EroShare - User Generated Porn

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

1. A.J.
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 3:54 pm

   Checking it out as Im typing this… hold on guys

   OOooh definitely fun to click around, cant wait to see the content when it really hits off, considering uploading some of my own;-) bookmarking this one!

2. Trygve Throntveit
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 3:57 pm

   I love this site.

3. Joe
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 4:17 pm

   And look how fast Michael found the site…

   Only 30 minutes….

4. Peter Cooper
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 4:21 pm

   Just to add a bit of extra ’scope’ (!) NewbieNudes(.com) have been doing something similar for a while now too. I don’t know how many members they have but it’s in the tens of thousands.

5. elvirs
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 4:28 pm

   just checked the homepage, all photos are girls kissing or doing other stuff to each other. mike are you sure this is not a lesbi website?:)

6. paul king
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 4:39 pm

   whatboyswant.com - for years now.

7. Michael Arrington
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 4:46 pm

   elvirs, no, I’m not sure. In fact, I have no idea.

8. Mike Watson
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 4:51 pm

   Do they offer video capability?

   What’s Hot Today.com

9. Jawad (Shuzak)
   

   January 1st, 2007 at 4:57 pm

   Congratulations Florian for getting featured on TechCrunch

10. elvirs
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:04 pm

    pornotube”s growth is quite impressive. i am not a experienced user of this kind of website but i ject checked the website and could not see any ads, just one few word line like ” win 1 000 000 $”. how do they plan to make money or at least cover the costs?

11. larry
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:15 pm

    The thing is that a lot of legitimate pornographic films can be views for free.
    There also seems to be a niche for “high quality” free porn aggregators such as this one.
    http://boratsporn.wordpress.com/
    it ocntains some of the webs very best.

12. Florian Cervenka
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:19 pm

    @elvirs
    Costs are covered by other projects
    You might note a couple “advertise here” .. ads will come (non-intrusive). Also I will offer payed webmaster accounts.

13. Ralph Dagza
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:22 pm

    Yay! Another Horny Startup made by Horny Coders, Funded by Horny Investors

    Happy New Year to all TC readers

    and to Michael as well

14. mark
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:24 pm

    i typed this with one hand!

15. Jim
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:29 pm

    REMOVE THIS CRAP. WHAT IN THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?

16. Robert Dewey
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:34 pm

    Jim - can’t complain, it’s just as “web 2.0″ as Flickr

17. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:36 pm

    SNORE

    User generated porn photo sharing? How 1999. See ANY of the “voyeur” sites (ex: voyeurweb.com), or the previously mentioned whatboyswant.com, or newbienudes.com or at least one of the moblogging services that’s aimed at the young party crowd.

    Oh, but it does have gradients and rounded corners, so it must be innovative.

    You’ve been gamed, Mike. If this is the best of Web 2.0, the genre is as dead as the nurse novel.

18. Dick
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:42 pm

    I am not sure how these sites get over the legality issue. Do they really have the means to check that all images/videos uploaded are adult? If not, then the feds can hammer them, no? am I wrong here? maybe it’s best that they are foreign companies, like allofmp3.com.

19. pete
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:46 pm

    how do they get around the porn laws that require people to keep proof of id?

20. Steve Morsa
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:52 pm

    Please Michael.

    Pornography is debasing to humans in general, and woman (our wives, girlfriends, mothers, and daughters) especially so.

    Those such as yourself with a very public audience carry an especially important duty and responsibility to consciously decide to deny these people the interest and attention they so desperately desire.

    As all your other many great posts demonstrate well, the marketplace of ideas does not need to include helping such repungent “offerings.”

    I hope that in the future you–and other caring and thoughtful bloggers as well–will not/no longer even mention such sites/companies.

    Morals always matter, Michael.

    The Internet makes this pox on humanity no less so.

    Please choose to do your part in this always worthwhile battle.

    Thanks for your consideration.

    Steve

21. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:53 pm

    I hate the words “user generated.” I don’t “use” when I have sex with Maryam, for one. I far prefer “participant generated” when regarding sites like these.

22. Patricia
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 5:57 pm

    It’s interesting that the porn industry is even updating its technology at all. It’s definitely one business that can give the end user a poor experience and still do really well.

23. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:07 pm

    Steve: give me a break. This site is “participant generated” (or at least purports to). If my wife takes pictures of me and her having sex and we want to share that with the world (we don’t, mind you, we’re still old-fashioned that way) who the hell does that hurt? Now, regarding regular porn, I’d agree, but not when it’s done by normal everyday people who are doing it consentually.

    If you don’t like it, don’t visit it.

    Oh, and did you know that 20% of all entertainment money goes to adult entertainment? And that your favorite communications companies, and, even, General Motors, make TONS of money off of porn? (I heard that General Motors owns some of the Satellites that transport tons of porn to hotels around the world).

24. Allen Stern
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:25 pm

    Robert - only 20%, I would have imagined it much higher.

    Also - all I see on this site is pics of girls kissing girls all clothed - is that porn?

    Reminds me of Seinfeld -
    elaine: when does sex actually occur
    jerry: when the nipple makes an appearance

25. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:27 pm

    Scoble, please never ever put that mental image — no matter how hypothetical — out into the world again. There are still people recovering from the topless photos of you from a while back. Toxic 2.0.

    User-generated, participant-generated, whatever. You’re splitting hairs, man. In this case, the short and curlies.

    And just because large corporations make money (you all remember making money, right? or is that reserved for web 2.2?) for their shareholders, that doesn’t make it any less destructive. We have a whole economy geared towards various forms of destruction. Someday someone will pay for it.

26. Nemrut
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:30 pm

    TechRaunch..woohoo!

    For those of you condemning stuff like this, ask yourself why it’s ok to promote/enjoy graphic violence but not sexual activity…

    I’m betting that with the proliferation of these ‘user generated content’ sites that 10-20yrs from now, people won’t give a second thought to ‘tossing the salad, hand jobs or wet sports.’

27. postzavtra
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:35 pm

    Check-out the granddaddy of all user generated porn websites - http://www.voyeurweb.com In all seriousness, this website has been around since the late 1990’s and was doing web 2.0 stuff before all of us even knew the term.

28. Steve Morsa
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:45 pm

    Wow, Robert. Who does pornography hurt? You don’t know? Really?

    You don’t grasp how it degrades us all as humans–especially the females in our lives? Really?

    You believe easy access to pornography–which these sites enable–is O.K. for minors to view? That it has no negative effects on them? Really?

    Sex is one of God’s greatest gifts to us all; and you think “sharing” it with others is what he intended? Really?

    And since when did the fact that others–even many others–does something make it O.K. to it? You really believe that? Really?

    So morals are determined–at least sometimes and/or in part–by what others do or don’t do? Really?

    That there are no absolute right or wrong choices and decisions in the world–as long as people aren’t “forced” to make/do it/them? Really?

    Sorry. There’s no place for moral relativism in the kind of world our creator want’s us all to share and enjoy.

    Forget asking me for a break, Robert.

    God is asking you for a break.

    Will you (and other bloggers) give it to him?

29. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:47 pm

    Nemrut> For those of you condemning stuff like this, ask yourself why it’s ok to promote/enjoy graphic violence but not sexual activity…

    Who said it was? Gratuitous violence is just as destructive as exploitative pornography.

    Oh, I forgot all about deathcrunch.com, kneecappr.com and all the ultraviolence 2.0 sites. Never mind.

30. John Handelaar
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 6:56 pm

    Steve Morsa> “God is asking you for a break.”

    Bzzt. Game over.

    Although if you’d like to tell us about any of your other imaginary friends’ needs, go right ahead. Especially if it’s Santa Claus. Or the Easter Bunny.

    Or Spiderman. Especially Spiderman.

31. Anonymous
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:04 pm

    Whoa Steve…pretty dangerous to mix rationale thought with religion. Let’s keep religion out of this discussion.

32. Michael Arrington
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:04 pm

    Steve - Chill out on the evangelism stuff. God needs to focus on ending war, poverty and disease. Then we can talk about the evil of pictures of 20 year old European girls making out with each other.

33. BooTCaT
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:06 pm

    So , Porn + Flickr = eroShare

    And this is again , going to be another big social sharing community .

34. Robert Dewey
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:10 pm

    Heh, looks like Scoble got the center of attention on this one

35. Yaser Anwar
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:15 pm

    “Sex is one of God’s greatest gifts to us all; and you think “sharing” it with others is what he intended? Really?”

    So Steve, tell me, did God himself whisper to you what He wanted and what not? He didn’t, so like Michael and another dude said, chill out and if you don’t like it, don’t visit.

    But PLEASE don’t preach to us, as most of TC visitors and the world can decide what needs to be shared and what not. We live in a free market economy, where everybody has their freedom to do what they want and to profit from what they want.

    So quit being a mincer.

36. Jason
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:21 pm

    Interesting concept. Bringing the free internet porn back to the realm of web 2.0

    No spam, no viruses nor pop ups.

    Could do well…

37. Yaser Anwar
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:22 pm

    To Michael Arrington-

    MA, why do you have Google Ads when your site makes a mint (not that there is anything wrong with that)? Just wondering, since you’ve got some big sponsors.

    Also re: the response you got for this post and PornoTube, can we expect TechCrunch Penthouse party?

38. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:33 pm

    >We live in a free market economy, where everybody has their freedom to do what they want and to profit from what they want.

    Don’t know where you live, but that’s not true in the US.

39. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:34 pm

    Arrington> Chill out on the evangelism stuff. God needs to focus on ending war, poverty and disease. Then we can talk about the evil of pictures of 20 year old European girls making out with each other.

    One might say the same of the Web 2.0 crowd.

40. Nemrut
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 7:58 pm

    Evan - what do you see when you watch football, hockey or boxing..isnt that all sanctioned violence nicely wrapped in the form of ‘family entertainment.’ And what about all the shoot deaths, decapitations, gore, etc you see in many horror/action flicks?

    For some reason evangelicals rarely condemn violence so popular in our media but bare some cleavage during a ‘family show’ and all hell breaks loose.

41. Eric Rice
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:19 pm

    Back in my day, we called it ‘amateur’, but it was too difficult to drop TWO WHOLE VOWELS to be 2.0 name-compliant.

42. Steve Morsa
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:21 pm

    Sorry, Michael; but we’re in no position to tell God what matters or is–or should be–important.

    He’s our creator and has already made those decisions for us.

    Since all evil and sin–and pornography isn’t even a close call–matters to God, you think it shouldn’t matter to us as well? Really?

    Fact is, all the founders and leaders of the religions of the world view pornography–both the involvement in and the observing/etc of such–as a sin and morally repungent.

    All evil and sin matters to God, Michael.

    It’s sad and frankly dissappointing that it apparently doesn’t matter to you.

43. Obet
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:26 pm

    Thanks for introducing me to the 2 best porn sites on the net. Keep god out of technology(that’s for Steve Morsa). If you disagree with what was posted here, then don’t ever come back to this sinful website. Thanks Michael!

44. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:27 pm

    Nemrut: Where did I ever say that I found any of that worthy of uncritical attention? Don’t assume because I think one thing is contemptible that I think other unrelated things are not. You’re assuming facts not in evidence.

    I consider boxing, “ultimate fighting,” etc. to be on a par with pornography. Whether the “participants” (as Scoble would call them, minimizing the agency of the coercive power structures in place around the business of both) are willing or not does not change the fact of the exploitation or the effects of the performance on the individual or society in aggregate.

    As a humanist, I find organized religion just as destructive as gratuitous violence (mean violence for the sake of violence) and explotative pornography. Agression and sexuality are natural aspects of human behavior and there isn’t anything inherently wrong with them. Any aspect emphazised to the exclusion of other aspects for too long, too heavily, leads to dysfunction, in my experience.

45. Michael Arrington
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:31 pm

    Steve - you are awesome! I didn’t know that people like you had learned to use computers yet. Will you please consider doing a guest post on techcrunch?

46. CrunchBack
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:36 pm

    Okay - it may be Web 2.0, or user-generated content. But TechCrunch should stick to the mainstream of Web 2.0 and tech. As a top-visited site, a lot of kids are probably reading TechCrunch. I’m not a prude and I don’t care if people like porn, but I think that widely-read general tech blogs should not be where a 12-year-old finds a new porn site like EroShare or PornoTube.

47. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:36 pm

    Classy, crunchboy. Very classy.

48. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:37 pm

    CrunchBack: I have news for you: if a 12-year-old wants to find porn he just needs to go to Google.

49. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:39 pm

    Steve: >>It’s sad and frankly dissappointing that it apparently doesn’t matter to you.

    There are billions of people who don’t believe in your world-view. Keep that in mind. Who are you to tell us what to believe?

50. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:43 pm

    Steve: >God is asking you for a break.

    God told me he’s waiting for guys like you to do something about getting us out of the war in Iraq. Or, fixing all those destroyed homes in New Orleans. When you gonna do that? He thinks it’s sad you spend your time worrying about moral decay when there are people who can’t afford to rebuild their homes (I visited some last week, if there’s a moral problem for our society to worry about, that is it).

    That’s where my morality comes from. Not from worrying about what pictures of people doing with each other are getting posted to Web sites.

51. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:46 pm

    >Who are you to tell us what to believe?

    Funny coming from someone whose title used to contain the word “evangelist.” Surely you understand the psychology working there. So you must know that you’re just sticking your hand into the tar baby.

52. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:51 pm

    Evan,

    Some things you might not know about me. I was a fundamentalist Christian from 1984 through 1992. I know very well that I’m sticking my hand into the tar baby.

    To Steve:

    Jesus worried a lot more about society’s treatment of the poor than what sex acts we were doing with each other. At least if you believe that the bible was written by God (I used to be a fundamentalist Christian — and was from 1982 through 1992 — so have read the bible probably more times than you have).

    Last week I visited New Orleans. What I saw there bothered me a LOT more than any porn site I’ve ever seen.

    Are you doing anything about the poverty in our country? In the bible poverty is mentioned at least 200 times more than sex. So, are you writing 600 entries decrying poverty in our country for the three or four you’ve written today about this site, which contains fairly tame pictures as porn sites go?

53. Jimmy
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:53 pm

    Wow guys… what the hell does porn have to do with $deity?

54. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 8:54 pm

    By the way, a technology evangelist’s job (at least at Microsoft) isn’t to tell you what to believe. That’s hopeless to change. They were there to help you write software for the next version of Windows. I never told people they were going to Hell for using a Macintosh!

55. Michael Arrington
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:08 pm

    You should hang out here more often, Robert.

56. Ben Metcalfe
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:13 pm

    Sorry to get back to business/tech aspect of this - but have you noticed that this site seems to be a clone of the recently launched yourep.com?

    Compare:

    http://www.eroshare.com/nav/learn_more/
    and
    http://www.yourep.com/nav/learn_more/

    Same FAQ-type page, etc.

    What’s the connection here? Are they from the same company, or running the same software?

    Might be nothing, but it’s curious.

57. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:17 pm

    Thanks Mike. I lurk a lot. It’s hard to participate in lots of other blogs lately. MOstly I’m just avoiding work (I have more than 500 emails to answer). Sigh.

58. Trygve Throntveit
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:17 pm

    I want to make out with Steve.

59. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:19 pm

    Most evangelism, in my experience, isn’t about seeing the glory of the deity so much as scaring the flock into submission on threat of torment if they don’t abide and pointing out how the heathens are damned. If you don’t write software for the next version of Windows, so the line would go, you’re going to suffer. Only difference is that might be true, financially.

    Oh, and Jimmy: Without the annointed internediaries of $deity’s religion suppressing human sexual desire (a mutated meme from the days of scarcity and disease for the tribe), there wouldn’t be much need for gratification overload through images. God created the need for porn.

60. Garbage
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:25 pm

    Michael,

    I love how you have such a HUGE problem with the “ethics” of Payperpost.com but you have no problem promoting this garbage.

    Do some research and you will find that thousands if not millions of children are abducted and forced into “porn” related acts that are video taped and spread all over the world to make money. I’m willing to bet that this site you just promoted and other like it will or already have TONs of this “porn” that is created using underage kids or whatever else. This is disgusting!

    There is no good porn or bad porn because it all falls in the same boat. IF you promote one you promote them all.

    Shame on you…which I’m sure you can care less as you posted this without a problem. When you fall don’t as why. You’ve lost this frequent visitor and I hope others will follow.

    Maybe you should follow this up with an “ethics” lesson on why Payperpost.com is wrong.

61. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:32 pm

    Garbage: child pornography is illegal and any host that carries it can be shut down. Anyone who watches it, or distributes it, can be arrested (and regularly are). Most porn sites work hard to make sure no child porn appears.

62. Garbage
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:34 pm

    Robert,

    How does a user-generated porn site plan on identifying underage kids in these “homemade” movies?

    Like I said…promote one and you promote them ALL.

63. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:41 pm

    “Oh, and did you know that 20% of all entertainment money goes to adult entertainment? And that your favorite communications companies, and, even, General Motors, make TONS of money off of porn? (I heard that General Motors owns some of the Satellites that transport tons of porn to hotels around the world). ”

    Oh bullshit, Scoble. I expect this sort of stunt from idiots like Arrington, but I thought at least you had a modicum of class. Bringing your wife into this sordid thread hits rock bottom.

    Porn is not a good thing. It is a predictable thing when a society confused freedom with libertinism. 90% of the world’s population knows this instinctively. Just because Europe and half of America choose to act like common beasts in the field does not make this OK. Humans are half angel, half animal. It is up to us which side we choose to emphasize.

    You should be ashamed of yourselves.

64. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:41 pm

    Garbage: that’s a good question. But the human mind is pretty good at discerning when it’s a kid and when it’s an adult. It’s the same way we remove crap from Wikipedia.

    Or do you look at a 30-year-old in a grocery store and have trouble telling whether she’s really an adult or not?

65. Soso
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:42 pm

    Why is everyone complaining about this site being listed? It helps to show that that TechCrunch in unbiased, which has been such a hot topic. It is relevant with web 2.0 and technology, what else matters?

66. Florian Cervenka
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    @Garbage..
    “Do some research and you will find that thousands if not millions of children are abducted and forced into “porn” related acts that are video taped and spread all over the world to make money. I’m willing to bet that this site you just promoted and other like it will or already have TONs of this “porn” that is created using underage kids or whatever else. This is disgusting!”
    I find your comment is pure garbage!!

    You can trust me on one thing. I will monitor for child pornography and have no problem reporting it instantly to Interpol. I already reported child pornography (including a list of 14.000 IPs) to Interpol. I have good contact to the police.

    -eroshare dev.

67. Alex Iskold
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    Mike,

    This site has 10 users, why are you profiling it???

    Alex

68. Michael Arrington
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:44 pm

    Steve - “I expect this sort of stunt from idiots like Arrington, but I thought at least you had a modicum of class.”

    great comment.

69. Michael Arrington
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:45 pm

    Alex - it just launched today. YouTube had just a handful of users the first time I wrote about them, too. As is the case with most startups. You have to start somewhere.

70. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:45 pm

    @Soso

    “…what else matters?”

    What else indeed? My own generation sickens me. Don’t any of you have daughters?

71. Phil Wolff
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:47 pm

    The big point here is that technical and economic barriers for producing and sharing sounds, pictures, text and video are being lowered in this arena just as they are for birdwatchers and sports fans. Along the way, they create new opportunities (can’t wait for what follows the EroShare APIs) and threaten existing players.

    I wonder if EroShare will enable flickr-like measures of community. This is a context that normally raises a very high privacy bar. To the degree we see sharing groups, peer tagging, favoriting, geocoding and subscribing to friends, this will be a pretty novel online behavior.

    @Morsa, Arrington is talking about EroShare’s technology and business. The adult content riding on top of EroShare is just one more market niche, and it has its constituents.

    Feel free to make “societal good” arguments for or against explicit media. It’s just that they will be off-topic for this blog. You might be better served talking to the participants or their hosts on the EroShare site.

    Please don’t confuse TechCrunch’s attention to technology diffusion and business innovation with the operation or endorsement of sites engaged in conduct you consider unbecoming. Let’s learn from everyone about what works and what doesn’t, what’s new and what’s changing.

    In any event, thanks for sharing your thoughts.

    @Mike, @Steve - Mentioning God or moral absolutism ain’t evangelizing. Morsa had a strong reaction to the sexual color of your post, shared his concerns, and got suckered into snidely defending/explaining himself. Neither of Morsa’s comments reads like an invitation to tea. But I bet there’s room for an extended discussion on morals in online community, and another on the markets made of the hundreds of millions who try to keep their hearts and minds occupied free of earthy stimuli.

    By the way, Mike, I’m surprised that your inner lawyer gave way to your headline writer by calling it “porn” instead of a less charged word. Me, I like the old fashioned “smut” better.

    Happy New Year, y’all.

    - Phil

72. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:48 pm

    Steve: do you care about all the people in Africa who are being slaughtered as we speak? Or, the thousands who don’t have homes because of Katrina? Don’t any of you have any morals? Why don’t you do something about THAT before worrying about sex acts on the Internet?

73. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:51 pm

    @Scoble:

    That may be the biggest non sequiter in web history. What in hell are you talking about? I donate time and money to my cousin’s ministry in upsate New York. They carry our missionary work in the poorest parts of the planet, including feeding and vaccinating children.

    What that has to do with injecting pornography into a Web 2.0 blog eludes me.

74. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:51 pm

    >Bringing your wife into this sordid thread hits rock bottom.

    She’s reading this too. Reminds her of growing up in Iran where fundamental religious people run everything (a friend of hers was beaten because he was simply caught riding in a car with a girl).

    You can pick what kind of society you want to live in. I would rather live in one with true freedom than one where religious thought decides what I can do in my own bedroom (and whether or not I could share it on the Internet with others).

75. Michael Arrington
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:52 pm

    Yep

76. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    >What that has to do with injecting pornography into a Web 2.0 blog eludes me.

    Because the bible I read when I was a church goer mentioned caring for the poor a LOT more than caring about sex acts (and, keep in mind, it was written thousands of years ago when community standards were a LOT stricter than today).

    I left the church cause most church people I met don’t really follow the teachings of Jesus Christ. He’d be aghast at the beliefs of believers who feel that they need to push their own morality on other people.

    If you feel this is against your morality, don’t visit it. Let your own life be a shining example to us all of what “clean living” gets us.

77. Evan Wired
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:55 pm

    >a 30-year-old in a grocery store

    30-year-olds aren’t the problem on “participant-generated” porn sites. 16-year-olds are (at least in the US). You’d be surprised how many (non-porn) models you see on magazine covers and in catalogs are 14 or so. Ask the “Girls Gone Wild” producers about this problem.

    The wikipedia analogue doesn’t scan. Consensus reality isn’t so simple. If it were, all that noise above about God wouldn’t have been necessary.

78. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:55 pm

    @Scoble

    “Reminds her of growing up in Iran where fundamental religious people run everything”

    Extremes in either direction are equally bad, Scoble. I am not advocating censorship or anything like it. However that does not mean I need to just go with the flow over the obscene degradation that passes for entertainment these days.

    Sexuality is a sacred gift and trust. It should not be splayed all over the web like so much fertilizer for those with no spiritual values.

79. Garbage
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:55 pm

    Florian,

    You’re just another drain on society and even if your site is successful financially your life is and always will be empty. You are garbage!

    You’re no better then the drug dealer on the street corners.

    Sad to see it promoted.

80. Soso
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:55 pm

    Steve-

    Tell me what daughters have to do with technology or how they play any role in determining what would be listed on this site. Should we restrict what we discuss and review just because it doesn’t sit well with us? I certainly dont think so. I must say that there is not much reasoning here.

81. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:57 pm

    @Scoble:

    “If you feel this is against your morality, don’t visit it.”

    Another completely bogus argument. You can make the same argument against KKK sites. They exist, and I don’t visit them because they are utterly repellent and beneath contempt. I certainly hope Arrington won’t be posting links to neo-Nazi sites if they start using Ajax.

82. Michael Arrington
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:57 pm

    Steve - you are starting to scare me. In a you might show up on my doorstep to show me the wrath of God kind of way. You made your point. Other’s made their’s. Let’s all let it go now.

83. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 9:59 pm

    @Soso

    “Tell me what daughters have to do with technology or how they play any role in determining what would be listed on this site.”

    Daughters–women in general–are harmed by pornography. It cheapens something which should be treated with the utmost reverence and respect. Sexuality is a sacred bond between a man and a woman.

    The issue is the other way around: what does Web 2.0 have to do with porn? Would you countenance ANYTHING as long as it had Web 2.0 content?

    You don’t live in a vacuum.

84. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 10:01 pm

    @Arrington

    “you might show up on my doorstep to show me the wrath of God kind of way”

    Not to worry, Arrington. I’ll save my thunderbolts for Steve Ballmer. Go on back to your porno.

85. Garbage
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 10:02 pm

    Robert,

    Nobody is saying they don’t care about the poverty issue in the world. Even though that is always a good one to discuss and debate.

    The issue at hand is the promotion of a website that is garbage!

86. Florian Cervenka
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 10:04 pm

    “You are garbage!”
    That is your point of view and I’m fine with that.

    About the always empty life I must disappoint you - it is rather the other way around.

    “You’re no better then the drug dealer on the street corners.”
    Got to disappoint you on this one too - we don’t have drug dealers on our street corners.

87. Craig Ambrose
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 10:05 pm

    Hi folks,

    I haven’t been sure how much web2.0 people are general interested in the adult industry, so I haven’t mentioned it here until now. However, anyone interesting in this field my want to check out my site at http://www.playfulbent.com

    It’s adult social networking, erotic image exchange, collaborative erotic fiction authoring, and something a bit like an online ‘truth or dare’. The site is written in Ruby on Rails, uses AJAX heavily, and aside from the fact that it doesn’t have a white background, could certainly be considered to be web 2.0.

    We’ve been featured on fleshbot.com and tinynibbles.com, and have had a slow and steady increase in community size throughout the year. Anyone interested in aspects of our technology or business is welcome to drop me a line at craig at craigambrose.com

88. Garbage
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    Steve Macdonald,

    Great point!

    I’m going to throw together a website that is a social networking hub for all the great racists organizations our there and jazz it up with some awesome “web 2.0″ tools and maybe Michael will promote it?

    Nobody should have a problem with that right? Maybe Mike can point that it has TAGS for all the popular racists terms!

    Brilliant!

89. Steve Macdonald
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    Great Arrington. Now you’ve opened the floodgates.

90. Robert Scoble
    

    January 1st, 2007 at 10:06 pm

    Mike: you can’t argue with these people (and I speak from experience since I used to be one). They are not rational thinkers. They see the world in black and white. If you are debating with them they think you are heathen and beneath them — note how “Garbage” is using rhetoric with Florian, a guy I know to be very upstanding. They don’t consider that you have rights to believe anything different than what they believe. Some, on the outer fringes, will go so far as to kill those who don’t believe with them (note the abortion doctor murders).

    They don’t really care about the human condition. If they did, they’d be rebuilding some house in New Orleans right now and they’d be a lot more concerned about violence on TV than sex acts.

    In my experience these people don’t even read the bible they all profess to believe in. Again, that book doesn’t care about sex all that much. It worries far far far more about poverty and the way we treat each other.

    I’m out of here. In my experience arguing with these types just makes them more frothy and they start telling their friends to come over to