad thing or a problem? I feel like it’s just someone’s thoughts but in shareable form. What makes it different from artistic expression or satire, really? Isn’t ALL of this just the same old moralistic outrage?<p>One interesting part of this article is where it mentions the Miller Test, and it links to this page about US laws on obscenity - which to me mostly seem to be violations of constitutional rights on free speech and expression:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;criminal&#x2F;criminal-ceos&#x2F;citizens-guide-us-federal-law-obscenity?ref=404media.co" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;criminal&#x2F;criminal-ceos&#x2F;citizens-guid...</a>

Interesting to see many of the people who cheered this type of thing when people with ideological views that don&#x27;t align with their own got shut out of the financial system now are upset that similar tactics are being used against them or content they like. They were even warned that this type of thing would end up used against them but they were sure we were in a new age where only one way of thinking would be permitted and that way would be their way. Turns out these tools can be weaponized against those who promoted them coming into existence. Doctor Frankenstein would be amused it still happens.

Heh, most commenters here are way off-base IMO, and IMO the real reason is hinted at in the article. Notably, there are categories of adult content that are illegal in the US and UK, but not in Japan. Based on something that very recently happened to someone I know in the UK, I think it is likely that Pixiv was compelled to hand over information on users who were looking at illegal-in-UK stuff. Perhaps Pixiv has gotten tired of doing that.

Does anyone know why companies like VISA and Mastercard try to distance themselves from NSFW websites? Is it because there is a large group of people that try to punish these companies when they engage with these companies? If not, why would they try to give up money they would otherwise make easily?

I&#x27;ve been thinking all my adult life that, eventually, society has _got_ to get more reasonable about the human body but... there doesn&#x27;t seem to be any evidence that we&#x27;re getting anywhere close anytime soon.

Is this the same news outlet that got on civit.ai and stabilities case for being &quot;complicit&quot; in unsavory generated pornography? Odd that there&#x27;s a different slant to this story