Support NeoGAF

[IdreamofHIME]

cool, i want to see what the ramifications are.

I predict rape and child abuse will continue.

 

[Martian]

I predict rape and child abuse will continue.

And might even increase.
As opening the world up to porn has shown to decrease the amounts of rape (same goes for legalization of prostitution)

 

[jimi_dini]

I always wonder why the UK is pushing for all those ridiculous laws, surveillance, etc. etc. What is the need for all this specifically in the UK? Where is the demand coming from?

Our

Spoiler

facist

governments see their own citizens as potential terrorists.
On top of that they also see everyone watching porn as a potential child porn consumer.

and "this damn Internet shouldn't be able to inform people about illegal things that we are doing, we need to do something about that" - "but we are calling ourselves democracies" - "well, let's call it a filter for porn, yeah and we will tell them that it's about child porn" - "perfect".

Yes, this is something the real Guy Fawkes would have probably implemented considering he wanted a more strict dictatorial government.

That's "V". Not Guy Fawkes. He is just wearing a Guy Fawkes mask. And if I would have to choose between both sides, I would gladly choose "V".
Anarchy isn't that great, but it's definitely better than facism.

 

[Joni]

It begins.

Yes, this is something the real Guy Fawkes would have probably implemented considering he wanted a more strict dictatorial government.

 

[sankt-Antonio]

German IP Arcor had to put up a filter to block porn, because of some legal right issue. It lasted all but a month and everything went to normal again.

You don't just take porn from people - all it takes is one IP that automaticly checks the "turn filter off" box when doing a new contract and all of a sudden every other IP will follow suite and this will end up nothing more then a checkbox, i would hope.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

Is this set automatically on or off? Different sources say differently.

 

[MJLord]

Is this set automatically on or off? Different sources say differently.

Auto on

EDIT: Don't attack the internet DC. Attack the monsters that commit the acts of child porn.

 

[cloud_sleep]

Jeezus.

So basically the U.K. government will now have a giant list of "perverts."

They already do. It's a 1974 TV Times.

 

[Joni]

You don't just take porn from people - all it takes is one IP that automaticly checks the "turn filter off" box when doing a new contract and all of a sudden every other IP will follow suite and this will end up nothing more then a checkbox, i would hope.

That is why you need a public shaming list for all those that have turned it off, and naturally when a couple wants to do it they have to decide it together in the same room so you can have huge fights between husband and wife as to why it needs to be turned off. Depending on the implementation it could be quite fun.

 

[Napoleonthechimp]

Auto on

The guardian article says differently. And I believe they discussed this before and stated that it would be turned off unless the customer says otherwise.

I don't believe that they could think that this would go down well with the general population.

 

[twobear]

Hello, is that Cameron? Oh, hi. Can you make pornography come on my telly please? Oh, that’s very nice of you. Thank you.

Nnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn this post

 

[zomgbbqftw]

It's opt in to block porn as I understand the idea.

Also, this is fucking Claire Perry's doing. Fucking hate that cunt. Wish she would fuck off.

 

[Rich!]

I blame the Daily Mail. They've been on this BLOCK PORN OMG crusade for years now, not understanding that the real dodgy stuff will stay unaffected on TOR.


fucking idiots.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

It's opt in to block porn as I understand the idea.

Also, this is fucking Claire Perry's doing. Fucking hate that cunt. Wish she would fuck off.

\Should have known she had some part in it.

 

[mrklaw]

Clearly using the child porn excuse to push for an censorship filter across the UK.

After-all, you wouldn't be for child porn, would you? who cares if the filter could be abused to smother freedom of speech.

It is so transparent how he is doing this. Has Newsnight pulled anyone up on this yet?

Tbh as a parent I'm in two minds. Internet freedom on the one hand, but perhaps a gentler introduction to the pornier side of life on the other.

I have no doubt my kids will see nudey ladies, but in my day it was a dog-eared copy of Mayfair someone from school found in a bush. Filters won't stop everything but if it means less accidental exposure to nasty stuff and makes it more difficult to see, then it might be ok. I am slightly worried that when my son gets into full-on hormone mode, easy access to streaming porn could leave him a dried out husk (certainly would have done that to me during my teenage years)

Although perhaps if it was less nanny-ish I'd have an option to have certain IP addresses blocked off, or ISPs could give me software to help (not a fan of net nanny etc, PITA most of them)

 

[Steverulez]

Doesn't David Cameron have something better to do, like fix the economy or come up with a plan to bin off that twat Osborne? Jesus.

He was watching the cricket the other day at Lords, needs to get his priorities in order.

 

[Gowans]

This is so clueless,

I have two kids myself, a boy and a girl.

It's my job to make sure they are covered with this stuff.

They have no idea how the internet works, just look at the pirate bay block it was useless.

It's using a bomb to take out an ant.

 

[Darth Sonik]

Start a campaign to block the Sun, Star, Mail etc. for their disgusting content, to protect the children from such terrible influences. See how long this stays as a policy then.

 

[casabolg]

At least John approves...

 

[Blearth]

The crown has no legal authority. The law is more than a set of words in books. That's the sheet music, but law itself is a performance art. In those countries, it's been a performance so long running that entire sections may barely resemble the original composition.

Which is why the poster who brought up the issue used the word 'technically'.

I like your metaphor, though.

 

[Marvel]

 

[cyberheater]

I'm all for it.

I've got two young kids and I don't want them coming across that stuff. I wonder if they're are any good browsers for mac that automatically have that option on.

 

[Deaf Spacker]

I'm all for it.

I've got two young kids and I don't want them coming across that stuff. I wonder if they're are any good browsers for mac that automatically have that option on.

Why don't you install your own blocking software?

 

[JonathanEx]

It is so transparent how he is doing this. Has Newsnight pulled anyone up on this yet?

It's a technology story on newsnight. So they go for the fear angle and not understanding the internet, and just having one scared PC magazine editor have to defend the internet against the combination of Paxman, parents and lobby groups. Painful segments.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I'm all for it.

I've got two young kids and I don't want them coming across that stuff. I wonder if they're are any good browsers for mac that automatically have that option on.

Why don't you install your own blocking software?

Indeed.

 

[fabricated backlash]

countdown until a hacker hacks an isp and dumps a list of customers who opt out of the ban

If it isn't leaked by an NSA contractor first.

 

[Deaf Spacker]

Indeed.

I don't get why parents think that this is a good thing. If they're that worried about little Johnny watching people fuck etc then they should install their own software, not expect the government to do what the parents should more or less be doing in the first place.

 

[JonathanEx]

Is this set automatically on or off? Different sources say differently.

Cameron wants it porn to be blocked and you opt out to see legal adult content. ISPs want it opt in and are not happy with the govt's attitude over this. But Cameron looks like he'll announce it despite that.

Edit - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23312579 has the letter from Govt to ISPs.

--

Just thought of an idea. So the idea is that there's a block screen? Making a version of that with a giant picture of Cameron's face saying "oh you didn't want to look at THOSE, did you? oh dear oh dear oh dear"

 

[Air Zombie Meat]

Cameron is such an ass. I can't imagine this being popular at all with the majority of people if it's opt out.

 

[peanutbutterlatte]

And yet I bet loads of violent websites will go unlocked. The confused way our society works where boobs and penises are evil continues.

 

[Bo-Locks]

If I'm understanding this correctly it's an opt-in system called "default-on"? The fuck...

It's so transparent this is just about winning votes and bending to certain sections of the media and population; mainly lazy, middle-class parents who use ignorance of technology as a smokescreen for their failings as parents and want someone to blame, and well done for conflating the issue of porn filters with paedophilia.

 

[dc89]

Cameron has just Tweeted this:

I'll be talking to @BBCWomansHour and @theJeremyVine this morning about protecting children from online pornography.

 

[panda21]

someone in another thread said it was just a DNS filter?

in which case bypassing it would be as simple as using google DNS.

 

[blazeuk]

Like has been said, I'm more concerned about the normal sites that get blocked by phone networks when you haven't opted out of the block.

It's just another reason why it won't work - so many people will get annoyed with having random websites blocked that have nothing to do with porn. Just as a quick example of that, some phone networks block some restaurant websites because of adult material.

 

[KNT-Zero]

This gonna work as well as the access ban to TPB. And that's all I'm saying xD

 

[gofreak]

I wonder if there are enough 16 to 20-somethings who'll be pissed off - i.e. still living at home and not in charge of their own internet - that the Tories could lose the next election over this Anyone know the demographics?

Maybe this will be the next 'Maggie took my milk' thing. 'Cameron took my porn'.

 

[afoni]

I hope this creates a big movement of YouTube porn, not that there isn't enough soft stuff on there already.

 

[DBT85]

I want to see the stats in 6 months showing that porn viewing hasn't changed.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

I don't get why parents think that this is a good thing. If they're that worried about little Johnny watching people fuck etc then they should install their own software, not expect the government to do what the parents should more or less be doing in the first place.

Absolutely agree, but it ties into this general trend that parents are somehow not fully responsible for their children any more and that the state should be doing more to help protect and raise them.

Pretty disturbing trend.

 

[JonathanEx]

 

[Gregorn]

We'll all get around this in seconds.

 

[JoeM86]

My issue with this isn't necessarily the blocking of illicit material, though I agree you should have to opt into having the block, not opt out of having it.

My concern is with the way they'll go about this. This is something being enforced by people with very little technical knowledge and it just isn't feasible.

If they just run an algorithm, so many innocent sites will get hit. Say someone foolishly spams this place with illicit material. GAF would then possibly get blocked, despite not actually being a host of that content.

Blocks of this extent just are not technically feasible. The things they want to block will get around it, and innocent sites will be hit.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

Cameron has his head in the clouds over this one if he thinks computers and tablets will come pre-installed with filters.

I thought Lynton Crosby was there to get the Tories on message for the election, he of all people should know that there is no popular support for this measure and it got kicked out in Australia.

Seriously, it won't get through Parliament, and if it comes through without legislation then the ISPs and computer manufacturers will just ignore it.

Dave, get back on message, immigration, economy and welfare. Forget everything else and stop pandering to Mumsnet and the Daily Mail.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Restricting certain terms and words.

Yeah, that's never going to be abused at any point. Jesus Christ, I hope the ISPs revolt and refuse to implement any such restrictions. Fuck this noise.

 

[JonathanEx]

Interesting that those are said to be devices with the filters rather than the networks - me suspects the man doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about.

It's a terrible decision in pandering, isn't it? Sure, you'll make the Mail readers happy, but there are a lot more people who'll be rightfully angry that he's taken our porn away.

 

[SteveWD40]

Chasing that ignorant, blinkered middle England vote.

ISP's have far more power (and money) when it comes down to it, Virgin, Sky, EE and BT. I wouldn't be surprised if, by the time this hit's it's a shadow of their intent, with porn enabled by default and an opt out button.

 

[Miles Quaritch]

Cameron has his head in the clouds over this one if he thinks computers and tablets will come pre-installed with filters.

I thought Lynton Crosby was there to get the Tories on message for the election, he of all people should know that there is no popular support for this measure and it got kicked out in Australia.

Seriously, it won't get through Parliament, and if it comes through without legislation then the ISPs and computer manufacturers will just ignore it.

Dave, get back on message, immigration, economy and welfare. Forget everything else and stop pandering to Mumsnet and the Daily Mail.

I don't know, people said the same about HS2 and yet here we are, about to move forward with a deeply unpopular and incredibly expensive policy that should have been abandoned long ago.

 

[$h@d0w]

Breaking news, Cameron "deeply involved" in porn.

 

[zomgbbqftw]

I don't know, people said the same about HS2 and yet here we are, about to move forward with a deeply unpopular and incredibly expensive policy that should have been abandoned long ago.

The Treasury is slowing turning the screw on HS2. It won't happen, the cost has risen to £43bn (optimistically, I have heard the Treasury think £59bn is a more realistic figure) and the economic case is due to be updated to the 2009 model and they are working on a "2030" model which is when it is due to be finished. Both of these will significantly impact the economic case for HS2 because the current model used to calculate the benefits assume that no work can be done on trains, but now we live in an age of always on 3G and 4G connections, AC power at all seats and tables on trains and laptops with huge batteries. Basically getting somewhere a bit faster does not significantly impact the amount of work that can be done now.

Anyway, that's off topic. IMO, it's silly season fodder, and Lynton Crosby will kill it on September when he starts full time.

 

[DBT85]

Imagine if it came out that Cameron and other leading politicians have opted out of the block. My, the papers would go wild.