[WaffleIronMaker]

I think it's reasonable to restrict pornography on a device intended to be used for AR in public.

From Apple's perspective, it's important that using the device in public doesn't have a stigma.

Otherwise, we don't need to wait for deepfake AI / AR apps to undress people.

Creeps could go in public, see a person they like, and put porn next to them without anyone knowing.

Without restricting porn, an AR device just becomes a machine to violate others boundaries. There's a reason cell phones in Japan cannot turn off the shutter sound.

[throwaway-blaze]

Given that they literally tell you not to wear the device outside (and that early reviewers showed how it stopped working in a moving car or on a moving train, the device stops displaying content when its accelerometer determines you might become nauseated by outside motion) I don't think this argument holds water.

MacBooks can access an unrestricted amount of porn yet the public doesn't immediately equate computer users -> using porn right now.

[dkonofalski]

This is factually inaccurate. It doesn't stop working in a moving car or train. The reviewers/users that were using it in those instances simply didn't turn on the Travel mode of the device. In order for the 3D windows to persist, they need tracking data. Travel mode disables the external tracking and leaves it as internal. It's less accurate but it's completely usable in a moving vehicle.

[lotsofpulp]

> Creeps could go in public, see a person they like, and put porn next to them without anyone knowing.

Does this affect anyone else more than imagining the same thing using one’s brain?

[refulgentis]

No, but that is a very, very, slippery slope, and there's a supermajority against enabling it.

[rowyourboat]

Slippery slope to where, exactly? I genuinely don't see it

[refulgentis]

The same argument (who is it hurting if its notreal and viewed by a singular person?) is commonly used by organizations who would like to see the age of consent lowered / widespread legalization of child pornography.

I don't want to discuss it too much because there's enough nuance here for people to hang you with no matter what you say, but, a brief parable: I spent exactly 1 sentence pointing out to someone you could make porn with Stable Diffusion and they started hosting a SD instance for deep fakes in our non-technologist community with girls in it, and also started what I still think of as a "porn dungeon" chat room.

It was immensely frustrating trying to verbalize why this was antisocial and why there was a set of people who were legitimately upset by it. They never really understood fully.

But I'm sure they had moment with the Taylor Swift deepfake stuff from last week.

There's isn't really a 100% logical Spock reason why it's bad, other than other humans find it deeply distasteful.

[rowyourboat]

Count me among those who don't see the problem. I believe that there are people who are upset by it, but that alone does not justify prohibiting it.

[chrisjj]

But "without anyone knowing" means privately, and not in public, right?

[kaashif]

> Creeps could go in public, see a person they like, and put porn next to them without anyone knowing.

So uh, can't people already do this with phones? I could watch porn on the train in front of people right now?

What NEW boundary does AR violate?

[peteforde]

Crickets.

There is no new boundary except for the one puritans dream up. A holographic projection of their own inner monologue on the topic, if you will. ;)

It's all just so painfully dumb, and we have to weather the same arguments literally every time there's a new content format.

[beeboobaa]

Can't tell if this is satire or if you're being serious...

Just in case you're being serious, you realize that people can already imagine others naked in public or just snap a picture or video of them using their phone and upload it to your AI undressing service.

It being strapped to your head adds absolutely nothing, and you might be projecting your own fantasies.