GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Business Workaround for Age Verification: Geo Blur Images – WordPress Plugin (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1385245)

teg0 07-31-2025 08:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marshal (Post 23388038)
Where did you get this info from? And who you are referring to?



Considered compliant by who?

Please provide more info. It would be helpful for a better understanding of the whole AVS thing.


Just according to clients of mine who have sought legal advice. Their lawyer outline what they needed and I coded it for them. The whole thing is a mess though and ever-changing. What we need is age verification as a feature on devices built into the OS. Then if someone loads your site the browser lets you know, and then you can just show them a message that it's required. If it was just the adult industry I wouldn't hold my breath, but sports gambling sites need that feature too.

cerulean 07-31-2025 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by teg0 (Post 23388425)
Just according to clients of mine who have sought legal advice. Their lawyer outline what they needed and I coded it for them. The whole thing is a mess though and ever-changing. What we need is age verification as a feature on devices built into the OS. Then if someone loads your site the browser lets you know, and then you can just show them a message that it's required. If it was just the adult industry I wouldn't hold my breath, but sports gambling sites need that feature too.

According to a recent webinar on age verification, gambling sites need to implement KYC (which has a higher litmus test than age verification,) and they also do not need to challenge anyone until they attempt to gamble. The laws are different. Simply watching gambling is not part of the requirement, so I don't think there's going to be any cross-connection between these two industries. My understanding is whether you are accepting funds to show adult content or not (i.e., tour) you still need to age verify against your risk assessment.

I don't think CSS blurring is very risk averse, and I won't personally suggest it for clients. I'm working on a WordPress plugin similar to this one, but it will actually batch transcode images to be blurred. I also include this as part of my custom CMS/transcoder products, which is an extra step to blur content.

Marshal 08-03-2025 04:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cerulean (Post 23388466)
I don't think CSS blurring is very risk averse, and I won't personally suggest it for clients. I'm working on a WordPress plugin similar to this one, but it will actually batch transcode images to be blurred. I also include this as part of my custom CMS/transcoder products, which is an extra step to blur content.

You can use BlurHash and generate hash for each image, save it in the database and show it instead of each image.

pornmasta 08-03-2025 07:24 AM

I was also thinking: you could XOr the pictures (or just the (data) body of the pictures) with a key, and there is certainly a way to xor back the original picture with a php script once the user is identified, but having a blurred and an unblurred picture is likely better for se traffic.

cerulean 08-03-2025 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marshal (Post 23389040)
You can use BlurHash and generate hash for each image, save it in the database and show it instead of each image.

Thank you for the information! BlurHash looks interesting, but I think since that solution is designed to send both the image and the blurhash in one payload for lazy loading purposes, it probably wouldn't work to prevent legal concerns.

I may look at using BlurHash for other things though. GD and Imagick blurring is really efficient, but if this is more efficient, it might be nice to integrate with some of the apps and transcoders I build.

Marshal 08-06-2025 03:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cerulean (Post 23389120)
Thank you for the information! BlurHash looks interesting, but I think since that solution is designed to send both the image and the blurhash in one payload for lazy loading purposes, it probably wouldn't work to prevent legal concerns.

I may look at using BlurHash for other things though. GD and Imagick blurring is really efficient, but if this is more efficient, it might be nice to integrate with some of the apps and transcoders I build.

BlurHash string is calculated for each image, and you need to store it. It's basically a tiny image derived from the original image, that can easily be delivered inline (inside HTML code).

What you can do with your code is only sending the BlurHash string, without the full image, until the user is permited to access the content.

Intended purpose for BlurHash is to HTML load inline (tiny) images for lazy loading.

But if you "break" the process, and deliver only hash strings, you can get an effectively blurred images based on the original ones, without actually sending the original images. Which is totally law compliant, and allows you to avoid "duplicating" the original images by blurring them. Which saves disk space.

Marshal 09-21-2025 02:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cerulean (Post 23389120)
Thank you for the information! BlurHash looks interesting, but I think since that solution is designed to send both the image and the blurhash in one payload for lazy loading purposes, it probably wouldn't work to prevent legal concerns.

I may look at using BlurHash for other things though. GD and Imagick blurring is really efficient, but if this is more efficient, it might be nice to integrate with some of the apps and transcoders I build.

any progress on this?

cerulean 09-21-2025 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marshal (Post 23400036)
any progress on this?

No progress. There wasn't any interest. I will likely do this when I have spare time in the coming months, but it won't be very soon.

cordoba 09-21-2025 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cerulean (Post 23400129)
No progress. There wasn't any interest. I will likely do this when I have spare time in the coming months, but it won't be very soon.


That's a shame.

Whether or not blurring images would technically satisfy, for example, the UK age verification rules, for a small affiliate at least it would probably mean that you would be well down the queue for the attention of Ofcom.

cordoba 09-21-2025 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtlantisCash (Post 23388057)
Hope someday human beings will understand that real harm comes from governments always and not from porn itself. Do you remember almost 20 years ago, a leftist/socialist bitch had a proposal for a porn ban in the European Commission, and because of people fighting back, they locked the EU Commission's emails to avoid these people reaching them. I doubt people are still as smart as they were 20 years ago.

I remember that. I think it came down to one European Parliament member realizing at the last moment that the wording of the directive or bill would make porn illegal, and spoke up about it, and places like 4Chan took it up.

DVTimes 09-30-2025 04:55 AM

This is not a solution.

The age verification has zero to do with if the pics are safe or not of the tour.

From my understanding it if the site is adult or not for the UK age verification.

If you are outside the UK then why bother to take notice as you are outside the UK legal authorities I would presume and as such they can send you fines but they have no legal powers from my understanding outside the UZk.

So why harm your site when at most they may just block your site from the UK.

Publisher Bucks 09-30-2025 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DVTimes (Post 23402231)
This is not a solution.

The age verification has zero to do with if the pics are safe or not of the tour.

From my understanding it if the site is adult or not for the UK age verification.

If you are outside the UK then why bother to take notice as you are outside the UK legal authorities I would presume and as such they can send you fines but they have no legal powers from my understanding outside the UZk.

So why harm your site when at most they may just block your site from the UK.

Idiot.

This is not just a UK thing... Go back to fucking skulls...


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:29 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123