Slashdot Mirror
British Prime Minister To Announce Porn Blocking Plans
Overly Critical Guy writes "British Prime Minister David Cameron will announce network-filtering plans targeted at porn websites, possibly requiring users to 'opt-in' with their ISP to access such content. The idea has support from MP Claire Perry, who said, 'There is a "hands off our internet" movement that sees any change in how access is delivered as censorship.'"
What next? The Internet and web should be free. There should never be any large-scale blocking of this sort, otherwise they'll add more categories in the future until we're left with a heavily restricted Internet/web, or worse: whitelisted categories.
I would not be surprised if the use of Tor, and proxies/VPNs in other countries spiked as a result of this law.
Palm trees and 8
How would that not be censorship?
The idea has support from MP Claire Perry, who said, 'There is a "hands off our internet" movement that sees any change in how access is delivered as censorship.'
Yes. And?
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
British porn is terrible.
Stick a camera up everyone’s ass, outlaw solitary men walking through parks on the off chance they're pedos, confiscate almost all the guns, now you erect a government run firewall ah la china to 'save' someone from porn or something.
This desire to make your island a pink and blue romper room will not work. Stop doing it.
Do I have to "opt in" if I want to read Huckleberry Finn or Anne Frank's uncensored diary? No. Free speech/press/expression means exactly that..... no censorship by the government of any book, paper, or website.
Dumbass PM.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Please don't make it a hassle for people who want to view the content. Not for the children, and not for anyone else. This isn't necessary. We've lived without this, and somehow the world hasn't collapsed due to it yet.
This anti-sexuality nonsense has got to go. Even if a child does see the content, it will most likely not hurt them, anyway. I'd say ignorance is far more damaging.
I see no problem with isp level filtering as long as it is opt-in. I'd image many parents would gladly pay extra to have the isp filter out some of the naughtiness from the internet connection their children uses. If some parents want to minimize the chances their children will be exposed to goatse and other even more deranged porn fetishes that is their right. It could also be much more efficient than client-side filtering at the end point which is only effective if the parent is more technically savvy than their child which is not always the case. However, it should be opt-in, not opt-out. And it doesn't need to be government mandated - the "free market" should be able to solve it by itself. Lots of concerned parents would freely purchase isp filtering if it was available as a product and everyone could be happy.
Football Odds
Everything on the internet is "opt in" access!!!
It sounds more like a government surcharge on porn sites to get a piece of the porn profit pie. They only do this because porn sites make money. It has nothing to do about protecting kids or some god damn thing.
Porn is not illegal, so what is the base to discriminate it over other stuff? Its much less damaging to everyone than religion, and religion is not bloqued. Is less damaging than sport, and sport is not blockqued. WHY THE HELL.
-Woof woof woof!
The right wing in the U.S. these days mostly wants to reduce the power of federal government and leave you the hell alone.
On any point where they do not seem to want to do this, they are no different than Democrats (gay marriage for example).
But basically overall any political group in the EU or UK is far to the left, hence the desire to control what the populace does or sees. A true nanny state comes about as the result of a left-wing "we know what is best for you" kind of mindset that few on the right have now (and the Tea Party is getting rid of the ones that remain that still think like that).
Really to use the term right/left anymore is meaningless, you should be looking for "statists" - those that think the state should be your master instead of yourself. The modern left is wholly bought into this idea, the U.S. right only half way, the EU/UK nearly irredeemably lost down that road now.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It's well documented.
You are a lying scumbag. It's well documented.
Early exposure to porn as serious detrimental effect latter in life.
Only if you fail to stock the Kleenex properly.
It has zero detriment to feelings towards women or sex. Kids have been looking at porn for decades now...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
And finish reading Fahrenheit 451. All this censorship all in a row...madness.
Great warrior...hrmph! Wars not make one great.
when the government is the one that manages "how access is delivered." What does it even mean to "deliver access?" How orwellian. He makes it sound like access is something you need the government to provide for you.
Currently hooked on AMP
Fuck You.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
It's been proven time and time again that filtering isn't effective, and often it's abused by people with access and the power to affect what is and is not filtered!
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
It's time for people who like porn to announce British Prime Minister-blocking plans.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
...seem to think the interwebs are theirs. It's time they realized they aren't!
Perhaps it's time for Occupy Internet!
How would imagine it working?
First they came for porn, but I do not watch porn, so I was silent, when people who watched porn were too shy to declare that.
Then they came for people who read Inspire magazine (wait, they came for them first, with drones), so I was silent, when people who read Jihadi websites opted-in without shame.
How do you expect this beaten to the death quote to work in this case?
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
I think the emphasis is on the word "came".
https://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
Have gnu, will travel.
That slope got slippery because I accidentally spilled some lube. Sorry about that.
An ISP who didn't want to comply could just add this one line to the account application:
Mark only one: :)
_X_ I am a legal adult and am okay with _ISP_ not blocking porn
___ I am not not a legal adult and agree to have porn blocked. Note: Non-adult customers must have an adult agree to pay the bill.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Clearly the thing to do would be to start a porn site where the talent make political speeches against David Cameron. Then he'll be repressing political speech.
Why doesn't the british government just have an option at sign up for child protection and use a simple DNS blocking service like NortonDNS? That would not disrupte free speech nor would it require expensive procedures and upgrades for ISPs.
I am an advocate of OpenDNS, and NortonDNS for phishing and crossite protection in case my anti virus package misses something. NortonDNS has porn filtering as well if you enter the IP addresses here. Basically the last subnet .50 filters unfamily friendly sites, .40 just porn and malware, and .20 for the rest of us with just security protection.
I have my router with .20 filter at home. If I had a child I would put his/her own computer with a subnet of .40 for the DNS IP Address. Problem solved. No expensive tax dollars or expensive hardware or software.
If you run Windows you can turn on family safety too for a childs account. I imagine most users are not this savy or smart to know this or set this up and you can do custom filtering as well. However DNS filtering is the best and an easy way.
I am for free speech and this is outragous! I think an option with those who pick family safety just run a script which configures their new shiny routers to the NortonDNS that protects agaisnt porn and viola! Easy
http://saveie6.com/
The link is here.
Messed up the tags
http://saveie6.com/
MP Claire Perry, who said, 'There is a "hands off our internet" movement that sees any change in how access is delivered as censorship.'" -> Because it is?
Censor (courtesy of MW):
2censor verb
censoredcensoring
Definition of CENSOR
transitive verb
: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable
See censor defined for English-language learners
I am John Hurt.
Start by blocking the internet porn, for the kids of course. A few years pass. Then block anything that could be deemed hate speech or offensive. Again for the kids. Govt bonus: have FBI/CIA/NSA secretly setup proxies and track people who use them to bypass the block. A few years pass. Next block anything from countries that might be unfriendly towards us, national security, nothing to see here move along. Govt bonus: have FBI/CIA/NSA secretly setup proxies and track people who use them to bypass the block. A few years pass. Start making it harder to opt in for porn, maybe even make users pay for access or a data plan that allows porn. Govt bonus: big list of people who want porn.
"all i wanted was a pepsi..."
Not a problem...
First they came for the porn but I didn't watch porn so I didn't care, next they came for those extremist websites but I wasn't an extremist so I didn't care, next they went after the hate speech, but I wasn't hateful so I didn't care, next they came for the unpopular but I wasn't unpopular so I didn't care, then when i realized I was in a jack booted fascist state I had no way to protest or organize because they turned the internet into the fucking home shopping club and when i complained they hauled my ass away.
I admit not nearly as poetic but the sentiment is there. NEVER FORGET that there are those out there that honestly believe nothing should exist that an 8 year old can't watch and scarily enough these douchebags often end up in power.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
They start by making you have to opt-in for porn, then the filter is expanded for child porn, terrorism, hate speech, extremism, copyright infringement, and whatever. It's foot in the door technique.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
Fight it at all costs.
FFS, RTFA! "The Prime Minister is expected to announce formal plans to look into...Cameron will announce a consultation". No plans to do anything at all have been announced, which is what the summary says
Just remember to keep sacrificing your liberty for freedom.
"...fuck the children; they are getting entirely too much attention"
This post is provided without warranty as to reliability, accuracy or otherwise or fitness for any particular purpose.
What is going to be considered porn? If I write something sexy in an email - does it get blocked? Does this happen in every language? If someone sends a sexy photo to someone who hasn't opted-in are they breaking the law?
Who is responsible for that, the ISP/government/sender?
If you "opt-in" who gets to see the list of people who have done so? How will this be audited and by whom?
Can this be the basis of a search warrant? If you bypass the filter are you breaking a law? If you help someone bypass a filter are you breaking the law? If you are a child and you bypass the filter are you breaking the law?
Will MP's have to own up to if they have opted-in? How will we know they are being truthful? What will happen if they are not? What happens if they visit friends houses where the friends have opted-in? Will this be true for all public figures and government employees?
If you "opt-in" and your children "see porn" does this mean you are accountable to the government in some way?
If your kids go visit their friends in a "opt-in" household does this mean their parents are responsible in defying the law some how?
If the ISP accidentally allows someone access to porn without their "opting-in" what does that mean? Can parents sue the government/ISP/auditors?
If your in a custody dispute with a spouse, will it be legitimate for them to discover if you have opted-in to internet.
What happens if the ISP blocks things that aren't porn? Who will know? What recourse will there be if they block a legitimate business site?
Who will make the list of porn sites?
If the government does it, and they start blocking "non-porn" sites - how will people know? How will it be fixed? How long will that take?
Will companies and institutions be able to opt-in en mass or will they need approval from every member of their staff?
Will libraries automatically "opt-in"? If the filter is not accurate and blocks items that are medical or sexual education - and you are a school/library/university etc will you have to opt-in just to be sure you get the information you need?
I am sure they are not thinking this through...
There is no wonder why the Tory are going to loose the next elections big time in few years time. I guess the people in the UK are not going to stand for this type of thinking in the government of the UK.
This also has nothing to do with children. That is just a cover up to get this censorship past the UK parliament.
So, I will opt-in for terrorism, hate speech, extremism, copyright infringement.
Who is coming for me?
I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
I think I'll opt-out of this society because I no longer wish to be indecently exposed to such idiocy.
You forgot to opt-in for child porn
...exactly what plans is the porn blocking?
Perhaps a missile, perhaps a drone, perhaps a sudden EMP while you're driving causing your engine and brake computers to go nuts
"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb." -- Dark Helmet
why the web took off in the first place... i mean really took off
for isps, banning porn is like telling cca they can no longer sell normal coke, only sugar free (coke zero)
internet traffic will plummet
seems like a good enough reason to me
*goes to get baseball bat and join the slaughter*
porn minister
And only then you should have to face a detailed background check, attend a training course and pay a hefty license charge to get online, while every single keystroke of yours is tracked and stored for possible infractions. There also needs to a be strict age limit of no access if you're under 25 or ever had any run in with the law including any charge for any reason whatsoever. Even a parking ticket. Violators will be electrocuted.
England Prevails.
The British can show boobs on TV, but they want to actively block porn. In the US, you can't show boobs on TV, but everyone says porn in fine. And don't get me started on Japan.
Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
No-one will come for you, but you might find that some kind of extended "sex offender" lists will crop up where everyone who had opted into something ends up on. Once there, good luck finding a job or buying or renting a house.
From the bigger issues. Like the EU crisis. The F35 and F22 fiascos. The nuclear fallout from Japan polluting the planet. The banksters. Offshoring and outsourcing. Unemployement. Immigration. Monsanto and GM Franken foods. Iran, Iraq. Afghanistan. Syria. Occupy Wall Street. The Tea Party. Enron. 911. The pension crisis.
Frighten you, put you on the defensive, TO TAKE YOUR EYES OFF THEM.
Block Porn? AS IF. It is a boogieman to frighten children.
Porn has always existed and always will. It only takes a few days to bang out version 1.0 of an encrypted peer to peer private network that runs on untouchable port 80.
Wanna see linux explode overnight? Wanna see crypto everywhere, all the time? Wanna see securecom(TM) for Raspberry PI materialize out of the void? Go ahead block and censor and scan. Countermeasures will be deployed in weeks.
UK Politicians lecturing on sex morality? That's a chuckle. The UK upper crust are some of the sickest perverts on the planet. Anyone else remember the pedophile roundup in the UK that got cancelled some years back because it started turning up a lot of the UK uppercrust? I do.
The UK has no money for this. As soon as the Olympics are over, the UK will collapse. Cameron and Blair will be lucky to pay their electric bill. The Queen will have to clip coupons.
They are bluffing.
Do not be afraid. Do not be divided.
So you have to opt into porn, some people feel uncomfortable about making private things, like if they watch porn or not, into public things. To me it's an invasion of privacy. I guess I'd just be shame free and opt into any and everything they would otherwise block.
This is the equivalent of posting the fact you purchased a skin flick or nude magazine on your facebook page for all the world to see...
What's next is that every book, periodical, or website you consume will be "opted in" ie, you'll enter it in their logs, so we can see exactly what you're doing -- They'll do it to close the cash loophole. What?! You want to be Anonymous? Like the Evil Hackers?!
Now, there is one for stopping the censorship of porn and there is one for blocking porn. But I liked this one even more.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/1629 --- "None of the above" on ballot papers.
Hello porn, goodbye politicians (shut up, don't ruin my dream, it's the British dream, we have ours, you have yours).
What's an adult child?
If parents want to restrict access to pornography, well that's their choice and I'm not going to argue against own-choice even if I'm tempted to suggest it may be misguided.
So I'd support an opt-in model, albeit wary about the implementation - specifically control and monitoring over what is blocked - but in principle, sure. If parents are the ones wanting something, they can tick the box when signing up or accessing the account. A solution made available for anyone with the problem.
So why an opt-out model? Are they insinuating that parents who want to block pornography are too stupid or lazy to tick the box?
Nope. Parents may be on side for this but mostly the opt in vs. out isn't important to them. The reason the opt-out is being pushed is because the "Christian" Tories' problem is about other people accessing pornography.
Of course that hands-off-the-internet people are saying that changes like this are censorship. That's because they are censorship - it's specifically preventing people from accessing certain kinds of content. If British Telecom were changing the internet access to deliver everything over wireless so everything's mobile and then telling you not to transfer big files because it would interfere with VOIP latency, that wouldn't be censorship, it would just be dubious technical change. But blocking access to specific content because it's politically incorrect is pretty much the definition of censorship.
I'm sorry, but I'd prefer to see a politician who's got the honesty to say that she wants to censor content because she knows what's best for us to read than a lying loon who says that it's not censorship when she's in charge of deciding what we can read.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Besides, it's "First they came for the porn. Then they came for the porn. After that they came for the porn. Now they're back, trying to get the porn again."
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
They're not breaking into your houses trying to confiscate your porn, or breaking into ISPs taking theirs away. They're just censoring it in between.
But they're being dishonest idiots about it. The reason the "hands off the Internet" people are calling this proposed "change" "censorship" is that it's rather precisely meeting the definition of censorship. She wants to block material based on its content. If BT were to move everything onto wireless and tell you not to download big files because it'd interfere with VOIP latency, that wouldn't be censorship - it's independent of whether the content is porn, pirated movies, funny cat videos, or speeches by idiot Tory politicians.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
I'd rather not have politicians telling me what to read, thank you. It's worse when they expand their targets from the originally-announced "porn" to cover lots of politically significant content, which so far has happened in just about any of the places that have implemented systems like this. And that doesn't even count the sloppy and accidental misclassifications, like one blacklist that banned "terra.es", which was a Spanish site similar to what flickr is now.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
Opting in for those things will obviously make you suspicious, which means you'll probably be put on some watchlist. Eventually, it probably won't even be an option to opt-in, since only dirty criminals make that choice. The assholes that are against porn tend to be the kind of control freaks that thinks that they should have a say in every aspect of everyone's life, and to them, the internet is a great threat. There's not a damn thing wrong with kids watching porn, so the base argument is completely invalid.
This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.