British Prime Minister To Announce Porn Blocking Plans 286
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.'"
First they came.. (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Um, yeah, actually ... (Score:5, Insightful)
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?
What about books, newspapers? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Hang on a second... (Score:5, Insightful)
Because you can opt out. Of course, you won't opt out because you don't want to have to call your ISP and say "Please can you let me look at porn", or explain to your boyfriend/girlfriend/husband/wife why you've had the filth-filter turned off.
It's really just another moronic step in the funeral parade of personal responsibility; this idea that people shouldn't have to think about requesting adult material be blocked on their connection, let alone actually look after their children and keep an eye on what they're doing online because, you know, that's *hard*.
Stupid lazy fuckers would happily give away all their rights and freedoms if it meant they didn't have to think about anything too hard.
Please no... (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Suddenly, Tor usage spikes (Score:3, Insightful)
What will happen is there will be a list compiled of the "weirdos" who choose to opt in. That list will be used to deny employment, raise insurance rates, and all manner of discrimination.
Salem witch trials/Spanish Inquisition all over again except this time it's digital.
What is the internet but opt in access? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Um, yeah, actually ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah, yes. Clearly.
A couple of days ago, I told an English friend of mine, who was claiming that the UK would never tolerate anything like America's level of right-wing crazy, that I strongly suspected their Tories would be just as bad as our Republicans given the chance. I think this is all the proof I need that it's already happened. Not just the proposal itself, but the smug, smarmy, iron-fist-in-the-velvet-glove way Perry is defending it.
Re:Hang on a second... (Score:4, Insightful)
Just use email. I suspect special feature will emerge to allow you to email a time it's on, or have it turned on for a set amount of minutes.
BTW, anyone reading this who has to hide porn from the So, should sit down and talk to there So about it, right now.
Make a decision, either get comfortable watching it, or decide not to watch it.
Re:Please no... (Score:5, Insightful)
Early exposure to porn as serious detrimental effect latter in life. It's well documented.
[citation needed]
Dear Prime Minister David Cameron (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The right wing here wants to leave you alone (Score:2, Insightful)
>>>"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)
Oh really? The Tea Party Caucus in the House voted 71% in favor of CISPA. They've been co-opted by the Republican Party (which acts like Democrats). By the way I agree the left/right paradigm is pointless.
It was originally a reference to the French Assembly of the 1790s, and has little relevance to the U.S. or modern politics. You are either for government control over individuals' choices, or against it. i.e. Statist or not.
Filtering doesn't work! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The right wing here wants to leave you alone (Score:5, Insightful)
The right wing in the U.S. these days mostly wants to reduce the power of federal government and leave you the hell alone.
What a bald face lie. They want to reduce the power of federal government to enable corporations to rampage freely across the country, extracting profits and leaving negative externalities for everyone else to deal with.
Personal liberty doesn't enter into it with the right wing. You won't find John Boener advocating for marijuana legalization any time soon.
Re:The right wing here wants to leave you alone (Score:5, Insightful)
unless you own a vagina. In which case they know whats best for you.
Re:The right wing here wants to leave you alone (Score:2, Insightful)
Unless you want an abortion. Or a gay marriage. Or freedom to practice your non-Christian religion. Moron.
Re:Should be opt-in.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You do realize that the parents ALREADY can filter out the naughtiness from the internet connection? It's called putting the computer in the living room, and using a password on it. By the time the kids are old enough to defeat those security measures, they're old enough to browse for boobies. By the time they can defeat anything more serious, as well as the threat of "I'm logging everything at the router", they're old enough to have sex.
In other words, this is a solution to a non-existent problem.
Re:Hang on a second... (Score:3, Insightful)
I personally don't see how this is any different from filtering adult TV channels
The internet is not a fucking cable service. It's designed to be free and open by default. The majority of people are ignoramuses when it comes to technology, so they wouldn't understand that.
they can still see porn
Yeah, and if the government censored speech for everyone, those people could just move out of the country!
How would you react if they said they were censoring certain political opinions by default? You could still see it if you asked, after all!
Also, blocking porn is *not* easy for most people
I don't give a shit. They can figure it out by themselves.
Re:Suddenly, Tor usage spikes (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The right wing here wants to leave you alone (Score:2, Insightful)
That is imbecile drivel. Obama is pretty much an enlightened saint next to all the crap the Republicans had as possible candidates. Claiming there is no difference is just utter idiocy.
Re:Suddenly, Tor usage spikes (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, opt in to VIEW it.
If parents are too retarded to setup web censorship, or, you know, TALK to their kids, they shouldn't be allowed to have any damn kids.
I'm sick of lazy parents forcing their stupidity and laze on others.
Porn first, adult content in general after it.
Hell, the idiots even have age group restrictions in general!
The web filters in their entirety should be banned.
It costs the entire country money and I am pretty sure I don't give a damn about lazy parents or their already warped childrens minds.
blocking the internet porn is just the beginning.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How do you think this quote will work in this c (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Filtering doesn't work! (Score:5, Insightful)
Nonsense. Filtering has been proven effective in many countries, including China and Iran. I daresay it's been proven cost effective in such countries as well. In fact, you will find that all this software was originally developed, tested, improved and optimised in such regimes, by western companies, and is now being sold back to the home country.
You are assuming that this is a side effect, and not the entire purpose of the system from the start. Filtering is designed to block things which those in power dislike.
In this regard, there is no difference between porn, the pirate bay, islamist websites, or even the likes of zerohedge.com when it comes to the running of a successful filtering system. Once the system is in place, those in charge will block what they please.
There will be no oversight or appeal to the courts, as a successful censorship/filtering system requires these options to be removed. This is the single biggest problem with such filters: they are above the rule of law.
Re:Filtering doesn't work! (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Filtering doesn't work! (Score:4, Insightful)
I was being completely sarcastic..... a filter/censorship/oppression system like this has nothing to do with porn. That's just the left hand going "look at me! look at me!" why the right hand is delivering the knife to your balls.
Weird (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Hang on a second... (Score:2, Insightful)
BTW, anyone reading this who has to hide porn from the So, should sit down and talk to there So about it, right now. Make a decision, either get comfortable watching it, or decide not to watch it.
I do wank as much as I want and nobody needs to know anything about it, wife included. She's not interested in it anyway, no more than she's interested in the stench of my shit. I'm perfectly comfortable with it. May I humbly suggest that you and your likes go fuck yourselves?