All internet porn will be blocked to protect children under UK Government plan

17810121315

Comments

  • jswift909jswift909 Posts: 11,360
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Internet Filter Software Review
    http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/index.html

    However most parents should be far more concerned to make sure their anti-virus is working and up-to-date, that their WiFi router is secured.

    http://internet-security-suite-review.toptenreviews.com/

    I use Kaspersky Internet Suite 2011, but previously used just their Anti-Virus component. Both haven't let me down. I suspect each new version of Windows is also helping provide significant protection. Parents should also know about making sure their PCs are taking all the appropriate software patches automatically, or at least notifying them when these are available.

    ISPs still have problems stopping spam and viruses, let along trying to interpret other content.
  • AzagothAzagoth Posts: 10,169
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Here's an idea, instead of interfering with a perfectly legal activity, i.e. watching porn on the internet, why don't they start by clamping down on all the parents who've bought their little darlings 15 & 18 rated computer games first?
  • d'@ved'@ve Posts: 45,452
    Forum Member
    Azagoth wrote: »
    If you notice though, the people who're saying it's a good idea don't seem to know how the internet works and don't seem to be too tech savvy. Perhaps the government could provide these people with Fisher Price computers and allow the rest of us to continue masturbating in peace.

    I am tech savvy and I am in favour of it (within reason). I do not have any children living at home any more - but I do have young grand children and I can see the dangers that their mum will face in a few years, and how difficult it will be for her to effectively monitor their internet usage for unsuitable activity.

    A simple opt-out option on our ISP account page is all that's needed for folks like you and me, nothing more.
  • TPLTPL Posts: 2,300
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jules1000 wrote: »
    Before the internet porn mags were placed on top shelves and can only be brought by an adult why should it be the parents responsibility to not let little johnny view hard core porn on the net because it is available and their are no restrictions.
    Is the internet an an adult service.?

    Maybe it should be. What about sexual text, stuff that can found on many a forum?
  • angustayangustay Posts: 2,141
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Deleted
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36,630
    Forum Member
    So different government, same crap I see.

    Proposals introduced under the last government to ensure that all your website visits, emails, mobile and landline telephone calls are tracked and stored.

    Proposals from the EU to ensure that all your contacts on forums and social networking sites are tracked and stored.

    Proposals from the Police who want the power to block and remove websites without any kind of judicial oversight. Similar proposals demanded by the record and movie industries.

    Proposals, and now a law (under judicial review) that gives music and media companies the right to force people off the internet without any judicial oversight or court order and requiring the accused to prove innocence, not the other way round.

    Proposals from this government to force ISPs to block porn websites.

    And you seriously think all these powers will not be abused once they have been in place for a while?.
  • jules1000jules1000 Posts: 10,709
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    adopter wrote: »
    So why do you object to the same happening on the internet? ie what is currently in place - parental controls.

    As I have explained the internet should be a service for all and that includes young adults. The fact that porn is readily available to all makes it an adult service which I don't think it should be. If there are restrictions that adults have to access because they are over the age of 18 it makes it a service for all.
  • You_moYou_mo Posts: 11,334
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Aneechik wrote: »
    1. Anyone who thinks this is about porn and not about paving the way for censorship of any site the government finds objectionable needs their heads examined.

    2. They'll be banning wikileaks just like Australia before too long.

    3. I'm surprised at the Lib Dems going along with this, since it's pretty much against all their policies regarding obscenity since the inception of the party and wasn't in the coalition agreement. Actually, I'm not that surprised.


    I'd say the Wikileaks embarrassment has probably made this more a priority than any porn has. Porn has existed on the 'net just about as long as the internet has existed. But now we're upset at it!
  • adopteradopter Posts: 11,937
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jules1000 wrote: »
    As I have explained the internet should be a service for all and that includes young adults. The fact that porn is readily available to all makes it an adult service which I don't think it should be. If there are restrictions that adults have to access because they are over the age of 18 it makes it a service for all.

    You didn't answer the question.
  • AneechikAneechik Posts: 20,208
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You_mo wrote: »
    I'd say the Wikileaks embarrassment has probably made this more a priority than any porn has. Porn has existed on the 'net just about as long as the internet has existed. But now we're upset at it!

    Yeah wikileaks was definitely the catalyst on this escapade, and when the government inevitably change the rules to completely ban sites (under the guise of the type of porn available), wikileaks will be the first on the list.
  • jules1000jules1000 Posts: 10,709
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    adopter wrote: »
    You didn't answer the question.

    Yes I did
  • Jane Doh!Jane Doh! Posts: 43,307
    Forum Member
    marjangles wrote: »
    Of course it is, yet again it's simply people who can't be bothered and who want to use technology to babysit their kids who maon about how impossible it would be. Rubbish, it might take a little effort but they're your kids, make the effort.

    I disagree. I am not one of those you are talking about, "people who can't be bothered and who want to use technology to babysit their kids who maon about how impossible it would be. "

    My daughter is ten and her internet usage is monitored and restricted.

    I honestly don't see why it is so difficult to opt in. Yes, I know all the arguments from the other side - I've been involved in a thread about this on another forum also. I still can't see why it is such a drama about opting in.
  • jswift909jswift909 Posts: 11,360
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Filters do NOT work - not unless you're a homophobe, for example.

    I just realised my Kaspersky Internet Security 2011 has parental controls. So I set them up for another user profile and logged in. I'm just restricting porn - it's one click. It's pretty hit and miss where I can get to. For example I can't access legitimate lgbt web sites like pinknews.co.uk or pinkpaper.com. I cannot view the LGBT wiki entry, nor access information about sexually transmitted diseases. I could also set it up to control which applications I could use. I restricted notepad, and it wouldn't load, and you can also restrict when they can use Internet explorer, and for how long. Some control freaks could have a field day.

    If you want to be a COMPLETE FREAK you can deny access to all web sites except those you specify. You can restrict various social networking applications. It seems pretty full featured. Perhaps the good lady Claire Perry hasn't seen this.

    ps. it tracks everywhere you go, every program you load.
  • Ash_735Ash_735 Posts: 8,493
    Forum Member
    Jane Doh! wrote: »
    I disagree. I am not one of those you are talking about, "people who can't be bothered and who want to use technology to babysit their kids who maon about how impossible it would be. "

    My daughter is ten and her internet usage is monitored and restricted.

    I honestly don't see why it is so difficult to opt in. Yes, I know all the arguments from the other side - I've been involved in a thread about this on another forum also. I still can't see why it is such a drama about opting in.

    Because it's allowing the Government to get a foot in the door to Regulating the internet!
  • LyricalisLyricalis Posts: 57,958
    Forum Member
    Azagoth wrote: »
    Here's an idea, instead of interfering with a perfectly legal activity, i.e. watching porn on the internet, why don't they start by clamping down on all the parents who've bought their little darlings 15 & 18 rated computer games first?

    I'm sure they'll get around to banning those completely as well just in case. I'd feel insulted if I were a parent with the government thinking I'm so useless that I need them to be a parent for me.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 36,630
    Forum Member
    Incidentally, Australia already tried to set up a filter to do exactly what this one is intended to do and it has so far proven to be one massive failure, blocking legitimate sites (including would you believe, some of the governments own websites), as well sites of political opponents (a mistake apparently) and allowing other porn sites through quite happily. There is also extensive lobbying to have it extended to block other sites that certain groups disagree with.

    And it can all be defeated with either with the use of an anonymous proxy or by paying a fiver a month for an encrypted VPN account.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,341
    Forum Member
    My views're neutral about this btu I've noticed that lager based sites often ask for date of birth. What's to stop a ten year old kid from lying about their age if asked for their date of birth?
  • LyricalisLyricalis Posts: 57,958
    Forum Member
    motsy wrote: »
    My views're neutral about this btu I've noticed that lager based sites often ask for date of birth. What's to stop a ten year old kid from lying about their age if asked for their date of birth?

    On the bright side, they have learned two valuable live skills for our consumer age: lying and arithmetic! Surely they deserve a reward for that?
  • MrOstentatiousMrOstentatious Posts: 2,713
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Kinda stupid. So many ways around it and my parents have no idea how to use the computer anyway. My mum does, but to a certain extent. I manage all of their online accounts and have passwords to everything. But that's because they trust me. I'm sure there are millions of kids who could easily log into My Virgin Media and so on, and just change the filter and the parents wouldn't even know what's going on.
  • d'@ved'@ve Posts: 45,452
    Forum Member
    And it can all be defeated with either with the use of an anonymous proxy or by paying a fiver a month for an encrypted VPN account.

    Until the day they decide to force ISPs to block access to all known proxies, or any IP address that isn't "known" on a Government approved list... :eek:
  • Si_CreweSi_Crewe Posts: 40,202
    Forum Member
    It's a bit scary that they plan to do something like this, but then a bit of a relief that they're so stupid as to not see how it will totally fail.

    You're missing the point.

    The point is NOT to actually achieve anything.

    The point is to make all those ignorant people who haven't got a clue about computers THINK they're doing something useful.
  • Biffo the BearBiffo the Bear Posts: 25,859
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    The new initiative is in advance of the imminent convergence of the internet and television on one large screen in the living room.

    Read more: http://www.news.com.au/technology/all-internet-porn-will-be-blocked-to-protect-children-under-uk-government-plan/story-e6frfro0-1225973501259#ixzz18fzEp2kB

    Huh? 'Imminent'?? Did I miss the press release???
  • SkycladSkyclad Posts: 3,946
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    All hail the "Great Firewall of Britain".

    It's as if New Labour never left power, is it?

    Not at all.

    http://www.thisissomerset.co.uk/news/Request-net-porn-refused-MP/article-2936701-detail/article.html

    Turns out it was a single MP who made a call for it and it was immediatly dismissed.

    "Culture Minister Ed Vaizey has refused a request from a West MP for the Government to take action to stop children being able to access internet pornography."

    So the conservative minister quite rightly dismissed it.
  • alaninmcralaninmcr Posts: 1,685
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    How will they prevent children sharing porn via their phones? That is common and will become even more so.
  • SkycladSkyclad Posts: 3,946
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    adopter wrote: »
    How do you think you access the internet with no ISP?

    Piggybacking your neighbours wireless connection :cool:



    "Hey - Mr Jones next door is a perv, he's opted in to porn!"
Sign In or Register to comment.