David Cameron 'Orders New Curbs On Internet Porn'

First time accepted submitter fustakrakich writes with news reported in The Telegraph of new anti-pornography regulations ordered by UK Prime Minister David Cameron: "The new measures will mean that in future anyone buying a new computer or signing up with a new internet service provider (ISP) will be asked, when they log on for the first time, whether they have children. If the answer is "yes", the parent will be taken through the process of installing anti-pornography filters, as well as a series of questions on how stringent they wish the restrictions to be, according to a newspaper."

Comments

Sorry kids...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I'm afraid that your first sexual experiences will have to be with a trusted friend, family member, or respected community authority figure, rather than the internet...

Re:Sorry kids...

[letherial]

The internet changed EVERYTHING. You don't see it because you grew up with it, but those of us who didn't know the challenges of a teen back then. Putting all the run to the library to do a school report aside; finding a titty mag was better then finding gold. Now you kids just get to type in anything in Google and its tits and ass for life.

Its great your generation got access to such information, not just porn but all around the massive amount of information you have available to you, the only thing i request is that you respect what you have, because you have no idea what its like without it. Also in 30 years when i say get off my lawn, get off my fucking lawn.

Re:Sorry kids...

[anubi]

Ok... now that you guys are talking about how you us of the older generation handled this problem... let it be known that kids will be kids regardless of the environment.

In my day, fifty years ago, we had this old discarded washing machine in a vacant lot. Lots of trees, so it was well secluded. We kept our tittie mags in it. Old stained tittie mags. No telling what filth was on them, but we didn't give a damn. All of us knew about the washing machine, as at least it would keep our tittie mags out of the weather. What risks did we take as horny teens out in a secluded area away from anyone taking care of natural drives - "child predators" could have had a field day seeding our washing machine with new porn just to watch us do what we did when we saw it. Someone was always leaving new tittie mags in, and I would too if I found one. I sure as hell could not bring it home!

If there was one thing the parents seemed to tolerate, it was the tittie mags receiving the brunt of the horny guy's attention, not their daughters.

Today's parents might breathe a sigh of relief knowing those natural urges are being satisfied in their private home, not in a secluded back alley, covered in the remains of who knows who's "stuff".

Another thing... kids aren't the only ones who do what someone else doesn't want them to do. Remember "prohibition"? Its a helluva lot easier to pass a law than it is to enforce it. Especially if it goes against natural drives.

I think there is a lot of wisdom is looking the other way when certain things happen. Is anyone getting hurt? If this is not coming out of anyone else's hide, then I feel its best to ignore it. Its just an itch that needs scratching. No big deal.

If you succeed in removing the natural sexual drives from your young'uns, you can look forward to a future with no grandchildren. Count your blessings.

This Will Certainly Work

[retroworks]

Finally, internet pornography will be thwarted, and David Cameron will go down in history.

Re:This Will Certainly Work

[wonkey_monkey]

and David Cameron will go down

But we won't be able to see the video.

To get around it

[epp_b]

"No, I don't have any kids."

At least until it becomes illegal to answer untruthfully.

As a father

[Max Romantschuk]

I really really hope my kids rather watch porn than all the violent entertainment which for whatever twisted reason seems to be OK accoriding to society.

I simply don't undertand how consentual sex could possibly do more harm than violence.

The best advice about porn that I got as an adolescent was really simple: Watch all the porn you want, don't just confuse it with real life. (99% of all porn is rather unrealistic fantasy, after all.)

Just kids?

[Roger W Moore]

I'm actually surprised that it just asks for kids. Given their established record I would have thought the question should really be "Do you have any kids or MPs in the house?".

It's secretly just a plan to improve education

[Art Challenor]

A brilliant move to improve public computer education in the UK. Now kids will have incentive to learn networking, system administration, and generally how the internet works in order to defeat the feature. A much better, practical lesson, than they'd ever get in formal classroom training - and it's free to the governemnt.

And normally, you'd be able to ask the nerdy Linux kid to fix your computer for you, but what interest would they have in porn?

You've all got this quite wrong

[folderol]

What will actually happen is that the adults will be told to fetch the kids and then be told to go away. The kids will then be asked if they want parential controls, i.e. stuff to stop the parents logging on to dodgy malware-infected sites etc.

Re:Religion is much worse

[artor3]

What you mean is that all families should be forced to be atheist, because you're an atheist. That would, after all, be the effect of banning exposure of religion to children, and your goal is clearly to make more atheists. You are advocating an end to freedom of thought -- forcing your personal beliefs on everyone.

It really is amazing how many internet-atheists (not to be confused with the majority of quite reasonable atheists) are exactly as bad in the exact same ways as the religious people they hate so much.

Re:Loveley, to live in a Republic!

[TheP4st]

With a UID as low as 137 I would not rule out old age.