Forums - Politics Discussion - Online porn filtered by default in UK

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/12/victory-for-the-tabloids-online-porn-to-be-filtered-by-default-in-uk/

 

"UK Prime Minister David Cameron wants porn filters to come on, by default, in any British houses that have children in them.

"A silent attack on innocence is underway in our country today, and I am determined that we fight it with all we've got," wrote Cameron in today's Daily Mail.

The system Cameron promises will be in the works by February, when British ISPs will have to present plans for how they will present the filter options. Every owner of a new computer will be asked when they log in through their Internet service provider if they have children in the house. If they answer yes, it will immediately prompt them to set up filters blocking content, individual sites, or restricting access at particular times of day, according to the Mail.

If those options just get clicked through rapidly, filters that keep out porn and "self-harm" sites will be "on" by default."

My Opinion: 

A defeat for free speech, which is not protected by law as unambiguiously in the UK as it is in the US. Never mind that such a filter is impossible to implement correctly, because there is so much porn and non-porn to classify, and because the borderline is ambigious. The reason given is also wrong: porn is not inherently evil and how children should be supervised on the computer is a parenting decision and not a state one. I guarantee both the wrong sites will be blacklisted at some point, possibly even creeping to political speech, and also adults who wish to view that content will be blocked due to technical or clerical error.

With parental supervision and optional parental control software, it's already easy to prevent children accidentally going to the wrong place. But if an under-16 wants to view pornography (and some will want to at the upper end of that range, no question) it will still be easy to access via VPN, proxies, sites that share unblacklisted links and so on. So who exactly is this designed to protect?



Around the Network
I think most sites have this. Google, Bing, etc. When my kids are old enough I will just parental control it. I know how I was as a kid...

Eh, seems stupid... but just seems like the image search options.

Oh no a penis! Think of the children.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.

spurgeonryan said:
I think most sites have this. Google, Bing, etc. When my kids are old enough I will just parental control it. I know how I was as a kid...

This is at the ISP level. If the person in control of the internet connection, who may not actually be a "parent"clicks "No" (or doesn't click, or skips through), all sites with pornographic content will be blocked. Who knows what the scope of the default filter is though? Is the Statue of David bad? Is life drawing bad? Is Deviantart bad? Is Youtube bad? Is suggestive but not explicit content bad? Is sex education bad? WIll this be extended to extreme violence or terrorism? Who's classifying this anyway?



Around the Network
So I found out about porn in middle school and I came out just fine.

Was Cameron never a teenager, or something?

 

Tag (Courtesy of Fkusumot) "If I'm posting in this thread then it's probally a spam thread."                               

David Cameron is such a tool. Good parenting prevents children from coming across porn while surfing the internet, which they should not do alone, not filters for people who dismiss their responsibility as parents.

 

brits just confuse me sometimes. i still like you guys though. at least you arent like the rest of europe.

"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

yeah that's stupid but “parental control“ still doesn't work. people always use this argument knowing that most parents don't control what their kids do on the internet and stuff. yes you would maybe control what they do but that doesn't help most other kids who can do what they want.

but like i said, it's stupid and i don't see a big problem with porn but if you believe it is a problem, parental control is worth nothing for most kids.

Around the Network
A stupid law if it passes, if a child under 18 wants to view pornography, it's against the law, but it shouldn't out right be blocked (similar to piratebay, the government shouldn't be allowed to block it).