UK's Tories Promise To Enact Age Limits For Viewing Online Porn 187
An anonymous reader writes with this news from the UK: The Conservatives say they will force hardcore pornography websites to put in place age-restriction controls or face being shut down if they win the election. The culture secretary, Sajid Javid, said the party would act to ensure under-18s were locked out of adult content after a recent Childline poll found nearly one in 10 12-13 year olds were worried they were addicted and 18% had seen shocking or upsetting images. Experts welcomed the move – targeted at both UK-based and overseas websites – but warned it would take hard work to implement in practice.
Good Luck with That (Score:5, Insightful)
Do any of your politicians have even the smallest clue how the internet works? Trying to age restrict porn will be as effective as a law banning the sun from rising tomorrow,
Re: (Score:2)
Do any of your politicians have even the smallest clue how the internet works? Trying to age restrict porn will be as effective as a law banning the sun from rising tomorrow,
Apparently the "experts" are having brain trouble. Must just be a british thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good Luck with That (Score:5, Insightful)
They may or may not think that it's possible; and may not even much care; but as a piece of political theater it is logical enough. Remember, you only need to be an expert on getting elected in order to make it into office. Never underestimate a politician's skill in this area; but never let one pretend that it implies skill in other areas.
Re: (Score:2)
Careful, they might actually have a cunning plan. If they pass this law then it's an excuse to force ISPs to block sites that don't comply with it. There are going to be thousands, if not millions of pages on that list. They can include other stuff they don't like, like "violent images" and "criminal skills", on the pretext that it should have an age restriction on it.
The government has seen how well the BPI has managed to get ISPs to block sites it doesn't like, and wants in on the action. By going it this
Re: (Score:3)
You don't actually think this is actually about porn, do you?
This is how they'll get the British people to agree to requiring proof of ID to access the Internet, which is the goal all along. Once they have that, they can cut you off the Internet at any moment.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't actually think this is actually about porn, do you?
The UK has a national election coming up on May 7th, and the polls are very close. They are just tossing random ideas out to see if anything effects voting intentions. If this is anything like past British elections, all of these stupid proposals will be forgotten the following day.
In America, our elections are driven by 30 second TV soundbites. In Britain, they are driven by inflammatory tabloid headlines, which, believe it or not, leads to even more vacuous campaigns.
Re: (Score:2)
As a Brit, I can second that statement about the importance of inflammatory tabloid headlines. They really are of central importance in our campaigning.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the Sun actually had an editorial comment on this issue yesterday saying that this issue "made the election more important" or words to that effect. Like an impossible to implement nanny state usurping of what should be parental responsibility is somehow more important than the NHS etc.
Yes, it's the Sun. It's a comic. But people read it. It's pure electioneering.
Re: (Score:2)
No they just want to force the children of the world to hand over their parents credit card details to the worlds pornographers because that would be a really good idea. Hmm, wait are they being paid bribes by the world pornographers or are they just being extorted by the worlds pornographers having been caught out. Want a safe internet for children, then fo fuck sake, fucking create a minors only with adult supervision internet, separate from the adult internet
Oh that is write can not do that because y
Re: (Score:3)
Trying to age restrict porn will be as effective as a law banning the sun from rising tomorrow,
Just stop roosters from crowing. Then the sun won't rise.
Re: (Score:2)
Lots of wiggle room there.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, not just your browser. You also have to include USENET, FTP, IRC, and bittorrents, plus whatever I forgot.
Re: (Score:2)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Knoppix [lmgtfy.com]
Re:Good Luck with That (Score:5, Insightful)
Parenting 101: Stuff is going to happen with your kid. Your goal isn't to magically prevent it, because you can't. Your goal is to keep it to a level where you can support your kid until they can cope with it independently, and stop anything disastrous from happening along the way.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Could we get one for torrent sites too? It's kinda hard to keep up with them popping up and closing down, why can't my government provide me with a list of them?
And where are the parents? (Score:4, Informative)
...a recent Childline poll found nearly one in 10 12-13 year olds were worried they were addicted and 18% had seen shocking or upsetting images...
In other news, around 10% of parents apparently have no idea how to supervise their 12-13 year old children when they go on-line. Maybe we should treat the problem, not one particular symptom? Age-checks on porn sites aren't going to stop those same inadequately supervised children from being groomed for other things, or subject to hate attacks by classmates at school, or any number of other threats that come with an open communication system like the Internet.
Porn sites don't vote (Score:2)
but idiots do.
Re:And where are the parents? (Score:4, Insightful)
Supervision isn't even really the "problem" here.
Parents don't like the idea of their still young and in need of heavy-handed protection children having naughty thoughts or being around other children who might have naughty thoughts. Puberty disagrees with these parents, but the politicians are offering a feeling of control over something that is biologically ingrained in us. Parents will buy into it in most cases because they tend to be irrational about this stuff.
Pro-tip: You can't control everything a teenager does, and if you try you will ultimately promote outrageous behavior. Teenagers will watch porn. Teenagers will have sex. To the parents out there: don't make it taboo, make it safe. Those are two different things.
Re: (Score:2)
'Precocious puberty' is occasionally a problem, for various reasons, and treatments are available. Nothing except medical ethics and the strong odds that it's a terrible plan with the potential for unpleasant and life-long consequences would prevent the same treatment from being used to delay the onset of puberty in 'normal' children.
Re: (Score:3)
Teenagers will watch porn. Teenagers will have sex. To the parents out there: don't make it taboo, make it safe. Those are two different things.
I couldn't agree more, but I'd also add that helping them to find good information when they're ready for it is probably the best thing a parent can do to support a child of that age.
On the evidence so far, the problem with older, sexually active teenage kids and Internet porn is more the unrealistic expectations that the porn creates. This can lead to peer pressure to do a lot more, potentially with more dangerous, distressing and/or permanent consequences, than previous generations did when they fooled ar
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The average parent is an idiot and not accessible to rational arguments like yours. That is where the whole problem comes from.
Re: (Score:2)
Parenting is hard and there is no instruction manual. By the time children are old enough to be taught how to be good parents they are leaving school. There is a need to educate young adults in parenting skills that is completely unfulfilled at the moment.
Re: (Score:2)
The mist important thing that parents need to learn is that their influence is limited and that if they try to change what their children do, they are setting themselves up for utter failure. I do not think this is a problem of teaching parenting skills, I do think the problem is severe personality defects in most parents.
Re:And where are the parents? (Score:5, Insightful)
Most of those images were probably send by peers. Children have a fascination with the morbid and forbidden.
Re: (Score:2)
Which surely brings us to the next question, which is why any 12-year-old has unsupervised access to systems where they could receive such images regularly enough to be concerned about being addicted (whatever that actually means if it's judged from the perspective of a 12-year-old). There is no law that says the moment a child is old enough to go to school on their own they also need an iPhone, a laptop in their own room at home, and an unrestricted data plan in each case.
Sure, it seems inevitable that any
Re:And where are the parents? (Score:5, Informative)
Childline is run by the NSPCC. The NSPCC has something of a history of abusing statistics and using poor survey methodology to generate scary statistics.
Here's a BBC article on their survey: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/educ... [bbc.co.uk]
I can't find anything yet that describes exactly how the survey was carried out - mostly I find columns expressing shock at the claimed numbers - but I wouldn't trust the findings too much without checking where they come from.
Re: (Score:2)
They also claim that 12% of thirteen-year-olds have produced a pornographic video - a statistic that just sounds implausible.
Re: (Score:2)
The NSPCC is one of those charities that I often feel like I want to support (because who doesn't want to help children have a better life, right?) but then I see how they act or something they say in reality and I wonder whether we really see the world the same way at all.
This is sad, because maybe somewhere there is a child losing out because of it. However, I have to think not just of what might happen to unlucky children in terrible cases today but also what kind of world I think all children deserve to
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have not conducted any research over whether politicians are stupider than they look. It appeared relatively pointless.
A previous research project of mine showed 100% of heroin addicts ate cornflakes at lest once as children.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I've seen it with plenty of people who otherwise exhibit much greater than average intelligence and capacity for critical thinking too. Becoming a parent seems to create a reality distortion field around a surprising number of people.
However, this failing certainly isn't universal among parents, nor does it mean that people with more rational and reasoned positions should not challenge this kind of foolishness. It is, after all, likely to be better for all children if their parents act responsibly, supe
Re: (Score:2)
All valid points, and it certainly doesn't help when politics defeats reasonable proposals like creating a dedicated .xxx TLD that would allow most of the heavy stuff to be blocked in practice for most kids most of the time. I imagine the porn industry, at least the legitimate/legal parts of it, would have supported such a measure in practice, and it makes it relatively simple to block that content objectively by opting in to whatever child-friendly access plan your ISP offers with minimal risk of false pos
Good luck with that (Score:2)
Parliament should really stop thinking of the kids.
Mostly because of the pedophilia scandals, but also in general
It's not up to the websites (Score:2)
Asking all websites in different countries on the planet to implement legal age verification is completely unrealistic. It takes too much work and duplicates that work on all the websites.
What's easy to do is ask websites to add metas about the content. A standard about the metas and their keywords could be established but we already have something used by media companies when publishing movies on DVD, etc.
The "locking down" side should come from the browsers themselves. It's easy to ask international compa
Re: (Score:3)
Young kids have limited buying power, and aren't really in the market for things that get advertised on porn sites or likely to subscribe to paywalled ones, are unlikely to be terribly into porn, and will be terrible PR if their discovery of the wacky world of gangbangs or whatever through your services comes to the attention of their parents, the authorities, or
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Asking all websites in different countries on the planet to implement legal age verification is completely unrealistic. It takes too much work and duplicates that work on all the websites.
The technical difficulties while high are the lease of the difficulties. The main problem is something like this:
Me: I say, American fellow purveyor of pornography. I'd be awfully obliged if you'd implement age verification, eh, what.
Other website: *crickets*
The main problem is the rest of the world quite rightly doesn't g
"Experts" have a hidden agenda (Score:5, Insightful)
I would say this is more likely to be a problem with their social / religious upbringing making them think that it's messed up to want to look at porn more than a couple times per week.
Also, feel free to make as many kid-friendly whitelists as you want but proposals to rate/blacklist the entire thing are horribly insidious. Why are we still falling for this old scam? In addition to being insanely hard to do effectively, this sort of censorship is ALWAYS stealthily aimed at adults, not children. Case in point: NC-17 ratings for movies and AO ratings for videogames. Both are on their face completely redundant (R rating and M+ rating), but their real use is to prevent certain content from being produced through self-censorship pressure by retailers/theaters refusing to carry the highest rating. The analogue here is going to be ISPs first offering opt-out for censored internet, then opt-in for uncensored internet, and then "hey, why should the government being subsidizing the with-porn ISP plans?" and boycotts and cheap political grandstanding and endless tedious arguments about what constitutes porn vs. art vs. education.
A genuine and forthright proposal would be "Here, if you're worried use whitelist XYZ and keep your kids off of the real the internet. " If we don't want kids driving cars then the solution is to stop them from doing so, not to pass legislation to install giant Nerf bumpers on everything and enact a new nationwide speed limit of 20 mph. Proposals to examine and decide whether to blacklist every goddamn page on the internet should be instantly recognized as a very clumsy attempt to control adults.
Re:"Experts" have a hidden agenda (Score:4, Interesting)
nearly one in 10 12-13 year olds were worried they were addicted
I would say this is more likely to be a problem with their social / religious upbringing making them think that it's messed up to want to look at porn more than a couple times per week.
Without knowing more about their definition of "addicted" we can't be sure, but introspection is socially accepted for things like "being offended" and whatnot, so I see no reason not to take their concern at face value.
Also, feel free to make as many kid-friendly whitelists as you want but proposals to rate/blacklist the entire thing are horribly insidious. Why are we still falling for this old scam? In addition to being insanely hard to do effectively, this sort of censorship is ALWAYS stealthily aimed at adults, not children. Case in point: NC-17 ratings for movies and AO ratings for videogames. Both are on their face completely redundant (R rating and M+ rating), but their real use is to prevent certain content from being produced through self-censorship pressure by retailers/theaters refusing to carry the highest rating.
No, they're not redundant. R/M+ are intended for adults, and children with parental consent. NC-17/AO are intended for adults only and not children, even with parental consent. It's not legally enforceable in most jurisdictions, but bowing to public pressure most mainstream cinemas will enforce as a matter of corporate policy the relevant age restrictions. In the US, "NC-17" was specifically created to allow it to be used for movies that warranted the restriction but weren't "pornography" in the sense associated with the previous rating, "X".
The main reason more "mainstream" movies don't come out as NC-17 is simple... They're likely to make more money the more people are easily able to see them. Frankly, this is why a fair number of movies try to end up as a strong PG-13 instead of an R rating -- bigger audience, and less worry for the parents about having to decide whether they really want their kid seeing the film before they accompany them.
Ironically, it goes the other way for 'G' films. Especially nowadays (morals and community standards change over time, naturally), there are plenty of films that could and would be rated 'G', but unless you're making an animated feature it's considered something that will keep the audiences away (what teen wants to see something G rated?). Often studios and producers will put some sort of slightly-unnecessary smack or violence, or a mild curse, or something exceedingly brief *just* to nudge a film up into the PG category, so it brings in more revenue.
Goes both ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Without knowing more about their definition of "addicted" we can't be sure, but introspection is socially accepted for things like "being offended" and whatnot, so I see no reason not to take their concern at face value.
They're 10-12 year olds. At best, they have a dim understanding of whatever definition for "addiction" the anti-drug crusaders are using these days but that hardly qualifies them to correctly analyze their behavior... particularly when Abraham sexual shame is still far from eradicated in the UK. The very fact that they're "worried" that they're addicted (if indeed that is the word they used) is telling. I'm sure none of them are "worried" about being addicted to TV or Facebook or their smartphones, yet t
Re: (Score:2)
Re:"Experts" have a hidden agenda (Score:4, Funny)
Sex/masterbation addiction can lead to food addiction and breathing addiction. End it before it's too late.
There is a real world precedent (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Also worth noting: the UK has already banned porn involving soft bondage, watersports, female ejaculation (which I can attest is a real thing despite the widespread conflation with peeing), face sitting, an
Re: (Score:2)
I think there's more to it than that (Score:5, Insightful)
Age control...right... (Score:2)
This is the country that has age control on alcohol-related websites. It's worse than useless. Go to any alcohol-related site in the UK, for example the Highland Park website [highlandpark.co.uk], and you have to enter your birth date. Wow, I'll bet no 13-year-old ever thought about adding 10 years to his/her age.
All this does is annoy the actual customers; it's not actually useful. Anyway, come to think of it, isn't the government's job at all. I kind of thought (speaking as a parent) that it was the parents' job to know what
Re: (Score:2)
They actually propose to censor every porn site? (Score:2)
This is going to be amusing.
Re: (Score:2)
No matter the country ... (Score:2)
... the run-up to elections is called, "the silly season."
Re:No matter the country ... (Score:4, Interesting)
The American version is to make it legal to refuse selling Pizza to gays.
Re: (Score:2)
That's just a part of history in motion.
The story is formulaic.
For reference, see Civil Rights Act.
Re: (Score:2)
Ya know, it was less painful when they promised outlandish, impossible things when it was outlandish, impossible things that I didn't simply KNOW are outlandish and impossible.
When you look at this you can only wonder: Any time they come up with something that I know enough about to evaluate their idea, my verdict is that their idea is rubbish. Now what should I assume about the quality of their work concerning things that I don't know enough about to gauge its value? Should I assume that they're masters in
Putting an age limit on sugar (Score:2)
would be more successful.
Re: (Score:3)
Ah, now you've gone and spoiled next weeks platform announcement.
It's odd (Score:2, Interesting)
British culture has always seemed the most paranoid in the world about children and sex. I once found a website claiming that the world's most innocent cartoons that have young girls in them (for instance "Kiki's delivery service" - and no I'm not joking) should be banned because a pedophile could gain enjoyment from watching the girl in it.. It was a British blog, but I could tell that before checking because of the insane paranoia.
But, here's the odd part, they're also the country least successful in pr
Re: (Score:2)
I think we just report it more when someone does get caught.
Re: (Score:2)
but not willing to confront Pakistani or Somali or whatever immigrants over actual abuse.
Or non immigrants like Jimmy Saville.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd have to be delusional to believe this. The UK is a developed nation with an operational police force. That alone is enough to put it miles ahead of some countries.
Yeah right, that will certainly work! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The kid at school with the 8GB memory stick full of porn is going to be in some demand.
Very much in favor of this (Score:2)
There should definitely be systems in place to protect developing minds from porn. We could even give them a snappy name like "Pornographic Age-Restriction Enforcing Network Tool." Really a shame that nothing like this exists in the 21st century.
Rob
The blind leading the dumb (Score:2)
That's contemporary politics for you. As long as voters have as little clue about technology as politicians have, politicians who know zero about the things they decide about are allowed to stay in office. In an enlightened society, such a suggestion would alone be enough to ensure political suicide of whoever came up with the idea. Because voters would know that it's not only impossible but simply idiotic to even try something like that. At the very least the ONLY way to do this would be to impose massive
Message to the UK (Score:2)
Please stop screwing our internet. If you don't like it, just make your own, it's easy and the infrastructure exist.
Thanks, the real world.
In all seriousness, if they want to create a "curated" internet, sanctioned by the state, they can. No need to bother the sane people around with their craziness.
Porn is bad, violence is... (Score:2)
I guess I'm flogging a dead horse, but where was all the outcry about violence? Hunger games was predicated on "lets have teenager kill other teenagers for sport". Yet the rating on that movie (and I'm sure the books, etc) were such that teenagers were encouraged to see it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, violence is a normal part of everyday life. But sex will corrupt and maim young minds! (It is just the usual bigots at work, of course....)
Re: (Score:2)
Nice dishonest fanatic religious propaganda piece. Go back under the rock you crawled out from, you misanthropic piece of shit.
The Usenet is alive and well. (Score:2)
You remember the Usenet, it was the Internet before WWW.
Before Gore gave public access to the masses it was frequented by bright people and the place you went for answers. It's still around; p0rn for those who don't wish to subscribe to a site or wish to pay for it, and rivals thepiratebay in the files available.
I've never frequented a sex site, there's been no need, and when someone has a disagreement with a sex site they normally post everything they purchased to the Usenet (many times I've seen this).
It'
A few key questions that come out of TFA (Score:2)
Having read TFA (yeah, I know... ), there are a number of questions that arise:
1) What the heck are they smoking in Tory HQ?
2) Did any of them consider running this by someone from even the party's own tech-support, let alone anyone form the Met or (for bonus points) GCHQ?
3) TFA states that this will apply to "Hardcore" porn. Who will be the arbiter of what constitutes hardcore?
4) Is their handling of websites selling POMs (Prescription-Only Meds) without a prescription to be considered a suitable yardstick
Re: (Score:2)
3) TFA states that this will apply to "Hardcore" porn. Who will be the arbiter of what constitutes hardcore?
Well, this comes from the Tory part and everyone knows posh people are much bigger perverts. So, basically anything the senior cabinet flogs it to.
Perhaps we can get the filters to add a little "approved by David Cameron" watermark (complete with a smiling Cameron giving the thumbs up) to any age-verified porn so we know we're getting the good stuff.
Re: (Score:2)
1) Finest quality tobacco, from pipes.
2) Why would they? It's a tabloid-bait proposal. Implementing it is a problem for the future, they know they can water it down heavily.
3) We already passed a law banning 'extreme' porn that has to have an explicit exemption for BBFC rated movies, otherise half the horror films from Hollywood would be banned.
4) POM sites would be easier targets: They need a payment system, which means they can be tracked and payment easily blocked. Porn sites are often ad-funded.
5) Proba
What did you expect? (Score:2)
For non UK readers.... there's an election coming up.
This time there's a chance it will go beyond a two horse race (whether or not that's a good thing given the parties involved is down to personal opinion).
The major parties want to look for something to differentiate themselves and will jump on any bandwagon going to appease the more rabid elements of the press. Manufacturing a major scare and then swooping in like a superhero to fix it is just custom & practice.
I fully expect this to evaporate like mo
wil they include the tabloids (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
The funny thing is that with the old Leisure Suit Larry games that you could simply "brute force" it, and learn something.
Motivation is a strong desire, education be damned. :-)
Re:Are they dumb, are they voters dumb? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
You forget how fast time passes: You'd need obscure trivia questions from the 80s now.
Find me anyone under 18 who can answer 'What food does Badger like?' - it's hard one to look up even with google, but almost any child of the early nineties in the UK will know.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but that also affects those of us who are older. I have no idea who that is. I'm over 40, no good asking me questions that assume I was a child in the 90s.
Re: (Score:2)
well.. we would look them up from encyclopedias etc.. after first looking on a dictionary to translate.
Re:Are they dumb, are they voters dumb? (Score:5, Interesting)
To answer your questions: No, politicians are not stupid; I'll explain below. Yes, voters are often stupid; they could make the effort to understand what is going on, but they choose not to - that, in my view, is the very essence of being stupid.
If somebody want to watch porn, he will say "yes I have 18" to any question. This is a stupid waste of everyone time. Don't vote this retarded people even if you agree with their ideas.
The point is not to stop those who actually want to see porn, but to protect those who don't want to, but feel pressurised or otherwise intimidated into it, or who stumble across it. It may be difficult for a hard-core wanker to understand, but to many, not least children, porn is genuinely off-putting, and to 11 year old, it may be something they find it very hard to talk to adults about. After all, they were not supposed to look at it, on one hand, and on the other hand, they now speculate that most adults, including their parents, engage in the sort of alien activities illustrated, however poorly, in pornography. It is easy to feel alone with those thoughts in those circumstances.
The point of this kind of legislation is to force a deliberate choice: if you proceed, it is because you have chosen to; and by requiring the ISPs or whoever to take responsibility, they make it illegal to just sit by passively and make money out of it; you now have to do something to ensure that your audience is old enough to legally make that decision. It won't stop young people from lying about their age, but it will now be possible to go after those that exploit this particular vulnerability, if and when it is deemed necessary.
Politicians are not necessarily stupid; certainly not as stupid as people who have nothing to have their opinions in tend to make out. I would argue that politicians are also quite often genuinely motivated by what they believe in, rather than simply being greedy bullies. I don't agree with much of what David Cameron stands for, and I certainly don't agree with his party's ideologically motivated privatisation at all costs, but I do respect him for being competent and for genuinely seeking to do what is good for UK; the same goes for Labour, the LibDems, SNP etc. They are principled and they have certainly made more of an effort to understand thing than you seem to.
Re: (Score:3)
That doesn't work. A kid can easily get hold of a credit card (some carry one all the time) and sign up.
As long as they don't make a purchase, they can see the free stuff. For some, that's enough and, anyway, it doesn't "block access."
The main reason it will not work though... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
All UK ISPs are subject to UK law however, and they will get the job of enforcing this through blocking non-conforming websites.
Re: (Score:2)
A kid can easily get hold of a credit card
Or they can have one of their own. My daughter is 16, and has had her own credit card for several years.
Re: (Score:2)
Doubt it is a credit card, more of a debit card or cash card.
Not everyone has a credit card in the UK either, I do not.
Re: (Score:2)
A porn site wanting my credit card number? Yeah, that sounds absolutely legit, uhhuh...
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, that's basically what this law will ensure. Anyone past 55 will be not only know too little about computers to get around the (certainly mandatory) block, but would also be ashamed to ask for aid to get porn, while the average child, if necessary with the aid of his school peers (for whom it is a huge gain of "street cred" if they know how to fight not only "da man" but of course parental restrictions), will have no problem getting around anything our esteemed polidorks can come up with.
Re: (Score:2)
Back when I was 55, I was doing senior tech support for an ISP. That was about a decade ago. If/when I want some pr0n, I don't need any help in finding it, TYVM. You might want to rethink some of your stereotypes.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, of course the one person who doesn't fit the profile has to speak up...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Way back when I was in my teens, I would always add 10 to my real age and so subtract 10 from my real birth year.
Makes it real easy to remember the lie and be able to make match even years later.
Of course when I was 15 the web wasn't yet a year old and we still got our 8-bit gif porn from FTP that didn't/couldn't age check, but for BBS profiles it worked great.
Never came up against such a validation myself however, at least not that I ever noticed. But I'm just a bit surprised this is my first time hearing
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...it's intended to [...] make sure that I'm not an autobot...
Seems to me that it would be easier to just ask you if you pledge allegiance to Optimus Prime, and if you answer in the affirmative, block your access?
Re: (Score:2)