Fierce_LiNk Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Every household in the UK is to have pornography blocked by their internet provider unless they choose to receive it, David Cameron is to announce. In addition, Mr Cameron will say possessing online pornography depicting rape will be illegal, bringing England and Wales in line with Scotland. In a speech, the prime minister will warn that access to online pornography is "corroding childhood". The new measures will apply to both existing and new customers. Family-friendly filters will be automatically selected for all new customers - though they can choose to switch them off. And millions of existing computer users will be contacted by their internet providers and told they must decide whether to activate filters to restrict adult material. Customers who do not click on either option - accepting or declining - will have filters activated by default, Tory MP Claire Perry, Mr Cameron's adviser on the sexualisation and commercialisation of childhood, told the BBC. Other measures expected to be announced by the prime minister include: - New laws so videos streamed online in the UK will be subject to the same restrictions as those sold in shops - Search engines will be given until October to introduce further measures to block illegal content. They have a "moral duty" to block illegal content, Mr Cameron will say - He will also call for warning pages to pop up with helpline numbers when people try to search for illegal content - Experts from the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre will be given more powers to examine secretive file-sharing networks - A secure database of banned child porn images gathered by police across the country will be used to trace illegal content and the paedophiles viewing it. Mr Cameron will say: "I want to talk about the internet, the impact it is having on the innocence of our children, how online pornography is corroding childhood. "And how, in the darkest corners of the internet, there are things going on that are a direct danger to our children, and that must be stamped out. "I'm not making this speech because I want to moralise or scaremonger, but because I feel profoundly as a politician, and as a father, that the time for action has come. This is, quite simply, about how we protect our children and their innocence." Source: BBC I've highlight important parts because there is quite a bit to read there.
Serebii Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 By forcing it on an ISP level, it provides a sense of dictatorship that does not belong in our culture, more along the lines of Stalin's Russia. It's up to the parents to do their job and protect the children, not the government. My main issue is with how they're going to set it up. Blocks such as these are logistically unfeasible to do. Not all sites will be possible to be blocked and many innocent sites will get hit in the crossfire. Take forums. They get filled with spambots who sometimes try to post links to illicit material. Systems such as this would then block the innocent sites. This is unacceptable. I get what they're trying to do, but they need people who actually know how technology works before they start imposing ridiculous blocks.
Rummy Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Censorship in my mind, protection of children should be a responsibility for parents. I know people will say they don't know enough to do so etcetc, but then maybe educate them so they do? Get them thinking about what their children might be seeing/experiencing in the world. Having said that, the opt-out/in thing is an easy and effective way to deal with a problem on a large scale. Can't fault it majorly in practise.
Beast Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 It's censorship. I mean, I ain't going to lie, I watch porn but why do I have to have it blocked and then I have to phone up my provider to unblock it. Surely it makes a lot more sense for the parents to get off their lazy arses and phone them up themselves to block it? Doing what he's suggesting to do just creates more work. Also, if there are parents saying "Yay, hurray! It's good"...well, hold on a second, love, nobody's stopped you from getting yourself an internet safety program yourself and doing it but then that's just creating more work, right? I don't like this one bit, it's a stupid plan! As I said, it makes more sense to say they'll do it but so long as the people phone up and ask them to block it, not block it and then tell them to phone up to unblock it. That's just stupid! Another stupid policy! What a fucking joke. What next? Videogames? For God's Sake, delete the post! IT MIGHT GIVE HIM IDEAS! :p Actually, you do have a point though. This is why his policy is a joke. He's all "Oh no, protect the children from harmful shit". Well, most 10 year olds I know play COD and Battlefield and watch movies they shouldn't watch so how is this exactly going to help? On TV, there are movies on at 9pm that show gore and violence and fighting and they'll be able to see that so what's going to happen to that? Also, it's even worse because it's the holidays now. The whole thing is seriously pathetic because you can't block one thing and not the others. Porn isn't the entire cause of things.
Zechs Merquise Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Anyone who agrees with this kind of censorship is basically a moronic sheep. All that is happening here is that politicians are trying to find a way in which they can bring in greater internet censorship. They are simply framing the argument around pornography so anyone who disagrees with them will be branded a 'pervert' or worse, a paedophile. It started with the Pirate Bay, now they have moved to pornography and next it will be opinions and views they don't like. The internet is the last true bastion of free speech and free information and should remain that way. If parents are so useless that they can no longer control what their kids look at or view then it is the parents who are to blame. What's more, if the police don't have the resources to deal with paedophiles then they should review how they apportion their resources. My suggestion is this: parents spend more time parents, police spend more time tracking down paedophiles and less time sat by the side of the road operating tax collection schemes and the government should leave the internet alone and stop bringing in legislation which will ultimately erode everyone's rights and liberties.
MoogleViper Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Blocking legitimate porn sites will lead teenagers to really dodgy porn sites, which will have far worse material.
Fierce_LiNk Posted July 22, 2013 Author Posted July 22, 2013 Blocking legitimate porn sites will lead teenagers to really dodgy porn sites, which will have far worse material. There's also the point that by banning this sort of stuff and making it "taboo" you make it more enticing to certain individuals. Telling a teenager that they can't look at porn is pointless, and you'll just give them further incentive to do it.
Happenstance Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 We'll go back to finding porn magazines by the railway tracks
MoogleViper Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 We'll go back to finding porn magazines by the railway tracks I always find them ripped up behind a bush (one time, along with a large hacksaw). Why were they always ripped up? To make them portable?
Rowan Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Cameron's comments make it sound like he doesn't know how the internet works. ISP's already provide blocks as part of their services and if a parent is too lazy to learn how to use it then don't give your child their own smartphone, tablet, laptop. Get rid of your Wifi and put the computer in the family room. If a film on Netflix has some nudity or sex scene is it going to be blocked too?
MoogleViper Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Well I can tell you today we are changing that. We are closing the loophole - making it a criminal offence to possess internet pornography that depicts rape. Whilst I agree in sentiment that this should be illegal, I worry that it may falsely target anything not vanilla. Take BDSM, surely that has lots of examples of people saying "no", and somebody dominating somebody else. Could that be classed as rape porn? If so, I think it will lead to my previous point, with people going to dodgy sites and viewing much more questionable material than they otherwise would have done.
Agent Gibbs Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Its rediculous Censorship from this stupid nanny state! Parents are meant to regulate children and their use of the internet, not the government. There are so many problems with this, Parents will become complacent and think their child is now safe, when there will be sites not blocked yet, there will be ways around it etc etc And most importantly, they are going to block inappropriate material....who determins what is inappropriate? the governement! and we all know how that works in other countries, they block everything that doesn't meet the current governements agenda were on a slipperly slope here and all because modern parents think the governement should stop their children; watching porn online, accessing illegal stuff, going anywhere dangerous....what exactly do parents these days do? cart them off to school and when they come back home put them infornt of an electronic device, or send them down a CCTV covered park? GOD DAMN DO SOME BLOODY PARENTING YOU LAZY BASTARDS
Rummy Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 We'll go back to finding porn magazines by the railway tracks I always find them ripped up behind a bush (one time, along with a large hacksaw). Why were they always ripped up? To make them portable? Amusingly I was chatting about 'wild' porn just yesterday! I'm with Animal on it though, why not make it an opt-in for parents to do? Call up and ask for the block to be placed, to be not by default otherwise? ISPs can always make people aware it's an available feature. Besides it won't work anyway, because there will always be someone who hasn't got the block in place - whole scheme flawed when young Billy becomes the local porn baron.
Rowan Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Services like OpenDNS already provide parental filters for free on a router level in your house so that it can block across all your devices. Maybe the government should just spend more money advertising things like this. Though kids I suppose could get around it with 3G.
Serebii Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 My Virgin Media router has these things (keyword/domain blocking) in the settings. You can turn them on/off at will. They should not, however, default to being on.
bryanee Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 It should be OPT IN not OPT OUT. If it happens and I get that call to opt out, I'll make it really uncomfortable. Surely people who look for child porn do so in other ways, by using the dark net. So I'm not sure how blocking all the legit porn streaming sites is going to help in the slightest. No doubt anyone who opts out will end up on some kind of register to be monitored.
Jimbob Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 This is pathetic, censorship in my opinion. The options are available for parents to block this material from the eyes of children. When i was younger, my Dad blocked the content (and he isn't too good with computers) so i couldn't see it. It's so easy to do, and if you are stuck your ISP can assist with it. I watch porn, like many people do. I admit it, and everyone knows and i don't care. I agree with the comments i've read, this should be an opt-in from responsible parents to put into place and not simply an opt out. I know of a recent opt-out choice which was a good decision for Wales, but thats going off the point in hand. I agree that violent "rape" porn and stuff like that needs to be banned, but not general porn. That's not right at all and one i disagree on. But at least it's an opt-out service, so you can at least get it back if you really want it.
Ramar Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 We'll go back to finding porn magazines by the railway tracks With this news and the current weather I'm sure we'll see an increase in ice cream vans.
Mr_Odwin Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 We need a name for the future of this. China has the Great Firewall of China, we need something cool sounding too. I wish I could think of some funny name, that would make this post so much better.
Jav_NE Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 This plan has one very simple flaw - adults want to watch porn. Probably males moreso than females, and porn has always had an element of privacy and secrecy about it so this is bound to create conflict amongst parents. Say the husband who likes porn is responsible for the ISP, he gets the phone call to opt out - somehow I think he will be doing exactly that. Then what? They have the awkward conversation with their wife why their kid can still access porn sites? Or maybe the wife is responsible for the ISP, what then? The husband has to confess and convince her to opt out? Of course, this works both ways, the wives could be the ones who like porn and not the husbands, but regardless, unless they both agree this has social nightmare written all over it. I would imagine most will avoid this awkwardness, get on with it and find alternatives should they have to so mobile sites, magazines and chat lines are going to have one hell of a sales boost! I agree with what they're trying to do but they really havn't thought it through. As others have said, best solution would be education - advising parents of how to put the restrictions in place themselves, by device, and not at ISP level.
Serebii Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 I think writing to our respective MPs could help sort this out, or at least give them reason to consider changing to opt-in rather than opt-out
James Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Services like OpenDNS already provide parental filters for free on a router level in your house so that it can block across all your devices. Maybe the government should just spend more money advertising things like this. Though kids I suppose could get around it with 3G. Mobile Operators already block adult content on there networks, o2 do anyways. You have to click a link and give them your credit card details which they take 1p from and then refund back to verify your 18
Serebii Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 http://www.writetothem.com This is what I'm doing. I'm trying to not go all techie in this, but yeah. It'll definitely help.
Dannyboy-the-Dane Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 This is censorship and thus by its very definition bad. What makes it worse is that this seems to be an effort to enforce conservative, outdated attitudes towards sex. Whilst I agree in sentiment that this should be illegal, I worry that it may falsely target anything not vanilla. Take BDSM, surely that has lots of examples of people saying "no", and somebody dominating somebody else. Could that be classed as rape porn? If so, I think it will lead to my previous point, with people going to dodgy sites and viewing much more questionable material than they otherwise would have done. Why, if I may ask? Why should porn depicting rape be illegal? Porn is not real, it's fiction. Nobody is being harmed. If depiction of rape in porn should be illegal, what about depicition of rape in films, video games, books?
Recommended Posts