The UK's Internet Porn Filter and Fighting Censorship Creep 234
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.'"
This is why I like being old (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah, me too. I have a relationship that would stand up to a "porn's okay" conversation.
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:4, Insightful)
Speaking of "porns okay" wouldn't it be nice if you could only opt into good porn. Yes I want adult material but only that which meets the following criteria. Think of the thousands of hours you could save if you didn't have to search :)
Re: (Score:2)
That sort of thing is pretty much the only niche where pay sites are still useful. Look up DOMAI, for example.
Re: (Score:2)
Linda: The blocked content includes child pornography sir.
What will you do now?
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:4, Insightful)
Say that things are commonly misfiltered and that Google already filters for that so it's rather unlikely to show up, and if it does you'll report it to the authorities.
Re: (Score:2)
Yup. Do it to it Linda. I survived the internet for 20 years before your filter showed up, I think I can manage.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
ISP agent: The blocked content includes child pornography, madam.
Linda: Thanks for reminding me that, I will make sure I block CP on my end. I just don't want you or the Government to block pictures of my grandchildren in the swimming pool or something like that.
This reminds me of a project where my team worked from the client's office, and we had to ask the client to let view porn, because their f***ing content filter thought Java source files were porn because they had some comments marked with XXX (stand
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Linda: The blocked content includes child pornography sir.
What will you do now?
Reply, "so sign me up to the filter which ONLY blocks child pornography."
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:4, Insightful)
wrong way to approach this.
the right way is: "I don't search for CP, and so it won't be an issue."
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is UK. You're boned no matter what you say. Pedohunters will rape you regardless of your choice.
Re: (Score:2)
Tell that to Pete Townsend: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/pete-townshends-child-porn-treatise [thesmokinggun.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Look up "strict liability" on Wikipedia. Child port possession and distribution is a strict liability crime in many places, so mens rea is not necessary.
Re: (Score:2)
Strict liability is not a crime, it's a liability standard, so it can't be an offense. The crime in question would be possession and/or distribution of child porn. Strict liability just means that you don't have to be culpable to be charged with the crime; merely committing it is sufficient.
Re: (Score:2)
A crime related to what?
Re: (Score:2)
Learn how to express yourself clearly.
Re: (Score:2)
The act of viewing it includes creating a new copy of the bits in the display memory area.
See the word 'creating' in the sentence above? In the UK they don't just charge you with possession, they charge you with creation too.
Yes, people are found guilty.
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Making poor Linda suffer for the fact that this unfortunate job has been foisted upon her would not achieve anything. Statistically Linda is highly likely to be a single mom or one half of a low income family and I can't blame her for not being reluctant to take a stand over this and risk losing her job over it. David Cameron, the conservative party and UKIP (out of fear of whom the Tories are doing this and who really deserve your scorn) can, however, shove their entire censorship program where the sun does not shine along with all of the hypocritical spin about how censorship measures that are only rivalled by those used by communist China and Saudi Arabia are being introduced in a democratic country in the name of protecting 'freedom' and 'moral values'.
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:5, Informative)
I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for people who take jobs that largely consist of annoying people. And that includes all cold-calling. We should do nothing to make their job easier and everything to make their job harder.
Re: (Score:2)
I have a little empathy, but no sympathy.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, but I have no sympathy for people who take jobs that largely consist of annoying people. And that includes all cold-calling. We should do nothing to make their job easier and everything to make their job harder.
If this was a telemarketer I'd agree with you, those people can be terribly annoying. But in my experience my telco's support centre staff are not there to annoy me. The handful of times they have cold-called me over the years it was to offer me more economical plans for my mobile phone and my iPad. As it turned out they were right, given my usage pattern I was actually paying less with the plan they recommended.
And you're an asshole (Score:4, Informative)
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:5, Insightful)
If you are unemployed and the local call centre is hiring then your choice is to take the job or lose your benefits.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately, this leads to a rather bleak conclusion about the future of our societies. After all, if Linda won't stand up to creeping tyranny, then who will? China?
Perhaps it's time to admit you
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:4, Funny)
how the heck are you a 50 year old man nearing retirement? In US you'd be halfway through your working life.
Re: (Score:3)
It isn't that hard if you reject consumerism and learn how to invest properly (see John Bogle).
Speaking from personal experience.
Re: (Score:3)
And are lucky,
And don't suffer a major illness which takes you out of the workforce for several years. Or which, in the US, has to be paid for with your life savings or by selling your home.
And don't invest is supposedly safe things that tank during a major economic recession. The things that supposedly highly trained investment advisors told you to buy. (or are you suggesting that every single person regardless of backg
Re: (Score:2)
I admit to being VERY lucky. Born white and middle class to parents who valued education (NASA scientist father, teacher mother) and who looked at me disapprovingly if I didn't bring home straight A's. My father also likes to build stuff, my mother loves to travel so I've been building stuff and traveling the world since I was a wee lad. There are few better educational and incentive experiences than visiting the poorer parts of the world when you are young.
So yeah, I had a lot of advantages and I used t
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you see...some of us save a respectable portion of our income over our work lifetime, and don't spend every fscking penny we earn buying crap.
Do a reasonable savings, invest, and yes...get a little lucky here and there from time to time, and at age 50yrs, you should be able to see retirement in the reasonable near future.
Re: (Score:3)
How did I do it? Let's see:
I live in a small house that I built myself on land I bought cheap outside town many years ago. I also bought more of that "cheap" land that is now worth 3x to 5x what I paid for it, so I can sell it later.
Saving and investing about 1/3 of my income. Dumped as much as I could stand into the market after the 2008-2009 crash. Lost some, made far more.
I'm building some alternative income streams now to keep the do-re-mi flowing.
I still travel a lot and spend way too much money on
Re: (Score:2)
You are very lucky, like many of your generation. Young people today often don't have enough spare cash to buy land, build a house or otherwise invest.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say I'm currently wanking it to the teletubbies. Please provide some better material.
Re:This is why I like being old (Score:5, Funny)
You have a sexy voice Linda. What are you wearing? Obscene content you say? Describe it to me in detail, so that I can make an informed decision.
Re: (Score:2)
While you're at it, ask Linda where you can find the video of her getting creampied by a German shepard.
thepiratebay of course.
"Yes across the board." (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
The answer is simple (Score:5, Informative)
"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."
Re: (Score:2)
"Sir, I'm sorry, but I'm obligated to receive individual confirmation of each item on the list. Can we continue, now, please?"
Re: (Score:2)
As I said before, no to censorship, meaning yes to everything, including that one.
If the call is recorded an individual yes is acceptable at that point, and if its not no one will care.
Did I miss something? Do you still think the chilling effect exists?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"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."
My answer would be "please can you send me my mac code".
"Yeah baby" (Score:2, Informative)
No big deal, I'll just make it equally creepy for Linda
really? (Score:5, Informative)
How hard is it to say, "Give me the total freedom package and piss off!"?
Re:really? (Score:5, Insightful)
The British have one thing over America: They know how to say "Piss off!" in every situation imaginable. Americans just get all hot and whimper and then bend over. Violence is bad here, it's taught as "not the solution", and all aggression is looked down upon; we've forgotten how to push back, to shout at people, and to react to someone trying to kill us by throwing a brick at them instead of crying and ducking under a chair.
In America, it would be like, "ohgod, I uh, please don't call me, I don't want to talk about stuff like that it's uncomfortable!"
Re:really? (Score:5, Funny)
Americans just get all hot and whimper and then bend over
Just phrase it as "Obama is coming to take your porn!" That'll get 'em riled up good.
Re:really? (Score:4, Insightful)
Nah, over here it would be the other way around. Rumors would start about the government subsidizing adult content and the next thing you know the Right in the US would be screaming about protecting the children from Obamaporn.
Re: (Score:2)
Imagine if Bush II had commited a bald-face lie - multiple times! - about his one major initiative. And don't give me the Iraq war bullshit
some interesting points here, but don't undermine them by making a GWB comparison since he was a super bad president and a liar who killed thousands with his ignorance.
And yet Obama bald-face lied about Obamacare - over and over. On multiple points. "If you like your plan you can keep it!" "You can keep your doctor!" "It'll be CHEAPER!"
I'm not ready to judge obamacare yet, because the market is still adjusting to the new normal and we haven't seen how the full package of premiums, state action, and tax breaks some together
Hell, Obama's been about to "pivot to jobs" for what? Five fucking years now without doing it? The US media was all over Bush for an unemployment rate that looks downright rosy compared to Obama's continued failure.
no, employment has gone up and up steadily throughout his term except for the first 9mo where the bush effects were still reverberating. look at a graph
Re: (Score:2)
Sarah Palin was a successull governor of a large state for years before getting picked to be a VP candidate, and the media skewered her.
you have to admit she was a total joke and had it coming.
In addition, while Alaska may be a large state in terms of *area*, it's ranked 47th in population [wikipedia.org] with fewer people (735,132) than Rhode Island (44th w/ 1,051,511) and Delaware (46th w/ 925,749). Seriously, Fairfax County, Virginia [wikipedia.org] has more people (1,118,602). I guess "large" is a matter of perspective (hopefully GP's girlfriend will understand.)
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but many of the statistics in your post are wildly incorrect.
No employment has not gone up steadily throughout his term.
CPS Table A-1 Historical Data [bls.gov]: Employment bottomed in December 2009 at 138.025 million. Since then it has risen steadily (with a few hiccups here and there). As of November's data, employment is at 144.386 million. If you want to talk about job growth rather than employment, CES Table B-1 [bls.gov] shows we've had steady positive jobs growth since the "double dip" scare in 2010. Every single month since September 2010 has had net jobs created.
note how the U6 number has continued to climb up under his presidency
U6
Re: (Score:2)
Would that be, "before" or "after" that the BLS was caught fudging statistics at the behest of the whitehouse?
Right, we already know exactly what happened there.
Re: (Score:2)
It's kind of a split personality though. In some situations it's immediately to "piss off!" But in other situations, like on the tube, it's 100% near-silent passive aggression.
Re: (Score:3)
Americans just get all hot and whimper and then bend over.
This post is now potentially blocked in the UK.
Re: really? (Score:2)
You realise the Queen has no real power over policy/government these days right? She's a figurehead. Your post reads like you think she's running the show!
Re: (Score:2)
You should actually say that to the politician to get results not the anonymous phone support person
Re: (Score:2)
I'm assuming in the UK that no one is actually forced by the government into this line of work? (I'm actually unsure about this, after hearing stories of people legally forced to work unpaid "internships".) If they chose this job, they deserve everything that comes from it. I'll stop before I godwin the thread.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
yep if you turn down work offered by the job center you get sanctioned ie have your benefits removed - no matter that you might have 30+years of NI contributions
The problem of the person with 30+ years of NI contributions is that they don't know how to play the game. You don't turn down the work. You go to a job interview and make sure they don't accept you.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm willing to have sympathy for someone effectively forced into a job by the government, much like I'd only hold a drafted soldier responsible for behavior inappropriate for a soldier, not for the fact there's a war in the first place.
OTOH, I find it quite shocking that in the UK being forced into working some job you didn't choose (over a job you were actually doing, the way I hear it) is apparently a thing. I mean, all of us not independently wealthy are forced by circumstance to earn a living, and our
Definition. (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess for the ruling party, the opposition would be 'obscene'.
Re: (Score:3)
Will be interesting to see if it applies to their own. If an MP has a racist rant on their site, will the "extremist" filter flag it? Will Enoch Powell's speeches on YouTube get the axe? Guess: no.
Re: (Score:2)
Will be interesting to see if it applies to their own. If an MP has a racist rant on their site, will the "extremist" filter flag it? Will Enoch Powell's speeches on YouTube get the axe? Guess: no.
I'm waiting for a newspaper to publish a leaked list of MPs who have said "yes I want the porn" to their ISPs...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a submission form for potentially bad sites? I want to write a script that bulk submits Daily Mail pages as they are published based on keywords for child porn/hate/racism etc.
Please ... (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Please ... (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Even if you're not interested in ever taking drugs, the experience reports on Erowid make for some damn interesting reads!
Re:Please ... (Score:5, Interesting)
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."
Re:Please ... (Score:4, Interesting)
I guess Game of Thrones is on your block list.
Re: (Score:2)
I see your point.
When 'Linda' calls, I'd like to request a block on the 'barely legal' genre but a definite yes to MILF. Brunettes, OK. Redheads, definitely yes. Blondes, if nothing else is available. Gonzo porn: check. Light on the plots, please. Big jugs OK, but hold the circus-sized breasts. Nice long legs a must.
What? You say your filter cant handle this? What sort of an outfit are you running there? I'd be surprised if Linda didn't hang up in the middle of my filter parameter list.
Here's what I'd say, and what YOU should say: (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Internet censorship, in any way, shape, or form, is wrong,...
Well, no, I wouldn't agree with this. There is certainly stuff out there that should be censored (and the people putting it up should be put into jail).
However, filtering this out completely is impossible, and I very much suspect that attempting to filter it out is done with the intention of filtering out contents that people _should_ be allowed to see, that is helpful, but doesn't fit someone's agenda.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
On the other hand you may well be
Re: (Score:2)
Can you clarify what you mean by "not allowed to exist"? I am all for going after producers of that stuff, but against trying to censor it online. It can't be used as the justification for building censorship infrastructure.
In fact I'd suggest that decriminalising possession might be worth considering. The police are all to happy to use claims of finding child porn on victims victims computers to put pressure on them, especially when the police themselves have bungled the investigation. Like firearms or the
The Nanny State (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The Nanny State (Score:4, Interesting)
One question for Linda (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Linda" is probably working in a call-center somewhere in India.
Re: (Score:2)
well, then, say you are sari but you still don't want anyone to filter the internet for you.
Re: (Score:2)
Briar Patch (Score:2)
As Goering said: "It's
Re: (Score:2)
Which laws did the UK government break?
Merely making you vocalize it (Score:2)
Search engines can figure out most of this stuff anyway, right? Isn't our privacy on these issues already gone? What's the difference between UK asking you for it and Google just paying attention to your browsing history? Now a-days I'm just going to assume the NSA and my ISP (I'm in the US) can see this stuff anyway.
This is in part a rhetorical question meant to focus on the general lack of privacy these days. We shouldn't get up in arms about being asked, we should be up in arms about not having privacy i
simple question (Score:2)
would you like censored internet? yes or no!!!
Turn it off. (Score:2)
Hi Linda,
What do you class as adult content? Who decides? Where would an act of fellatio fall in this criteria? Would that be blocked? What about anal sex? What about playing with a vibrator? So all adult content is blocked? What about pregnancy advice? What about information on alcohol consumption? What about contraception? What about advice on which genital piercing to get? So not all adult content, then? So which content to I know that I'm opening up or not? How can I decide? Where's the li
Filtering lost one customer (Score:2)
I am not from the UK but I live there. I signed up to GiffGaff, only to realize that the "optional" filter could only be disabled by giving GiffGaff my UK passport information. However, not being a citizen of the UK, I obviously do not have a UK passport and therefore cannot opt out. So much for the freedom of movement for workers.
Sites which have been blocked included childline.org.uk and British Library. Obviously they correct those mistakes when they make it to the newspapers, but what about all the site
The clear answer (Score:2)
Fuck yes i want freedom. ( and be sure to scream the obscenities )
Wrong question. (Score:2)
What is really being asked:
"Do you want to be able to see hardcore pornography? If you answer yes, we'll make sure your partner knows, along with any visiting family, friends or co-workers who may use your connection and have the fleeting curiosity to see if sex.com if blocked."
Whenever privacy issues are discussed, someone will quickly raise the obvious question: 'What are you hideing? The innocent have nothing to fear.' Well, here's your answer. Pornography is still legal, that doesn't mean I want everyon
My response to Linda... (Score:2)
Thanks you for calling, Linda. Please sign me up for the no-filtering-whatsoever service, please. My own filters that I have setup and maintain are more accurate, more unbiased, and less aligned toward corporate group think than the crap you are trying to push on me. As for child pornography and hard core porn, I have already discussed such things with my children and prepared them for what is out there. I trust that they are mentally strong enough and intelligent enough to be able to make basic decisions a
Re: (Score:2)
Almost, I don't have that uncomfortable, kinda creeped out feeling, and the undeniable sensation that I'll never get those hours of my life back again though...
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but why is everyone opening their posts by saying "sorry"?
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, WTF are you talking about? Do you even know? I am talking about the UK govt. classifying people like David Miranda and the papers like the Guardian as "terrorists" and you're talking about chemtrails. Then your buddys' are jumping in talking about chemtrails. What is this, a UK sponsored hijacking of my point?
Go fucking fuck your fucking selves. The word "terrorist" can't be used to describe "anyone who pisses us off on matters of national security or business " or it will lose all meaning and take t
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I had an option for cheaper internet that included a porn filter.
That *should* be the other way around. If you're making use of their filtering services, that's requiring more hardware/bandwidth/etc on their side, so you should have to pay more (a filtering tax?), whereas if you opt out, you should not have to pay for the service.
Sadly, if there was a cheaper option, I know it'd be what you said. They can even blame the cost of having to call everyone every year to confirm they want to keep the filter off as the reason those people need to pay more.
Re: (Score:2)
Because any such legislation would probably turn into a self-contradictory paperwork-laden mess of nightmareish complexity asking ISPs to achieve things that aren't possible short of a revolutionary breakthrough in artificial inteligence. The major ISPs objected for a while, but eventually saw common sense: If they do as the government asks voluntarily, they get to define the filtering requirements themselves according to what they can actually achieve. If they don't, then eventually the legislation would p
Re: (Score:2)
Hasn't gotten very far through the process yet, and is less likely to do so now it's clear that all the major ISPs are complying without a law to force them.
You're right about filters being useless. They do nothing about all the non-web sources of pornography - IM programs swapping pics with friends, p2p software, etc. And let us not forget that the prank of posting pornography of an unusual or humorous nature to unrelated forums is a long-established pasttime of internet culture. Plus all those dubious sit
Re: (Score:2)
And before those games came out, British TV was always playing wartime and post-war movies like "Battle of Britain". Those were just as violent, if not more. Wartime movies would show innocent civilians being hurt, like someone taking a cab through English countryside roads, only to be shot at by a fighter plane.