The UK government is today launching the UK Council for Child Internet Safety with support from BT, Microsoft, Facebook and over 100 other organisations and companies. The talking shop will deliver a "Child Internet Safety Strategy" to the Prime Minister early next year. It will also work to improve public awareness of issues …
Of course ...
The best "Child Internet Safety Strategy" would be to deny the little buggers access until they realize it's a horrible electronic ghetto ....
That's what we need, another committee.
This is why taxes are such bad value. Rather than achieving things these days they are content to just form a committee or have a think tank. Rather than blue sky thinking let's just have more of the 'inside the box' thinking where parents are held accountable for what their offspring are up to and paedophiles get sentences that are slightly more substantial punishment than the standard couple of years in one of Her Madge's country clubs.
Yay! An excuse for censorship!
And you'd better agree, otherwise YOU HATE CHILDREN!
Why don't you love your country?
What have you got to hide? PAEDO?
Man, I'm feeling a bit weird this morning.
Jacqui Smith not fit
“We are determined to do all we can to ensure that the internet environment is safe for children to use. Earlier this year, the Home Office published the first ever social networking guidance developed with industry, charities and law enforcement. "
We are determined to make the Spice channel safe for Children to view.
We are determined to make the BBC news kid friendly.
We are detemined to make slasher movies safe for toddlers.
We are determined to make the M25 a safe place for children to play.
We are determined to hide our censorship agenda behind kids so when we're locking up millions of adults for doing adult things, we don't sound like an insane bunch of unelectable loonies suppressing free speech.
What does she propose to do? Lock up millions of adults for doing adult stuff? She's a control freak, not fit to hold a senior position. She's shown the same pattern of behaviour again and again, people don't count, she puts them in prison at the drop of a hat. Yet she can't be sacked because she's a Brown supporter.
It's like a parasite you can't get rid off.
why don't they get it
Leave the net alone!
Why is the term "supporting harmful behaviour" nice n vague?
Could this be how they challenge 4chan? consumption junction? break.com?
How about this little nugget of advice - get parents to actually do their job and parent their children!
Yes, the net is full of asshats and nasty stuff but that's the price of freedom - not everything can be sugar coated and wrapped in cotton. You take the nasty with the smooth.
Is it just me, or does the freedom of the net really worry these people in power because it's an echo chamber where their bullshit doesn't stick as well?
Yep UK heads showing its understanding of the internet lol
The issue here is the internet is a large database full of good and bad, the UK wants to rewrite the internet (lets assume its oxford dictionary) and take out all the things that mean bad things (sex, drugs, gun ) so kids are safe... hmmmmm lots of points to argue about here but its not the issue
The issue is what the UK needs is two internets
Internet for adults and internet for kids
What you UK bods need to figure is really simple
Rather than harrasing adults and contents on the internet
1. You need to approach ISP's making two layer accounts
1.1 adult accounts
1.2 kids from the adults that will be adults soon
1.3 Define IP ranges for 1.1 and 1.2
2. Send these IP ranges to all the market hoggers Yahoo and rest of them
3, Get them to block normal internet from the kid ips
4, Get Yahoo and msn and youtube and rest to create new websites KID FRIENDLY (like youtube) i.e.
kidstube.com so when a kid from ip 10.0.0.1 hits youtube.com - they are redirected via policies to kidstube..
5. Leave us adults alone and rather than harrasing adults try to THINK.. OPEN YOUR MINDS
If you can not open you mind offer people with a more technical understand the jobs
King Cnut rides again.
Oops, there appears to be a spelling mistake in my title there.
The safety starts at home, with the parents teaching their kids the rights and wrongs.
Becouse a peadophile would never claim to be a kid so she could get onto the kids network...
Hey you kids...
Stay off my darn intawebs!!
Lets not forget what we are talking of here !
we are talking of kids searching on youtube and google for things like suecide..
If there was a dual network 1 for kids which filters for bad things then in theory no need to worry /touch the adult side of things.
I am going to be honest here - this as per usual is nothing to do with root cause if it was my solution would work 100% its more to do with monitoring and knowing your every move
so roll on phorm and all the imaginary middle management positions created to monitor the internet PFFFT (only in the UK)
once you have finished please ensure you tell us all I will be a planning a flight plan ticket = 1 way
never fear - I took your suggestion with a pinch of salt.
Besides what kid didn't have a morbid interest in morbid things when they were kids? (Goths/Emos like their suicide and sacrifice whilst chavs and trendies like their gangstar killers and hoes) I remember drawing tombstones and depressing quotes in the margins of my workbooks - not becouse I was miserable or depressed - but becouse it wound the teachers up something cronic.
A conversation between my Science Teacher and Mother
"About Matthew - do you think he may be depressed?"
"Well he draws alot of depressing things and writes morbid stories - and this seems to be getting more frequent..."
"Have you mentioned this to him?"
"Yes..." *mother gives parental look* "He's taking the pi$$ isn't he."
"I think so."
Alot like the conversation my mother had with my Maths teacher
"Are you concerned that Matthew may be a bit of a... Goth?"
"Not really, besides the drugs goths take are far safer then the alternatives."
Kids shouldn't be wrapped up in cotton wool, just makes them irresponsible losers with no sense of fear or reality. Much like the rest of society.
"taking down illegal internet sites that promote harmful behaviour"
Damn! There goes my plan to start a site called www.runningwithscissors.co.uk!
(Addendum: Double damn, I've just found someone's already registered it! I hope they know they're liable to be shut down any day now...)
ahem correction of myself
You know what why am I re-inventing the wheel here ?
Why should any ISP or infact any content provider change their ways?
Why do we even need another fat cat minister yet again to overlook and be the overseer of yet another thing?
Its quite simple and the solution is already out there its called AOL - They do parental control with kids accounts who go through content filters.
Rather than having a minister surely it makes sense giving parents the initiative to sign up and use aol (evil muhahahahaha)
I mean I for one as an adult with no kids have no use for their service but hey it look there is market its the whole of the UK with kids lol
Seriously if this is what they want nothing negative for the kids it would make more sense rather than trying to wipe out the internet slowly invest that money in companies such as BT muhahahahahaha to have this service.
Kids are now safe you can put out the light and go down the tappas bar......
Mr Prime Minister, our surveys indicate that people are no longer buying the terror threat thing. We need a motive that nobody will ever dare challenge.
Wait, I know...
Nailing jelly to the wall
The UK can only regulate UK websites. They can issue a take down notice to UK based websites promoting suicide but there it won't effect websites outside the UK. So, the content will still be out there - just moving it to another country.
I think its a slippery slope for internet censorship. Children are generally very IT tech savvy and will manage to bypass most filters/blocks if they really want to see something. All this will do is eventually restrict sites for adults.
I for one look forward to only being able to view
Biased representation and evidence base
I have read through the list of board members. As you would expect the industry interests and child protection organisations are well represented. Of more concern is the omission of anyone opposed to unnecessary censorship despite the inclusion of at least one group that actively promotes wide ranging censorship. We will of course be making our views known.
There is only one justification for censorship. Evidence that it is necessary to prevent harm. Unfortunately many people do not bother to distinguish between evidence and prejudice.