Feeds

back to article WAR ON PORN: UK flicks switch on 'I am a pervert' web filters

Prime Minister David Cameron will today gaily announce that Brit adults will be forced to ask their ISP for permission to view web grumble flicks. The system will also ensure people typing in "abhorrent search terms" for stuff online will receive a "warning" along with some helpline numbers - although a former child protection …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Silver badge
Coat

Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

Yes, the Nanny with the leather outfit and the cats ears for me, please.

My coat? The one wih Gotlib's "Rhââ Lovely" in the pocket. Thank you, young lady.

16
0
Silver badge
Flame

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

Apologies for jumping in at the top.

I urge everyone to leave their connection as-is when they offer you to 'option' to turn the filter off.

Then I would urge everyone here to use a workaround and spread the knowledge of how to do so far and wide.

Deny them their list, and educate the plebs on how to circumvent their pathetic censorship rules.

The time to take a stand is NOW.

PS If I stop posting for more than a week, you can assume I'm rotting in some prison somewhere without any rights.

50
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

When someone attacks your daughter and puts videos of it online, will you still be saying it's a nanny state who helps take them down?

1
101
FAIL

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

THEY ARE ALREADY ILLEGAL YOU IDIOT - This is just a silly filter for parents too stupid to control their own children's web access.

59
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

> I urge everyone to leave their connection as-is when they offer you to 'option' to turn the filter off.

This is probably the worst thing we can do as it will be seen as tacit agreement. The scheme will be trumpeted as a major success and will open the way for all sorts of other stupidity.

Everyone, and I mean everyone, should opt out "I am Spartacus" style. Let them have their list, it's no good to them if it's got absolutely everyone on it.

21
0
Bronze badge
Devil

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

Actually, I would say everyone should phone their ISP immediately and demand that they not switch off the porn!

Especially since if the switchover happens just at the wrong moment it will really ruin your day!

5
1
Gold badge
Childcatcher

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

"When someone attacks your daughter and puts videos of it online, will you still be saying it's a nanny state who helps take them down"

Oh look, the nearly obligatory AC with the "Think of the children" BS.

I'll be saying it's illegal and I think a DCMA takedown order would exist.

11
0

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

(.Y.)

This comment thread now needs you to opt in to pr0n to see

8
0
Silver badge
Black Helicopters

@AC

Horribly wrong and extremely naive example.

This filter doesn't take down anything, the only thing it does is hide the ugly truth from you. And guess what: there is a lot of garbage out there.

But instead of actually providing any resources to fight these disgusting (self-censored) pieces of (self-censored) (self-censored) who would easily abuse and exploit children the English government now seems to put more effort in hiding the offense rather than fighting it.

Obviously there is also the harsh reality about censorship. This move is wrong in so many ways..

20
0

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

The thing is, this idea will never work, a huge majority of the UK will have to call their ISP and opt out as soon as they realise they won't be able to view:

The National Lottery

Ladbrokes.com

GlitzyGirlyBingo.com

Alcohol websites

etc

The public will soon kick up a stink when they can't get through to their ISP as it's innundated with calls to unblock so people can check their lottery numbers or place a bet on the grand national.

4
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

This is the UK, DCMA is USA....

1
0
FAIL

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

I would argue that it is your responsibiltiy as a parent to protect your child from anything that may harm them. This is typical reactionary Daily Mail politics from people who just sit back melting into their chair expecting the Gov to come and sort it all out for them. Get off your backside and be a parent....

I also think this is dangerously close sending us off a slippery slope. I agree that violent an abusive porn should be tackled but surely you must tackle the cause, not just 'close peoples eyes' to the stuff that already exists. The criminals who use and create this filth are no worse off after this anouncement, it will just serve to score political points and comfort the weak who are deluded enough to think the Goverment are here for our benefit.

Still, we shouldn't be surpised.....

15
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Stop it, these are totally different things.

This is like trying to prevent murder by requiring you to "opt-in" to eating burgers.

Perhaps they are trying to damage the Labour party by sending Jacqui Smith mad by preventing her husband from seeing porn?

That makes at least as much sense.

2
0
Silver badge
Coat

Re: @AC

Worse, it will unintentionally block valid innocent content.

Though should be people be protected from the truth about Scunthorpe?

5
0
Unhappy

Re: @AC

But doing something that would actually help costs money, and takes time, and may not work..

With this option, they can have a few nice photo ops, and be seen to be doing something. The photo ops are the important part. Not the molested kids.. Unless they are suitably photogenic of course.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

It's just sour grapes because his nanny still won't let him type rude words into that computer thing.

2
0
Bronze badge

Nanny State ?

Wow 425 comments and there is talk on here of frothy mouthed Daily Mail, Sun etc readers.

A question for folks on here how is this different from the other restrictions placed on pornography?

In cinemas they don’t let you watch it until you are 18, in newsagents again 18 and it is on the top shelf, and on the TV there is the 9 PM watershed.

Since it is now very much a normal part of life, so why should the internet have special exceptions?

1
4
Big Brother

Re: Nanny State ?

@Titus Technophobe - "A question for folks on here how is this different from the other restrictions placed on pornography?"

Its different in one key aspect; you have to put yourself on a database to say "I want to watch porn". In a country that has effectively declared war on porn and sees you as a "deviant" by default. You can't see how your name on that database may come back to haunt you in the future?

4
0

Re: rather than fighting it.

It is cheaper. Plus, the ISPs will pay for it.

I feel real sorry for the British ISPs anyway... to end up in a hole like that...

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: Nanny State ? @David Evans

Ah I see ... so the only difference is that you have to register with a database that you have an interest in 'Over 18' content?

So that might be pornography, but could also be gambling or indeed violent movies. Why, of the possibly millions of people who are going to elect to knock the content lock off, would the country pick on you?

Also this database is going to be held by a private company so, should this 'country' want to look at it, would need a court request for the information. Why do you think the court would suddenly decide to issue a request for your details?

If it reassures you at all, not maybe having such a sheltered life as you, I personally have:

1. removed the content lock on my phone (I guess they know I might look at porn, and then again it wouldn't let me use MSN)

2. registered with a number of 'clubs' that only allowed me entry having had sight of both my passport and a utility bill. So it would seem my details would be on a database.

0
4
Silver badge

Re: Nanny State ? @Titus

It's all very well stating that you are happy with this Titus, but what about the people who aren't?

I don't recall this being part of their mandate and I certainly haven't been asked about it since. My primary objection to this whole business isn't just that it's another nail in the coffin of privacy and freedom (because we all know it's actually dead and buried) - it's that the general populace have been brainwashed into accepting this level of control for their 'safety', and I don't want that.

I don't want to have to leave the country because I object to where it's heading, I would rather stay and fight and it's frustrating to be balked by ignorance.

I recently came upon a quote that sums it up nicely..

"We are actively discouraged from thinking contructively and questioningly, and once an individual has accepted the numb acquiescence so encouraged, an insidiously vicious circle has successfully been promoted. Another rather convenient result of such a situation is that people who don't think contructively and questioningly don't even realise it." - Michael Timothy.

By absolving themselves of the responsibility of actually parenting their children, the populace of this country have encouraged the government to step in and do it for them. What's next?

2
0
Bronze badge

Re: Nanny State ? @Mr Spoon

It's all very well stating that you are happy with this Titus, but what about the people who aren't?

I didn't state that I was happy with the situation I pointed out that these changes bring the Internet in line with the rest of the UK. They are applying the same ‘safety’ to the Internet as say either mobile phones or WH Smith.

If I had a choice I suspect that a better approach to this sort of thing might well be the continental model such as the Netherlands or Denmark. But that said this would take both a change in legislation and a cultural shift in the UK. Just liberalising the rules doesn't to my mind work.

As an example of this take a look at the effects of the 2005 relaxation of the licensing laws, along continental lines, to reduce ‘binge drinking’. Which at least anecdotally this has rather more increased the problem of ‘binge drinking’.

My point is really directed at the denizens of the Internet who for whatever reason think that they should be special. The Question being why and what makes you special?

0
3
Facepalm

Re: Hmmm.... a Nanny State.

"When someone attacks your daughter and puts videos of it online, will you still be saying it's a nanny state who helps take them down?"

Of course not. I would them to hunt down and bring to justice the perpetrators. Pathetic net filters? No thanks. The content has to disappear, the offenders need to rot in hell.

2
0

Re: Nanny State ?

"In cinemas they don’t let you watch it until you are 18, in newsagents again 18 and it is on the top shelf, and on the TV there is the 9 PM watershed."

Then a few questions about you:

1. Do cinema gear stop projecting the porn for you if you are under age while others keep watching? Besides, watching cinema is public activity, using Internet is private matter.

2. Do porn magazines turn white pages when an under are person looks at them?

3. Does your TV switch off after 9pm, to protect you from watching porn?

This stuff has nothing to do with port. It's just testing waters for centralized censorship and manipulation setup.

2
0

Re: Nanny State ? @Titus

Correct. You are heading here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletariat

0
0
Bronze badge
Boffin

Re: Nanny State ? @danbi

Ah yes, on the basis of your facile points I am assuming that you would be one of children whose Internet connection is paid for by parents who are unlikely to knock the content lock off.

If it is any consolation when you grow up if you study a bit and work hard you will find that you can by-pass the content lock, and indeed later on buy your own Internet connection. It would seem that UK Government may have provided you with both the motivation, and time.

This would be an argument for this policy that even I hadn't thought about happening. So a big thank you for so ably illustrating this point.

0
0
Silver badge

Who will turn the filter off?

The question gets shown to the first browser to try to acces a web page after the moment of switch-on.

In most "at-risk" households, that's pretty likely to be one of the kids being babysat by The Internet.

0
0
Bronze badge
Unhappy

Re: Nanny State ?

There is a difference between censorship and restrictions, stopping law abiding citizens from viewing perfectly legal content is censorship, stopping children from viewing restricted content is different, those tools are already available, and this is going to make no difference.

I don’t get put on a list saying I drink beer before I can enter a pub.

The next step is having to register to watch films with violence in, in an effort to stop people being violent, so the next time you want to watch the Godfather you have to contact someone and say “yes I do enjoy watching people being murdered”, meanwhile society carries on raping murdering and robbing each other, but the Police have a handy list of people to round up.

“Is there any evidence that the accused committed this sexual assault and then stabbed his victim to death?”

Why Yes your honour, this man not only lives in the area the crime was committed in, but he is a predator, you just have to look to see he is listed as enjoying murderously violent and graphic sexual content, that contains the theme of using blades to kill women, he is viewing this so often, sometimes more than once a day for almost a year now, and in his house we found an assortment of knifes and other dangerous instruments!

And that is how you end up in jail because of a set of steak knives and the DVD box set of Game of Thrones.

3
0
Silver badge

Better get busy

searching for those "Oilseed rape videos" on YouTube now, before it's too late.

49
0
Bronze badge

Re: Better get busy

Don't forget those 'hot strip mills'.

Actually our company used to have filters on terms like that. Played havoc especially considering we sold a lot of control systems to the steel industry

13
0
Stop

Re: Better get busy

I've been refurbishing some old paraffin pressure lamps lately, and so far the terminology used has been merely giggle worthy. The number of times I've searched for "cock washer", "gland nut", "locating bush" and "pricker" has not been insignificant.

Once this nonsense proceeds at flank speed, I'm going to need to find a new hobby, else the porn police will be bashing down my door!

29
0
xyz
Bronze badge
Thumb Down

Re: Better get busy

>> I think the best search string I ever used was bitch anus boil....oh my! BTW, my dog had a boil on it's bum. Who knew! I presume in the near future I'll be hearing the mumsnet black helicopters pronto

15
0

Re: Better get busy

Scunthorpe!

11
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Better get busy

Google still ignores punctuation, so the search queries

extra-marital sex

and

extra marital sex

give the same results...

9
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Better get busy

pity those poor insect experts looking for details on the "Cockchafer" beetle then

4
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Bronze badge
Unhappy

Re: Better get busy

I'll always remember the time I went to answer a mate's musing about how many pigs were killed in a year. We were eating bacon sarnies at the time.

Typed pigs and slaughter into the search engine, and was confronted with a whole bunch of anarchist websites and splatter movies, all about killing policemen... :(

5
0
Happy

Re: Better get busy

Not me but the wife got a shock when she searched for bengal kittens...........

1
0
Silver badge
Black Helicopters

Re: Mumsnet Black Helicopters

It's the future...

7
0
Joke

Re: Better get busy

...and the RSPB website. Full of tits and shags.

5
0
Gold badge
Thumb Down

Re: Better get busy

">> I think the best search string I ever used was bitch anus boil....oh my! BTW, my dog had a boil on it's bum. Who knew! I presume in the near future I'll be hearing the mumsnet black helicopters pronto"

I always thought "plug nozzle" was a fairly arcane term only used by rocket engineers.

How little did I know..............

And it's opt "in" to pron filtering, not opt out in any sane society.

Now had they said Q1 Do you have children? Q2 Do you want to enable web filtering to reduce the risk of them viewing harmful content?

No problem.

But this BS really is the Daily jailbait Heil at its TOTC worst.

3
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re: Better get busy

And so, Dildo in Newfoundland suddenly vanished from existence.

2
0
FAIL

Re: Better get busy

Once the filter is in place, the town of Scunthorpe will cease to have any presence at all on the internet. Which is a pity, as the town is really quite pleasant.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Better get busy

You must have been to a different Scunthorpe than me.

2
0
Bronze badge

Re: Better get busy

FYI for many years, people living in Scunthorpe were unable to sign up to AOL, for some unknown reason.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Better get busy

So did the Angry Worms' song about it.

Let's not forget that charmingly named town in Austria which is constantly complaining about british/american tourists stealing their signs...

3
0
Silver badge
Alert

Re: Re: Better get busy

"pity those poor insect experts looking for details on the "Cockchafer" beetle then" A relative on my mother's side served on an Insect-class gunboat in China between the Wars. I believe they even have a reunions website with more than a few mentions of HMS Cockchafer!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Cockchafer_%281915%29#Second_World_War_service

0
0
Devil

Re: Better get busy

Clitheroe.

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: Better get busy

I had better not bother about looking for directions to the delights of Penistone or even think about attending a football match in North London.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Better get busy

Ooh, matron!

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.