Topic: Serious question on porn filtering in the UK
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao started this discussion 13 years ago #29,478
I realize it's not cool, but why is it such a big deal to you guys? You can still opt in without consequence, yes?
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 21 minutes later[^] [v] #430,740
Its very easy to get around regardless.
I don't like it because it is pandering to right wing hypocrites to make up for allowing gay marriage. It also allows parents to do even less parenting. Its lazy.
I don't like it because it is pandering to right wing hypocrites to make up for allowing gay marriage. It also allows parents to do even less parenting. Its lazy.
Green !pFNWNYROxA joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #430,742
Because of my inability to get laid or get a girlfriend. This doesn't hurt the fucking neurotypical family guy. But losers like me and /r9k/ are going to get hit the hardest.
Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #430,743
@previous (Green !pFNWNYROxA)
No, it'll affect the kids who seek out even more obscure porn sources than the mainstream and end up viewing things they previously wouldn't be exposed too, like on Deep Web.
No, it'll affect the kids who seek out even more obscure porn sources than the mainstream and end up viewing things they previously wouldn't be exposed too, like on Deep Web.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 8 minutes later, 40 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #430,746
It sets a worrying precedent is all. What if the government decides that they have a "moral duty" to filter some other form of content?
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 43 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #430,748
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
~William Pitt
~William Pitt
Green !pFNWNYROxA replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 48 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #430,749
@430,746 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I don't know how they expect me to become a normal member of society now when they pull shit. I'm going to have to pull larger stunts. I already now how to make a large explosion. Also, I hope rape cases start going up. I don't like rape, but it will show what happens when they take away our porn.
I don't know how they expect me to become a normal member of society now when they pull shit. I'm going to have to pull larger stunts. I already now how to make a large explosion. Also, I hope rape cases start going up. I don't like rape, but it will show what happens when they take away our porn.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #430,753
It's a complete waste of time and will achieve nothing. Anything seen as censorship will be opposed by people out of principle.
And then there's the possibility ISPs will be forced to block other types of sites using whatever systems they create, as when the High Court forced BT to use their child porn filter Cleanfeed to block Newzbin.
And then there's the possibility ISPs will be forced to block other types of sites using whatever systems they create, as when the High Court forced BT to use their child porn filter Cleanfeed to block Newzbin.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 58 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #430,757
@430,749 (Green !pFNWNYROxA)
Just opt to not have the filter, buddy. No need to go out and do (somehow) crazier stuff, the porn will still be accessible.
@previous (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
> Anything seen as censorship will be opposed by people out of principle.
And so it should be, I'd say. Freedom of information, a free Internet arguably being the pinnacle of this, is a cornerstone of a free country. If the government tries to start pulling that away, we should protest it.
Just opt to not have the filter, buddy. No need to go out and do (somehow) crazier stuff, the porn will still be accessible.
@previous (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
> Anything seen as censorship will be opposed by people out of principle.
And so it should be, I'd say. Freedom of information, a free Internet arguably being the pinnacle of this, is a cornerstone of a free country. If the government tries to start pulling that away, we should protest it.
(Edited 31 seconds later.)
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #430,762
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 14 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #430,770
@previous (beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao)
No, I can protest indoors by filling out the petition against it.
I'm not even losing access to it, anyway. Like I've said, my issue is the principal of it, and the precedent it sets.
No, I can protest indoors by filling out the petition against it.
I'm not even losing access to it, anyway. Like I've said, my issue is the principal of it, and the precedent it sets.
(Edited 24 seconds later.)
!KThEOwLwbU joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #430,783
The fact it's porn being banned is irrelevant to me. I don't like the idea that I, as an intelligent and independent adult, have to ask for permission to not have things blocked on the Internet. As well as this, it will almost certainly catch unrelated sites and will open up the possibility for abuse.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 5 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #430,788
Anonymous B replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #430,792
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 8 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #430,803
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 4 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #430,881
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 12 hours later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #430,985
@OP
No!! opting in will require you prove you are an adult by giving certified information that will be recorded on file. Entrapment by any other means.
No!! opting in will require you prove you are an adult by giving certified information that will be recorded on file. Entrapment by any other means.
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 2 hours later, 22 hours after the original post[^] [v] #430,995
Icarus !!fxtF/31b/ replied with this 13 years ago, 52 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #431,003
@previous (L)
No crime but you are being forced/trapped into registering your details which will include a valid address and social security details. All making it easier to track and find you.
No crime but you are being forced/trapped into registering your details which will include a valid address and social security details. All making it easier to track and find you.
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #431,004
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 55 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,031
Depressionman !qeK7ilt6gI joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 45 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,032
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,033
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 38 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,044
I'm going to mention this in my suicide note.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,046
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 19 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,051
@previous (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
A good sign.
Hopefully this will just fizzle out and go away.
Also, have any of the other parties said anything?
A good sign.
Hopefully this will just fizzle out and go away.
Also, have any of the other parties said anything?
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs replied with this 13 years ago, 19 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,055
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
I don't think any have yet, but I can imagine the Lib Dems being quite opposed to this.
I don't think any have yet, but I can imagine the Lib Dems being quite opposed to this.
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,076
@OP
Because now there'll be a list of every household if they want to watch porn or not. Just wait for a list of politicians that like themselves some porn to get leaked.
Another one is that now the infrastructure gets put in placed for large wide-scale blocking, which will have cost a lot of money to get put in place. That money will have been provided because 'think of the children' and 'stop the rape' and such statements. Adding new websites to the filter is cheap, it's just a list. Pushing legalization for that will be far easier, thus it is assumed by many that this is the first step in a larger plan.
Another objection is where people are using internet connections they do not control. Think tenants, roommates, and even children living with their parents. This isn't as strong as a point, but can still make things a whole lot more unpleasant for people in those positions.
I believe children (and anyone else) should have easy access to pornography. Curiousity should be easily sated in a safe manner and if all big well known pornography sites are blocked, what remains? Obscure websites which are not as strongly regulated and thus prone to more obscure material which would leave a queer first impression.
Because now there'll be a list of every household if they want to watch porn or not. Just wait for a list of politicians that like themselves some porn to get leaked.
Another one is that now the infrastructure gets put in placed for large wide-scale blocking, which will have cost a lot of money to get put in place. That money will have been provided because 'think of the children' and 'stop the rape' and such statements. Adding new websites to the filter is cheap, it's just a list. Pushing legalization for that will be far easier, thus it is assumed by many that this is the first step in a larger plan.
Another objection is where people are using internet connections they do not control. Think tenants, roommates, and even children living with their parents. This isn't as strong as a point, but can still make things a whole lot more unpleasant for people in those positions.
I believe children (and anyone else) should have easy access to pornography. Curiousity should be easily sated in a safe manner and if all big well known pornography sites are blocked, what remains? Obscure websites which are not as strongly regulated and thus prone to more obscure material which would leave a queer first impression.
(Edited 5 minutes later.)
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 16 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,081
@previous (O)
> I believe children (and anyone else) should have easy access to pornography.
Really? Granted I do not "seriously" think a nationwide porn filter is a good thing, but I also think it's pretty fucked up to let kids look at whatever they'd like. That should of course be the parents' decision though, unless we're talking about some kind of extreme/abusive situation.
> I believe children (and anyone else) should have easy access to pornography.
Really? Granted I do not "seriously" think a nationwide porn filter is a good thing, but I also think it's pretty fucked up to let kids look at whatever they'd like. That should of course be the parents' decision though, unless we're talking about some kind of extreme/abusive situation.
Anonymous O replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,082
@previous (beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao)
Their parents shouldn't encourage it, nor should anyone else but if the interest comes up you know it's not just going to disappear because of a wall. Keep kids educated of the dangers online, and that what they see doesn't necessarily reflect the real life.
You say it's fucked up to let kids look at whatever they'd like, do you consider it fucked up leaving a child unsupervised with a computer in a country that does not have a filter? Because that's the current situation and what I am referring to with easy access.
Their parents shouldn't encourage it, nor should anyone else but if the interest comes up you know it's not just going to disappear because of a wall. Keep kids educated of the dangers online, and that what they see doesn't necessarily reflect the real life.
You say it's fucked up to let kids look at whatever they'd like, do you consider it fucked up leaving a child unsupervised with a computer in a country that does not have a filter? Because that's the current situation and what I am referring to with easy access.
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 54 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,084
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 20 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,085
@431,082 (O)
Better yet, educate the parents a bit. Unsupervised access to the Internet is the root cause here.
Better yet, educate the parents a bit. Unsupervised access to the Internet is the root cause here.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx double-posted this 13 years ago, 37 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,087
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 38 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,088
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
The trolling on this website has gone entirely too far, and I will have no part in it any longer.
The trolling on this website has gone entirely too far, and I will have no part in it any longer.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,089
Anonymous O replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,090
@431,084 (beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao)
So how would you like things to be? A parent always watching over their shoulder, or some technological means barring them access from what is deemed naughty? Or simply don't give children computers at all? Please give some insight in what you think is best.
Also, what do you consider children? What age ranges are you thinking?
@431,085 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Educating the children would reach that goal in a generation, but you're right. Having the parents be educated would be a necessity for them to be able to educate their children (of the dangers online, etc).
So how would you like things to be? A parent always watching over their shoulder, or some technological means barring them access from what is deemed naughty? Or simply don't give children computers at all? Please give some insight in what you think is best.
Also, what do you consider children? What age ranges are you thinking?
@431,085 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Educating the children would reach that goal in a generation, but you're right. Having the parents be educated would be a necessity for them to be able to educate their children (of the dangers online, etc).
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs replied with this 13 years ago, 10 seconds later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,091
@431,085 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
This.
As far as I know, all major ISPs already have adult filters available to customers.
This.
As far as I know, all major ISPs already have adult filters available to customers.
(Edited 56 seconds later.)
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,093
@431,090 (O)
A filter controlled by the parents. I think at 11-14 or so parents should start giving them more free rein, depending on how retarded the kid is. (For instance, dreamworks probably shouldn't have unrestricted access to the Internet yet.)
A filter controlled by the parents. I think at 11-14 or so parents should start giving them more free rein, depending on how retarded the kid is. (For instance, dreamworks probably shouldn't have unrestricted access to the Internet yet.)
Anonymous O replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,094
@previous (beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao)
I don't believe filters to ever be effective with this. The moment you do hit the filter you have already stumbled across it, and you will be curious. I believe it will become some sort of forbidden fruit, and the bible has taught us what happens with forbidden fruits.
That is assuming the filter will not be 100% perfect, which I strongly believe will be the case. It's very hard, ranging to impossible, to distinguish pornography automatically. This here is an image board, and we do not serve pornography primarily. If we are caught by the filter, is that just? If we are not caught by the filter, then there's unfiltered pornography. Wider examples are imgur and reddit, both serve pornography but not primarily.
I don't believe filters to ever be effective with this. The moment you do hit the filter you have already stumbled across it, and you will be curious. I believe it will become some sort of forbidden fruit, and the bible has taught us what happens with forbidden fruits.
That is assuming the filter will not be 100% perfect, which I strongly believe will be the case. It's very hard, ranging to impossible, to distinguish pornography automatically. This here is an image board, and we do not serve pornography primarily. If we are caught by the filter, is that just? If we are not caught by the filter, then there's unfiltered pornography. Wider examples are imgur and reddit, both serve pornography but not primarily.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,096
@previous (O)
> This here is an image board, and we do not serve pornography primarily. If we are caught by the filter, is that just?
Yes, I will report this fora to the IWF. Thanks.
> This here is an image board, and we do not serve pornography primarily. If we are caught by the filter, is that just?
Yes, I will report this fora to the IWF. Thanks.
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 3 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,097
@431,094 (O)
I'm glad you referenced the Bible, I was just going to do that.
Of course there's no perfect solution. But you can certainly do a "good enough" job of keeping kids away from constantly seeing hardcore shit when they're too young to figure out how to get around filters or how to find the preggo porn on reddit.
I'm glad you referenced the Bible, I was just going to do that.
Of course there's no perfect solution. But you can certainly do a "good enough" job of keeping kids away from constantly seeing hardcore shit when they're too young to figure out how to get around filters or how to find the preggo porn on reddit.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous O replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,098
@previous (beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao)
> constantly seeing hardcore shit
what
when does this happen? I browse the internet a fuckton, and I don't even encounter any softcore shit unless I'm looking for it.
> constantly seeing hardcore shit
what
when does this happen? I browse the internet a fuckton, and I don't even encounter any softcore shit unless I'm looking for it.
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,099
@previous (O)
That's what I'm saying -- without a filter, a kid can access a lot. The fact that you can happen across random wrinkled dicks on reddit isn't as worrisome to me.
That's what I'm saying -- without a filter, a kid can access a lot. The fact that you can happen across random wrinkled dicks on reddit isn't as worrisome to me.
Anonymous O replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,100
@previous (beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao)
I don't see you saying that. You were saying:
> keeping kids away from constantly seeing hardcore shit
which implies that they, in the current situation, are constantly seeing hardocre shit which simply is not the case. The fact that they can access it does not mean that they are, or even know what it is.
I don't see you saying that. You were saying:
> keeping kids away from constantly seeing hardcore shit
which implies that they, in the current situation, are constantly seeing hardocre shit which simply is not the case. The fact that they can access it does not mean that they are, or even know what it is.
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao (OP) replied with this 13 years ago, 4 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,102
Anonymous O replied with this 13 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,103
@previous (beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao)
Honestly I doubt that. There may be a very small percentage of children under 13 which are avid users of pornography, but even so, so what? It doesn't hurt anyone, and I sincirely doubt that it will affect them negatively in any way. Is it really so terrible that a small amount of children are doing something they enjoy that is not hurting them or anyone else?
I would say that your opinion might be partially there because you're American, and Americans seem to be tremendously afraid of any kind of sexuality while extreme violence is fine. But alas, we are talking about Britain which also seems to be inflicted by that mentality.
Honestly I doubt that. There may be a very small percentage of children under 13 which are avid users of pornography, but even so, so what? It doesn't hurt anyone, and I sincirely doubt that it will affect them negatively in any way. Is it really so terrible that a small amount of children are doing something they enjoy that is not hurting them or anyone else?
I would say that your opinion might be partially there because you're American, and Americans seem to be tremendously afraid of any kind of sexuality while extreme violence is fine. But alas, we are talking about Britain which also seems to be inflicted by that mentality.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs replied with this 13 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,105
@previous (O)
It really depends on the kind of porn they're watching. A 13-year-old watching hardcore porn is likely going to have a very warped view of sexuality and sexual relationships.
This is why I don't understand people's opposition to sex education including discussing porn, I think that would be immensely helpful.
It really depends on the kind of porn they're watching. A 13-year-old watching hardcore porn is likely going to have a very warped view of sexuality and sexual relationships.
This is why I don't understand people's opposition to sex education including discussing porn, I think that would be immensely helpful.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,106
@431,103 (O)
> But alas, we are talking about Britain which also seems to be inflicted by that mentality.
I wouldn't say we're as bad as America, though. We're much less religious, so we're generally less inclined to that sort of mindset.
> But alas, we are talking about Britain which also seems to be inflicted by that mentality.
I wouldn't say we're as bad as America, though. We're much less religious, so we're generally less inclined to that sort of mindset.
TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,108
@previous (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Agreed. I think it's more a case of Cameron trying to appease older Conservative voters. I very much doubt many people support this filter, even the comments on the Mail's site were overwhelmingly opposed.
Agreed. I think it's more a case of Cameron trying to appease older Conservative voters. I very much doubt many people support this filter, even the comments on the Mail's site were overwhelmingly opposed.
Anonymous O replied with this 13 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,110
@431,105 (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
Perhaps. I was educated on the fact that things that happen online are there for people their viewing pleasure, not accurate representations of what happens in the bedroom. Education is great, and most definitely should be more prevalent.
Anyway I just believe that parents should be responsible of their children, and that it's none of the goverment's business.
Perhaps. I was educated on the fact that things that happen online are there for people their viewing pleasure, not accurate representations of what happens in the bedroom. Education is great, and most definitely should be more prevalent.
Anyway I just believe that parents should be responsible of their children, and that it's none of the goverment's business.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,112
@431,108 (TTEH !JXsxEkDBLs)
> even the comments on the Mail's site were overwhelmingly opposed.
Ha, wow. I'm genuinely surprised at that. Still, nice to hear.
> even the comments on the Mail's site were overwhelmingly opposed.
Ha, wow. I'm genuinely surprised at that. Still, nice to hear.
Anonymous P joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 26 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,116
I'm 12 years old and what is this?
Meta !PARAdoxiHw joined in and replied with this 13 years ago, 4 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,194
@OP
Not in the UK obviously but I'd say it's two things. First, that you have to opt in to it which requires you calling your ISP and saying "can I receive porn please" which makes you sound like some kind of pervert (we all are, but still) and also because I think it's creeping censorship. When government wants to take liberty away, it never does so all at once, but in small steps. Look at gun control. The government never said "we're going to take your guns away", but they went in small "common-sense" steps.
Not in the UK obviously but I'd say it's two things. First, that you have to opt in to it which requires you calling your ISP and saying "can I receive porn please" which makes you sound like some kind of pervert (we all are, but still) and also because I think it's creeping censorship. When government wants to take liberty away, it never does so all at once, but in small steps. Look at gun control. The government never said "we're going to take your guns away", but they went in small "common-sense" steps.
Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx replied with this 13 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,195
@previous (Meta !PARAdoxiHw)
And I assure you that it'll be opposed. The public reaction to it doesn't seem to be great as it is, and Cameron is already admitting that it'd be problematic to do.
And I assure you that it'll be opposed. The public reaction to it doesn't seem to be great as it is, and Cameron is already admitting that it'd be problematic to do.
!KThEOwLwbU replied with this 13 years ago, 7 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,197
Anonymous L replied with this 13 years ago, 7 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #431,249
@431,112 (Killer Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx)
Conservative people are notorious porn consumers. An American factoid is the greatest per capita spending on web porn comes from Utah.
Conservative people are notorious porn consumers. An American factoid is the greatest per capita spending on web porn comes from Utah.