Slashdot Mirror
The UK's Internet Porn Filter and Fighting Censorship Creep
An anonymous reader writes "The Guardian takes the UK government's internet porn filter to task by pointing out how absurd the opt-out process is: 'Picture the scene. You're pottering about on the internet, perhaps idly looking up cake recipes, or videos of puppies learning to howl. Then the phone rings. It's your internet service provider. Actually, it's a nice lady in a telesales warehouse somewhere, employed on behalf of your service provider; let's call her Linda. Linda is calling because, thanks to David Cameron's "porn filter", you now have an "unavoidable choice", as one of 20 million British households with a broadband connection, over whether to opt in to view certain content. Linda wants to know – do you want to be able to see hardcore pornography? How about information on illegal drugs? Or gay sex, or abortion? Your call may be recorded for training and monitoring purposes. How about obscene and tasteless material? Would you like to see that? Speak up, Linda can't hear you.' The article also points out how the filter is being used as a tool for private industry to protect their profits. 'The category of "obscene content", for instance, which is blocked even on the lowest setting of BT's opt-in filtering system, covers "sites with information about illegal manipulation of electronic devices [and] distribution of software" – in other words, filesharing and music downloads, debate over which has been going on in parliament for years.'"
As a 50 year-old man nearing retirement, I can emphatically say "Hell yes!" to all of those questions.
And I'll let Linda know that I'll be wankin' it to much of that aforementioned content. While smoking weed.
I would hope Linda and others would have the fortitude to say "Yes across the board" and hang up. It's better to face the odd goatse than to have the government spoon feed you.
Trolling is a art,
"I do not wish to have the government choose for me which content is appropriate for my viewing. Unblock all of it. If I am worried about what my children will get into, I will monitor them myself or purchase configurable child blocking software. Thank you. Have a nice day."
The best thing about UDP jokes is I don't care if you get them or not
How hard is it to say, "Give me the total freedom package and piss off!"?
I guess for the ruling party, the opposition would be 'obscene'.
Does "drugs" block sites such as those advocating an end to marijuana prohibition? Does "gay sex" block sites such as support sites for homosexual teens? I suspect yes and yes; if not intentionally every time then at least unintentionally some of the time. So no, you damn well won't censor any of my communications with the outside world.
"Internet censorship, in any way, shape, or form, is wrong, and I for one do not support it nor will I endure it, because while ostensibly it is to 'protect the children!', it is inevitably mis-used as a tool by politicians to further their own political and social agendas, and by proxy it is further mis-used by big business to increase their profits by silencing their competition. Lastly it has been proven time and time again that using blacklists to censor the internet simply does not work, and it inevitably will block perfectly 'acceptable' content while sometimes allowing 'unacceptable' content through. Therefore I do not wish to have anything to do with anything having to do with any form of censorship, please do not include me in it, and please do not bother me about this subject again."
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
is now being turned, all nice and easy, into Nanny State 2.0: a Surveillance State. Police State will be Nanny State 3.0. Rejoice, o Britons !
Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
Personally, I'd respond "give me all of it" even though I have no desire to visit gay sex or drugs websites. First of all, should I decide to visit such sites in the future, I don't want to ask for permission to see them. Secondly, I don't want the government deciding what constitutes "gay sex" or "drugs" websites.
Who is determining this and who is preventing them from abusing their position? (i.e. "You oppose me so your site is suddenly an 'undesirable' site and blocked by default.") Government shouldn't be in the business of blocking websites. If the government feels the need to do anything, they can recommend a few of the many free or pay web blocking programs and provide information on how to install/configure them on your local computers. This should appease the "think of the children" crowd without forcing the rest of us to abide by their definition of "right and wrong."
My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
I guess Game of Thrones is on your block list.
Love many, trust a few, do harm to none.
In a perfect world we'd all be able to have jobs that didn't piss you off. Sadly, we don't live in that world and there are some people who have to take the only job that's available to them, and in some cases, that jobs going to be a job that consists of annoying you. When the alternative's starvation, any job's a good one. You're an asshole because you're advocating making life even shittier for people who may have no choice in doing the job they do.