I do believe that there are some things on the internet which the majority do deem as too crude and some of this content should be blocked or removed. This should not mean that 'standard' porn should also be affected as I'm sure a large part of the population watch porn.
I do believe that there are some things on the internet which the majority do deem as too crude and some of this content should be blocked or removed. This should not mean that 'standard' porn should also be affected as I'm sure a large part of the population watch porn.
YOUNG&READY wrote:
I do believe that there are some things on the internet which the majority do deem as too crude and some of this content should be blocked or removed. This should not mean that 'standard' porn should also be affected as I'm sure a large part of the population watch porn.
I agree with you there,
MissChar wrote:
Yeah sgt horny that's what I think, I don't see why people can't just opt out which is a really comparatively simpler process!
And I might be being thick but I don't know what you mean :( lol
I just think they try and cover some things up with other stories, ;-)
SgtHorny wrote:
MissChar wrote:
Yeah sgt horny that's what I think, I don't see why people can't just opt out which is a really comparatively simpler process!
And I might be being thick but I don't know what you mean :( lol
I just think they try and cover some things up with other stories, ;-)
Ohhhh! Lol true true! Xx
I dont really like it, question is will it protect our young or will it encourage adults to go out seeking sex and extreme fetish and the like that they would only normally look at online in the safety of the home in real life? i know there is an opt in/out thing but if you're married and you dont want your spouse to know you watch porn what do you do? I dont think it will work well in practice. its up to parents to set up filters and controls.
L&J
Wont somebody think of the children!!!
Not their parents apparently...
I highly doubt this whole thing has anything to do with the children, just like when they monitor emails ect has nothing to do with terrorism. It's about the government dictating what people can and can't do and using an excuse like children and terrorism to do it. It won't be long before they ban things from TV adult channels ect.
And as Ork said it will eventually devolop into a ruling body like China has. It's about time people stood up to the government and gave them the finger. It's only going to get worse.
I'm curious how this may affect bloggers in the sex toy community, since they post adult content.
why the fuck is anyone annoyed about this?
if you want porn, just tell them you want it, its not rocket science!!
Emu wrote:
why the fuck is anyone annoyed about this?
if you want porn, just tell them you want it, its not rocket science!!
Someone I know posted on Facebook saying 'now we can't access porn without ticking a box to say we want it, congrats David Cameron you have lost. 99.99% of the male vote' ... Can males not tick boxes?
people are all talk
It's not that I want porn, I don't actually watch it that much. Nor do I generally search out explicit sites. It's more the fact that I pay for an internet connection, I pay for my computer and I also expect to be able to use it as and how I see fit. I'm not doing anything illegal, I'm not hurting anyone. But what I don't like is being told what I can and cannot do by other people.
I dislike the fact that they will dictate what is classed in their eyes as porn, that could be a wide range of things and I would have to phone up my ISP to have them unblock the block that I've been forced to have all in the name of child safety when lets be honest we all know that's a load of bull. Child safety is a smoke screen they're using to filter out more things and gain more control over what we can and cannot do.
I also see this as not more safety for people but for more harm, the internet for many people is a form of release and when they're not able to get that release? Then what is going to happen they're going to go out and they're going to get that release and not necessarily by willing participants. In several different countries when porn was legalised they found that overall the rape cases dropped. And I do believe this little mission that's been set out is going to see those cases rise in this country when already IMO they're high enough.
I'm a grown woman and I shouldn't have to be told what I can and can not look at, I also have children but as a mother I use common sense and block out things that can be harmful for my child or any other child in my household as we're all capable of doing that. Would I phone my ISP and ask them to unblock the material they're blocking? More than likely not as I've said up there that will more than likely result in mine (And everyone elses details who does it) being passed over so they can monitor what we do online all in the name of child safety. If they're going to block something atleast have the balls to call it what it is; and that is a means of control.
There seem to be a couple of strands to these new measures - some content that was legal to access online in England and Wales (e.g. depicting scenes of rape) will become illegal; also ISPs will be switching to an on-by-default filtering system for pornographic content and search terms.
To the first part, I don't think many people would object particularly strenuously. Should we though? People do have abduction/rape fantasies, and are free to act them out (among consenting adults, etc.) - but it might not be ok to video it any more. And films like The Accused (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Accused_%281988_film%29) - you can buy the DVD, but you maybe can't watch it on Netflix any more.
Regarding the second part, I think it's really just a rather poorly thought-out effort designed to appease voters. Most people, whether from a technical background or not, are fully aware that filtering technology works poorly at the best of times, and is often more of a hindrance. Moving the filter from the PC to the ISP actually reduces the effectiveness - imagine a house with a computer in each of the kids; bedrooms, plus a computer for the parents. If filtering is carried out at the PC, the filters can be set appropriately depending on the child's age, plus taking other factors into account (blocking social networks, games etc. during homework time). Move that to the ISP, and all of a sudden it's just an on/off switch for the whole family's connection - and in this scenario multiplied by the number of similar households across the UK, there will be a significant proportion where the parents do actually want access to porn.
With regard to how it's implemented, I think that'll depend on the ISPs and search providers. In most cases I imagine that'll be via a blacklist of known domains, plus search term filtering - depending on how willing the big search providers are to go down that route. Certainly not impossible to bypass, but I'm not quite sure who the second part of the legislation is aimed at - realistically it's not going to stop anyone who is determined and reasonably techno-literate, so it's really just got to be to stop kids accessing porn.
Which brings me to my final point - does anyone actually know whether children are detrimentally affected by viewing pornography? I haven't come across any studies (haven't looked, to be fair - not sure I want to start putting those search terms into Google now!). Use of porn is virtually universal in adults (at least among men - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/6709646/All-men-watch-porn-scientists-find.html), and one can't avoid the fact that there is a second motivation for children to seek out porn - curiosity. One might hope that a government that truly listens to its advisers on child development might take the approach of a more liberal parent, who quietly leaves an informative book somewhere it'll be found - though the concept of state-approved porn is just as unsettling...
I think blocking it is a good idea, afterall it's not being banner you just have to tick a box to say you want in a similar way to other types of porn.
If I want to buy a porn mag I don't get loads through my door and then have to choose to throw them away. If I want adult channels on the TV I have to call a number to request them they don't automatically appear and I have to opt out. I don't see this as any different.
This is not about porn, folks.
It is about the government forcing ISPs to insert some technology that the government controls that edits what we can see.
It is about censorship. Porn is just the excuse they are using to introduce it.
Everyone should be afraid right now.
It should all be fine, i've noticed a 'safe guard' from Orange where i cant acess 18+ material on 3G without disabling it first. Easy enough to do, i cant see them wanting to shut all porn down or anything, just make it so a small child cant accidentally get on them.
Lets face it pressing 'okay' on a webpage to access 18+ stuff is not gonna hold back anyone if they are curious, be that a kid thats stumbled on their dads history or a 15 year old interested with shemales or some stuff.
FrozenAngel wrote:
But what I don't like is being told what I can and cannot do by other people.
i suggest you set up an island somewhere all to yourself then, because what do you think every single new law they bring out is doing? it is all there to tell you what you can and can't do...all of it
the real irony here is, this law DOESN'T tell you that you can't do ANYTHING - it gives you the choice whether you want to or not
this whole 'freedom of speech' thing makes me laugh, as if having to make an extra five seconds of effort to say YES I WANT PORN! does anything to damage free speech...but in this case i think, for 'free speech' read 'i want to ram my porn down your throat whether you want it or not'
NO ONE has the right to impose porn on someone who doesn't want to see it
I think you've missed the point entirely, and you're entitled to your views as I am intitled to mine. I think it's a really bad idea, if it comes in effect it won't really effect me anyways, my point is; this isn't being brought into effect for child safety or so that it doesn't impose porn on people (If you don't want to see it then you could just block it out right?) It is an excuse they're using to yet again find another way of control online, and once they have this rule in place it won't be long before other things you do online are monitored legally for 'child protection, terrorism or whatever bull excuse they decide to throw at us now'
And if I had the money to set up an Island I would, however like I said I think you missed the point on what I'm saying. I pay for the internet, I pay for my computer and I pay for the electric to use it; I shouldn't have to be dictated to as an adult how and what I can use it for, which is exactly what is going to happen.
My point isn't that it can be easily veiwed by checking a box or calling up, my point is that you shouldn't have to do that. And if they are going to bring it forward then don't cover it up saying it's for child protection when it's aload of crap, tell it what it is a way of controling you even more. But then that wouldn't win votes now would it?