Crap Here we go...

[DaGaffer]

If I can just squeeze past the wall of sweaty outrage, can I ask a simple question?

What's the difference between this, and forcing newsagents to put porn magazines on the top shelf, obscured by wrappers?

Not that I agree that this proposed legislation is the correct course of action.

See my example above. If the newsagent sticks porn on the top shelf, you are unaffected, if you have to opt-in with your ISP (and inevitably end up on a database in Snooper's Paradise Britain), you are affected. Its another bit of profiling.

 

[Raven]

If I can just squeeze past the wall of sweaty outrage, can I ask a simple question?

What's the difference between this, and forcing newsagents to put porn magazines on the top shelf, obscured by wrappers?

Not that I agree that this proposed legislation is the correct course of action.

For a start, its the thin end of a wedge, censorship of the internet is a crock of bollocks.
Secondly a list will be stored showing that you have opted in to view perfectly legal pornography. In today's hysterical daily mail shit fest of a country how well do you think that will look for teachers, nursery nurses, policeman, social workers etc etc. Everyone knows about porn and most people look at it. I doubt many people want it on their CV though...

 

[Athan]

I'd also wonder about the technical implementations. i.e. if you've turned the filter off is your traffic still going through the equipment anyway such that any failure of it leads to no HTTP access ?

That and no-one seems to be mentioning HTTPS in the context of this filter. Yes, google et al will be on board to some degree so using HTTPS for your searches will make no difference, but what about access to the 'actual' sites? IP-level filtering, so collateral damage galore? Turning on the filter means you have to install the ISP's CA cert so they can MITM it for you ?

 

[Raven]

...also, if a parent wants to watch a bit of porn once the scrotes have gone to bed, will they be constantly turning it off and on again? If they opt out it will make fuck all difference anyway. Personal filters would make much more sense, if a parent wants to block it on their kids machines now then it is very simple to do so.

 

[Scouse]

Plus, the Honorable Fellowship Of Leaving Porn In The Woods For Teenagers To Find has had its day, so even if sex hasn't changed, porn has.

Different ways of finding it, yep

Among the "normal" porn there's a lot of really dodgy and disgusting stuff going on that was pretty damn hard if not impossible to get your hands on not all that many years ago.

Disagree. Same shit, different day is all. And also "disgusting" and "dodgy" are subjective observations.

It always seems to me the ones who are most offended by anything slightly outside the realms of their limited experience are the ones who have the most 'depraved' (by their own standards) desires, they're just unable to admit it to themselves.

Science has actually proven this point. The biggest actual subscribers to porn sites in the US are those with the most fundamentalist christian populations.


Forbidding things to humans makes them MORE attractive.

As for the "rape"-vid thing. Three things to say: 1) It's not real. 2) Consenting adults. 3) Ask your girlfriend if she'll tell you what her rape fantasy is...

...she won't tell you. But she has one.

 

[TdC]

Personal filters would make much more sense, if a parent wants to block it on their kids machines now then it is very simple to do so.

indeed. it's VERY simple to do. this proposal is the complete opposite and imo only geared to a higher level of control of the public.

 

[Moriath]

But how will they even do it. I mean its easy to block sex.com. But sites spring up all over the place and some hae other things on not just porn. I mean most of the forums on the Internet would have to be banned cause they couldn't guarantee what is posted on them.

Then there's the block this we give you proxies and VPN. If they ever dd manage it they would just be on te look out for the next out rage. Johnny no mate watched bourse of gore ban all gore sites. Until you get johnny no mates watched bourse of fluffy bunnies quick bring back mixamortosis (sp)

 

[eksdee]

With all this said, no one has mentioned the most important thing here... Deebs please tell us you have hard copy backups of the booty thread for when FH gets taken down?

 

[Chilly]

If I can just squeeze past the wall of sweaty outrage, can I ask a simple question?

What's the difference between this, and forcing newsagents to put porn magazines on the top shelf, obscured by wrappers?

Not that I agree that this proposed legislation is the correct course of action.

Well you dont have to prove your identity to a newsagent if you want to buy jizzmags. I seriously object to having my name on a list of "perverts". What if that list leaks? What if a future government decides to use it as a target for some other action?

History shows that governments should rarely be allowed to make lists of people.

 

[Shagrat]

Or they sell the list onto Paul Raymond so he can target ads at purveyors of porn....

The potential for abuse is just immense, and with govt track record on any kind of IT project its just an incoming clusterfuck.

 

[Job]

I fully support it...online porn is corrupting our minds...its a fucking sea of extreme acts slowly but surely desentising our morality...there is nothing left to get excited about..thats why so many men end up looking at kiddie porn...restrict access to it as much ss you reasonably can and we will all drift back to getting turned on by a flash of tit in a movie...the excitement is the same but the content is far less depraved...itll be like coming off crack..but it will save your mind.

 

[Shagrat]

It's far more accessible than it was when I was young (getting hold of a copy of Razzle was porn when I was younger). Then it was pictures that you had to download in sections......

but do you really think that an opt out system that blocks sites is the answer?

Who will make the list, who decides on what is blocked, at what level are they blocked (the image, the link, the entire site, etc.)

I just fail to see how implementable a system it really is.

 

[megadave]

time to get some depraved porn in before it's too late

 

[Raven]

It will be like work blocks I imagine, where it blocks all sorts of every day stuff based on a scoring system.

 

[megadave]

like freddyshouse!

 

[Shagrat]

Remind me a week before this is implemented and I'm going to buy a lorry load of V for Vendetta masks. I'll make a fortune selling them on ebay.

 

[Job]

We all need to look in the mirror and ask ourselves if watching some strangers perform the most vile sexual acts for the entertainment of the masses and then clicking away for the next casual hit is the way forward for the human race

 

[Moriath]

We all need to look in the mirror and ask ourselves if watching some strangers perform the most vile sexual acts for the entertainment of the masses and then clicking away for the next casual hit is the way forward for the human race

For some it is for others it isn't, but who am I or the government to tell you what you can and can't see if they and the viewer are all consenting adults.

 

[Raven]

We all need to look in the mirror and ask ourselves if watching some strangers perform the most vile sexual acts for the entertainment of the masses and then clicking away for the next casual hit is the way forward for the human race

What the hell are you babbling on about now?

 

[Tom]

For a start, its the thin end of a wedge, censorship of the internet is a crock of bollocks.

But the internet is already censored. The authorities actively search for and remove child pornography. YouTube delete anything they don't like. Piracy websites are also blocked.

I don't agree that internet porn is a problem but the way some people are reacting, it's as though David Cameron just elected himself supreme ruler.

Porn on satellite television has been blocked by default for decades. There's no difference.

 

[Raven]

What are your thoughts about point 2?

 

[Job]

My eighteen year old stepdaughter and her boyfriend are watching one of the newer American Pies with us in the room, there's a full on sex scene and I looked at them, not a flinch, no reaction whatsoever from teenagers sitting with their parents...simply because they are so used to pornography it might as well have been a cheese making program, the kids of today have been robbed of their innocence and respect for humanity by the tsunami of pornography on the internet.
In my day it was color climax getting passed around school, now it's 10 year olds with videos on their phones of people shitting on each other.
Surely it's time for a reset of our expectations.

 

[Tom]

What are your thoughts about point 2?

That some list will be developed and stored? I don't consider it to be a problem. Firstly, it would be a list owned by a private company and subject to data protection laws. I certainly don't see how the government could possibly get legal access to it, since pornography of that nature is perfectly legal to own. Secondly, any attempt by the media to gain access to and use such a list would have to be in the public interest - and I cannot see any public interest angle in revealing who's on it.

In short, if some bogroll like the Daily Mail published details of anyone on such a list, they'd probably be looked at in just the same way as we now look at the News of the World.

 

[Raven]

Your naivety with the security of data is astounding. I thought you had been using the internet for some time? Shit is constantly leaked either by idiocy or by subterfuge. All it needs is the list to go public and you have a lynching at the local primary school.

 

[TdC]

But the internet is already censored. The authorities actively search for and remove child pornography. YouTube delete anything they don't like. Piracy websites are also blocked.

I don't agree that internet porn is a problem but the way some people are reacting, it's as though David Cameron just elected himself supreme ruler.

Porn on satellite television has been blocked by default for decades. There's no difference.

this. makes me wonder if TBL and the other techs forsaw what would happen and it's effects. note: I do not complain: if anything, the internet has forced humanity in to the next era, albeit the humanity of the western, liberal skanced flavour.

 

[Raven]

Oh and blocking just doesn't work, I still use the pirate bay nearly daily. It just such a stupid way of doing it. Educate parents, not foist shit on the rest of us.

 

[TdC]

och, but asking the PARENTS to do something is too much no? I mean, the PARENTS who hope their kids PS3's will do the parenting for them. the PARENTS who are to busy / CBA to sit down and actually communicate with their kids and explain to them what is what.

a few days ago my mate's 4yo seriously told me there are no monsters -anywhere-, they're all fake and/or made up. Me, I hoped with every fiber of my being that she would never have to know otherwise. then she said that unicorns and dragons were allowed because they werent monsters and I had faith again

 

[Chilly]

Now this is the story all about how,
My life will end with me wearing a crown,
And I'd like to take a minute just sit right there,
I'll tell you how I became the prince and also the heir.

In Kensington palace born and raised,
Water polo is where I'll spend most of my days.
Chillin' out maxin' relaxin' all cool,
Shooting some pheasants outside Eaton school.

When a couple of peasants who were up to no good,
Starting asking for change in my neighbourhood.
I got touched by one and my mom got scared,
She said you're moving in with great Granny to become the new heir

 

[DaGaffer]

That some list will be developed and stored? I don't consider it to be a problem. Firstly, it would be a list owned by a private company and subject to data protection laws. I certainly don't see how the government could possibly get legal access to it, since pornography of that nature is perfectly legal to own. Secondly, any attempt by the media to gain access to and use such a list would have to be in the public interest - and I cannot see any public interest angle in revealing who's on it.

In short, if some bogroll like the Daily Mail published details of anyone on such a list, they'd probably be looked at in just the same way as we now look at the News of the World.

Not so, its ISP data so its covered by RIPA. The government can have the data; unlike your satellite TV example.

 

[Moriath]

I think it is all moot and Cameron is promising something the ISP can't deliver. There's no way they can stop all porn. They can't stop all kiddie porn let alone the ocean of what's out there of non niche stuff