Opt Out Porn Filter

Off-Topic Chat
43

Aqualaria wrote:

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.

THIS. This is the main reason why the whole thing is so terrible. You can bet your arse that the government will be keeping a list of the people who have opted out, just so they can monitor what you're doing under the guise of 'but they might be paedophiles!!'

The entire thing is absurd and it won't change much at all. Children need to be talked to by a responsible adult and educated - not have things hidden away so they'll become more curious! Not having the internet won't stop them, and if they can't see it online they might actually start doing it instead. More teenage pregnancies aren't going to make the world a better place.

If you don't agree with what the government is doing, tell them so by signing this petition: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/51746

It's on their website so they can't just ignore it!

44

I've known about this being in the works for a few years now and a few of the people behind it sadly..

Also one of my first thoughts about the news was 'Man this is going to make sex researching harder!'

It isn't a positive movement at all.

45

The 'what constititues porn?' question is definitely an important one here, but one not likely to be entertained by the government.

I can't see them handling this too well to be honest, especially in terms of the argument that this is a complete form of censorship.

If they do go ahead with this (there's word of them trying it over here in Ireland, so they're liable to fuck it up even more), then I'm not too worried. Proxy servers and all that can get around such blocks fairly easily.

46

No expert on politics but this sounds like the government seeing how far they can go,if they succeed in this erosion of our freedom of speech, what comes next?

47

So just seen on the news this morning, in light of the recent opt out porn filter, 'lads mags' are also being requested by certain shops to cover up their front covers or have them removed from shelves...

48

It's.started what next no family planning or health issue leaflets in Dr's surgery because the word sex or intimate is on there, yes. .child abuse must be stopped, but once they start, and no government is going to tell me where I.can buy toys or info, it'll be government toy shops next, onc size fits all, after all "We've all in it together "according to that idiot.

49

I've noticed that when I try and go on the LH site, on 3G a message pops up and it doesn't allow me because I haven't registered that I'm over 18. I don't want to opt out, I'm quite happy not to have porn accessible online in my home, but will that mean I can no longer access LH?

50

MrsMcX wrote:

I've noticed that when I try and go on the LH site, on 3G a message pops up and it doesn't allow me because I haven't registered that I'm over 18. I don't want to opt out, I'm quite happy not to have porn accessible online in my home, but will that mean I can no longer access LH?

Yes I'm worried about this.

51

If it comes to it, I'll just have to 'opt in' but with having kids in the house I would rather just not have to.

It's a ridiculous thing to do anyway, anyone who they are trying to stop watching porn will watch it anyway because they can opt in!

52

I signed the petition against it.

I have also since learned that this filter will also block sites that focus on Eating Disorders, Su!cide, Booze, Drugs, as well as some religious content (mainly anything considered extremist, and some in the Pagan community are saying it will affect us too!)

Sites like Tumblr would be "banned" as it is FULL of porn.

I really do believe that people should opt IN to this, I am not looking forward to ringing up the internet people and asking to be unblocked, how embarrasing! I don't want him to know I want to watch porn and use other bad sites! :/

Also parents should be monitoring their kids better, and not giving them unlimited access to phones with the net and so on. Just sayin'.

54

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/51746

I think is it hun. xx

56

Just signed the petition as an amature photographer it would be a bad thing if sites like tumblr or devientart were blocked because they contain nude images that are more art than porn. Sites like that don't just contain the nude images but would be blocked anyway.

57

Emu wrote:

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

Ermmm, nothing is getting rammed down anybody's throat, and the only people who see it, are those that look for it.

Producers of pornographic material, have a right to be able to make films etc... and to make that available to those that want to see it. By making the default filter an "opt out" scenario, that freedom is being taken away... hence the "freedom of speech" concerns. TV shows have sex and nudity in them, but you don't have to opt in to watch them... you do however, have the option of opting out, by changing channel. The only ones that are blocked, are those requiring a subscription... but even those have freeview periods, that are viewable by everyone. I guess by your definition, all those shows are forcing porn on people that don't want to see it... are they? Irrespective of the fact people have to CHOOSE to go to those channels.

The other concern with all this opting in, is what are the government going to do with this "opted in" list? Do people who opt in, suddenly become high risk, potential paedophiles, because they choose to view any kind of pornography? Do those people suddenly get special monitoring conditions on them, just in case they type in something that gets inadvertantly picked up by a porn keyword filter? Someone on another site said, what if I type "my children are searching for porn". I am sure you can see where a keyword spotter would have a field day with that line.

To be quite honest, if the UK didn't have such an antiquated view on pornography in general, there wouldn't be such a problem. What do you expect though, when you treat a nation of adult TV watchers, like children? You can't watch this... you can't watch that... Erect penises are banned, but we can show a dildo... which is a fabricated erect penis, it's madness. Honestly, the pornography attitude in this country, is firmly stuck in the Whitehouse era. It's about time we matured as a country, and treated the adults like adults.

58

I understand what the government are trying to do - but curious teens managed without Internet pornography years ago, they'll manage after. I do understand if you 'ban' something though, it's throwing up a sign to children that they can't have it, and well - curiousity always kills the cat.

59

I disagree with it, because I think it's the thin end of the wedge and because I don't think it'll really protect the children who are most vulnerable - I severely doubt it'll impact the TOR network in any way whatsoever and therefore a hell of a lot of child abuse will go uncensored, which I thought was the main point of this thing...?

I saw porn for the first time before I was ten (don't even know how that happened - trying to get onto NeoPets obviously went HORRIBLY wrong...), and I am only slightly unhinged, so I don't think children seeing porn is really the biggest issue here.

60

Firstly, anyone who puts up or watches the worst kind of porn, as in children should be hung, drawn and quartered and I agree that something needs to be done about this menace.

However, if anyone wishes to watch legit porn, surely that is their choice. Who is the government to decide what we wish to look at? This is going back to the days of Mary Whitehouse and (I won't say exactly what I think of him, as I don't want banning for rude language :-) ) James Anderton.

Yes, there is going to be an option to tick a box, but as others have asked, is this going to be used to monitor people, who wish to look at porn, as potential peado's?

Plus, we all know how effective government systems are don't we? (hmm - not!).

How much is going to be filtered? I remember accidently turning on the parental control on my Internet security system a few years back and it went overboard with filtering. I wanted some information on Middlesex - it stopped me from looking because it had the word 'sex' in the search term. Bettter still, was when it blocked the Channel Four and Five websites - reason 'inappropriate or adult content' - go figure!

Parents are responsible for their own children and their children's actions. It should, ultimately, be up to them to monitor and censor their children's activities on the Internet - not some great big, wet nanny residing in Westminster.

61

I do agree that this is more to do with controlling the adult population than protecting children from porn.

Filters can be put on and its up to parents to use those and protect their children . These will probably be more effective than some blanket filter with no refinements anyway which is likely to block all kinds of sites not related to porn in any way. And given that it can be so easily removed its a kind of redundant idea anyway which makes you question the motives behind it.

I was watching breakfast television recently and they were talking about this and questioning whether it could prevent more sinister images that Annenon mentioned from being viewed. They seem to think not as that kind of material is apparently hidden away in all kinds of places and the filter wouldn't effect it!
Perhaps this really is their way of just keeping an eye on everybody.

62

The point that seems to have been missed here and what makes my angry is what responsibility parents are taking.

When this was proposed I headed a woman taking on the BBC news about the number of pre-school children who are accessing porn. I ask myself what kind of parent allows their young children unsupervised access to the Internet?

To me it is another example of some parents not wanting to take responsibility for looking after the wellbeing of their children.

I am the Father of three sons two of which are still teenagers and I have no doubt that they have probably viewed porn at sometime, but i would have hoped that I have passed on a degree of understanding or right and wrong.

My main concern is that if we are not careful we will bring up children with no concept of risk or danger and assume that the government is protecting them by blocking averything that may harm them. In reality children need to understand that some things are dangerous and can harm them.

I can remember talking with the Headteacher of my boy's junior school about road safety. She was concerned about parents who drive their primary school children everywhere for their safety, rather than walking them to school and showing them how to cross roads sately. She told me that the highest number of road accidents involving children happen when they start secondary school, because they are suddenly old enough to walk to school, but parents have never exposed them to the risks or explained the dangers.

I feel that the same could be said about the Internet, by assuming that the government is blocking all the bad stuff it is like taking your child to school in a car, you don't have to explain the dangers because they are safe.

The reality is that teenagers will find a way to view porn so they need to be taught that some of it is not real and some is just not acceptable. Without teaching our young people about respect, responsibility and the importance of self respect and esteem, when they are exposed to porn they will be like eleven year olds crossing a main road for they first time when their only experience of traffic has been from the side of a protective box that we call a car.

Parents should not be off loading responsibility for the safety of their children

63

I think this is a good idea in terms of child protection and stopping youngsters from viewing things they are not ready for but I am not 100% behind the idea. I will choose to watch porn and I know that isn’t always liked by people but that is my choice. I think blocking porn may make people ‘go underground’ for porn potentially staring up the old black market again lol