this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2023
566 points (98.1% liked)

politics

18986 readers
3683 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Resurfaced comments in which new House Speaker Mike Johnson talked about how he and his son monitor each other's online activity using "accountability software" have raised questions about national security.

Johnson, a Republican who was first elected to Congress in 2016, spoke in 2022 about how he installed software called Covenant Eyes on his devices during a panel called "War on Technology" at Cypress Baptist Church in Benton, Louisiana, Rolling Stone reported.

According to a clip first posted on X, formerly Twitter, by a user called Receipt Maven, Johnson spoke about how the subscription-based service helps people abstain from internet porn and "objectionable" websites.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee 254 points 11 months ago (3 children)

I thought this was overblown at first glance but reading into it...

From Wikipedia:

Accountability software typically functions by continuously making screenshots of the user's mobile phone or computer screen and monitoring their internet traffic. It checks both for keywords (such as "gay" or "porn") and images associated with the behavior the software is intended to detect.

So like even if the Speaker is on a VPN securely viewing classified material, if it's on his phone or laptop, Covenant Eyes now has screenshots of it. That is very much a breech of national security if that is happening.

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 49 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I'm sure there's no chance that a "Christian-based surveillance company" is mishandling the data they collect in unsecure or nefarious ways.

[–] ZeroCool@feddit.ch 48 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Fun fact: Before starting his weird anti-porn spyware company the CEO of Covenant Eyes, Ronald DeHaas, worked as a geologist for Chevron in the 70s. In fact, he's still helping to destroy the planet by working as a consultant for the petroleum industry. He never actually stopped. So he's always been an unscrupulous P.O.S.

[–] Zippit@lemmy.world 36 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Why always get the gays involved? I swear, these people are obsessed with penises and projecting at this point.

I mean I'm a straight woman, I watched one video just because I was curious about the practicality of things and was too embarrassed to harass a gay friend about it.

But when I want to get horny now, it doesn't even cross my mind. Even though there was one scene with Nick Offerman that was really hot in The Last of Us.

So major projection from these people.

[–] squiblet@kbin.social 32 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Some Christian men talk about “SSA” (same sex attraction) and their struggle to “resist the temptation”. As a non-repressed straight man, this is not something I’ve ever dealt with. I feel bad that these people are so indoctrinated and intimidated by their weird-ass culture that they can’t just relax and go grab a dick.

[–] Poggervania@kbin.social 16 points 11 months ago (3 children)

It’s because Christianity (and by nature, offshoots of it) was, and still is, a means of control.

Let’s not forget the roots of Christianity was from when it was a literal cult; you were considered a part of the Christian Cult if you practiced Christianity before iirc either Theodosius or Constantine became the Roman Emperor and made it into the state religion. Christmas was also stolen from Sol Invictus as a means to help bridge the transition into Christianity.

[–] LemmysMum@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

Not to mention the fact that America was founded by puritans who were kicked out of Britain for not being allowed to oppress everyone around them.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That's exactly what it is, a major projection of their own inner sexual turmoil. Whether they are closeted homosexuals or not, and really in the case of Mike Johnson I hope he isn't because I don't want him among us LGBTQ folks, they definitely are projecting some hugely enormous interest in the sex behaviors and genitalia of other dudes. As a gay man - I'm kind of in awe of their penchant for penis worship.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 16 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

All this monitoring and over monitoring of what people are looking at online. Honestly if people aren't trolling for underage sex hookups or trying to encourage gross behaviors online, who the hell cares what people look at. Covenant Eyes - that name just says it all about the hypocrisy of religious zealotry. You can be happy! You can be free! Just do what the hell we tell you and don't you DARE look at anything we don't approve of, you born sinner and miserable wretch!!! WE'RE WATCHING YOU!!!!! Because Jesus would want us to.

[–] Sweetpeaches69@lemmy.world 122 points 11 months ago (5 children)

Imagine needing spying accountability software to not watch gay porn. These weird homophobes really are the gayest of them all.

[–] Feirdro@lemmy.world 54 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Oh, no, it’s the porn that’s the problem, just being there all hot and gay.

[–] thorbot@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, god forbid the hot gayness leap out at unsuspecting homophobes! Better get some STRONG software to keep it at bay, instead of just, you know, just NOT BROWSING PORN SITES

[–] dynamojoe@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago

The thing is he's admitting he has a problem he can't control. Just not doing a thing is the reasonable approach for people who have self control.

It also is an admission that the GOP's preferred solution to temptation is doomed. Just Say No to drugs. Abstinence-only birth control. But he needs to subscribe to a service to keep him from watching porn.

[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 8 points 11 months ago

A lot of gay porn, like much straight porn, is really hot. I'm gay but some straight porn I've seen is really incredible. No one will ever convince me that enjoying people having sexual pleasure together is wrong, bad, indecent, immoral, or grotesque (unless it involves watching trump or mike johnson engage in it - which would be my definition of gross indecency).

[–] Kbobabob@lemmy.world 34 points 11 months ago (5 children)

I think everyone should be allowed to watch all the gay porn they want. Even Mike Johnson.

[–] burntbutterbiscuits@sh.itjust.works 24 points 11 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] dannoffs@lemmy.sdf.org 43 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I grew up in the far right evangelical Christian church and watching people's horror when they hear little tidbits about how fucked up it is always entertaining to me. I know a bunch of people who use the same software on their computers.

[–] KnowledgeableNip@leminal.space 16 points 11 months ago

Triggering the apocalypse? Yes please!

Triggering an orgasm? Satan's work.

[–] jasondj@ttrpg.network 42 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

All the fucking cybersecurity bullshit I gotta go to as a network admin for a federal contractor and the baddies can just have some tech illiterate federal representative install whatever back doors they want on their personal computers under the guise of morality or whatever.

[–] Cyanogenmon@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

Hello fellow admin.

Feel the same way. The most secure network is only as secure as its dumbest user.

Sadly we're still a couple hundred years off of that being less of a concern :/.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 41 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Wait, this dude is such a deviant he needs to install software on his own devices to keep him away from porn?

Let me guess, his wife once found gay porn on his computer, and he said he didn't know anything about it and did the typical conservative "doth protest too much" thing and decided that paying for a porn filter would give him cover to keep looking at porn?

Do these people really think they are fooling anyone?

[–] donuts@kbin.social 36 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

So God is a supernatural, omniscient, all-seeing entity that can speak directly into your mind, but you still need to pay a company $20/month to snoop on your devices for "accountability" so that you don't look at all that very tempting gay porn on the internet.

Ok...

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Ah yes, makes total sense. Similarly... The universe stretches to unfathomable distances, countless trillions of stars, and the god of all this ... somehow cares whether you jack off to porn or not. Riiiiight.

[–] Nightwingdragon@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Actually, no.

The universe stretches to unfathomable distances, countless trillions of stars, and the god of all this … somehow cares about you at all.

This would be like you caring about an ant. I'm not talking about ants in general. I'm talking about you caring about one specific ant, located in one specific anthill, in a cabin in the middle of the woods. In Russia. To the point where you've written an entire book on how that ant should be living its life.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Yewb@lemmy.world 33 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Does he so desperately want to look at porn that he needs this? How about will power?

Who the fuck are these people.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] BeautifulMind@lemmy.world 32 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

It's one thing if you want to subject your personal/private online life to a sort of virtual panopticon, but if you want to also look at classified material while also letting your morality cops peep over your shoulder, that should be disqualifying. Under no circumstance should a device with spyware on it have access to anything like classified material

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 15 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Agreed. What also bothers me is that he admitted to having his 17 year old son be his accountability partner. He really couldn't find anyone else? It had to be his underage son? That's weird, yo

[–] wildginger@lemmy.myserv.one 10 points 11 months ago

Given christian track records? Him being underage might have been the point.

[–] nymwit@lemm.ee 30 points 11 months ago (2 children)

This dude is super creepy and I hate he's in congress, much less the speaker, but does anyone feel like the other headline "monitors each others porn activities" purposely makes it seem like they're each reviewing the porn they each do look at and making sure isn't toooo skeevy? Like it's weird enough, do you have to push it?

Made me picture them high fiving each other the next day, "yeah buddy! I saw that one, too. Nice."

[–] Socsa@sh.itjust.works 16 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I think the headline's intent is more "what did he get caught doing which prompted the need for him to buy a porn blocker for his own machine?"

Like, nobody in the world does that unless someone caught them looking at porn.

[–] CalicoJack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 11 months ago

"Does he have weird third-party monitoring software on his government phone?" is what the headline is referencing, that's a massive problem. Confidential info could end up who-knows-where if it was sniffed.

[–] Peppycito@sh.itjust.works 8 points 11 months ago

makes it seem like they're each reviewing the porn they each do look at and making sure isn't toooo skeevy?

Yes. But probably because I look at porn, I would take it to mean I'm telling my friends what porn I'm looking at. Whereas they are doing it to show each other that they're not looking at any porn at all.

[–] _number8_@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

this shit is so fucking creepy and insane. if literal receipts about the porn i look at came up in a family conversation for any reason whatsoever my brain would melt and explode. how are these freaks so outwardly successful but behind closed doors they're spying on their son's porn viewing??

how does this motherfucker do speaking tours with these blood curdling weird christians and become like the 4th most powerful person in government? why do we keep respecting people who can't even jerk off like an adult? we used to be a proper country! we used to do rebellions!

he doesn't even have any particular juice or charisma! he's just white and clean shaven and wears a button down! give him the fucking keys to congress! jesus fucking christ

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] tygerprints@kbin.social 24 points 11 months ago (11 children)

It's bad enough living in Utah where you're expected to "live the word of the Covenant" every day or be damned. People showing up at our doors to ask what we're looking at online to make sure we're living the word of Jesus. Jesus! For Christ's sake, what do I care about jesus!!!! Can you imagine anything more horrible than having to be monitored by someone else who thinks you're not up to the "lord's" standards?!!?!

To HELL with that nonsense. It's one reason I'm not just non-religious but actively anti-Mormon. Oh sure these mormon assholes think they're made of sunshine and Jesus' farts, but in reality they're just as sleazy, bent, evil, contemptible, and manipulative as anyone else. Moreso in fact. People are not "saints." They aren't supposed to be. And no well-adjusted mentally healthy person would ever WANT to be. So to hell with this monitoring each other bullshit.

[–] Buelldozer@lemmy.today 8 points 11 months ago (4 children)

People showing up at our doors to ask what we’re looking at online to make sure we’re living the word of Jesus.

What? That's not really happening is it?

[–] meyotch@slrpnk.net 8 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It definitely happens in Utah. The social rules are very different behind the Zion Curtain

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] photonic_sorcerer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 11 months ago (7 children)

Welcome to Murica. Land of the free, as long as you do what we tell you to do.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 19 points 11 months ago

If Mike Johnson puts that spyware on his work computer.. .

[–] Evotech@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago (1 children)

If you need to buy a 200usd/year service to make sure you don't look at gay porn you are definitely not gay

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ATDA@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Morty: That just sounds like incest circle jerking with extra steps.

[–] m3t00@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago (2 children)

don't believe government devices will let him install that crap. may be wrong but I've read they lock them down pretty tight. his own stuff is his problem

[–] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

His own stuff is potential blackmail material on a prominent politician, which is a national security concern.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Rottcodd@kbin.social 11 points 11 months ago (3 children)

This whole thing is just creepy as hell. This guy has some serious and disturbing psychological issues.

And he's a fucking politician. People actually decided that they wanted him to represent them in government.

More all the time, I feel like I've somehow been trapped on an alien planet, surrounded by a bizarre race of inexplicably stupid lunatics.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 10 points 11 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


Resurfaced comments in which new House Speaker Mike Johnson talked about how he and his son monitor each other's online activity using "accountability software" have raised questions about national security.

According to a clip first posted on X, formerly Twitter, by a user called Receipt Maven, Johnson spoke about how the subscription-based service helps people abstain from internet porn and "objectionable" websites.

Social media users raised concerns about whether Covenant Eyes having access to Johnson's data could "compromise" him.

Marty Taylor, the executive director of progressive PAC New Blue USA, wrote that Johnson "allows an outside Christian based surveillance company 'Covenant Eyes' to access his electronic devises and prepare a weekly report to make sure he is not viewing any 'objectionable' material.

Others echoed the sentiment, with one user writing that "with any public office holder, but particularly someone who's second in line to the Presidency, this is a profound national security risk."

Johnson, an evangelical Christian, has come under scrutiny since being elected to the speakership in October following weeks of infighting among House Republicans.


The original article contains 527 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 67%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] BigMacHole@lemm.ee 10 points 11 months ago

National Security is COMMUNISM!

[–] CuttingBoard@sopuli.xyz 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Imagine their next father and son talk..."So dad, what was it about that scene that emptied your balls?"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›