Feeds

back to article Gov: Smart TV bods must protect users from smut-riddled badness

Labelling within electronic programme guides on connected TVs could help viewers to distinguish between regulated and unregulated content, the Government has said in setting out a new communications strategy. The government has called on industry (52-page/472KB PDF) to develop tools that enable the distinction to be made between …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge
Big Brother

In other news-

Govt wants DVD manufacturers to include a homing moth which is released whenever the case is opened and flies back to a reporting centre so they can tell what sort of content people might be watching that they can't otherwise spy on.

FFS. Do yer fucking job and stop prying!

10
0
Bronze badge

Re: In other news-

If politicians could do their job then they wouldn't be proposing things like this, which they do to grab Press exposure to make it look like they are effective. As it stands, they are a wholly, useless, ineffectual lot that think responding to the vagaries of whatever twitter trend is trending means they are more likely to get a vote. Or maybe a lucrative media career launched on HIGNFY. I swear, I thought Boris was an entertainer for years.....not just of women.

7
0

Take a tip from the pirates

"Here be dragons" has worked for centuries.

6
0
Stop

NSGM

Nanny State Gone Mad

6
0
Bronze badge

Unregulated content?

People with "Smart TV's" already know what is "unregulated" by the fact they need to click on their internet TV viewer of choice to view it.

Whats the real reasons behind this bollocks?

8
0

"Whats the real reasons behind this bollocks?"

Cameron trying to look like he's actually doing something to people who understand the internet even less than he does.

10
0
Silver badge
Devil

@ Gordon Pryra -

> . . .

Whats the real reasons behind this bollocks?

<

The real reason behind this bollocks, in my understanding, is getting votes, which m0rt earlier on already stated. Look at it like this:

You are the current conservative MP for Frimpleton. Your Labour competitor criticises your lack of action about the security of the local primary school where a child was followed by some real pervert with a compact camera. To be seen as more vigilant than you he proposes a law that forbids cameras in the area around this school.

Now, from your position it would be political suicide to speak against that: You would be siding with the perverts. You also can't just say that it is a good idea, because he was first and you would be 'riding the bandwagon'. So, to get ahead you have to step it up so that he appears to not be stringent enough: You suggest to ban all cameras in the constituency.

The ball is now back in his field. He faces the same dilemma and needs to raise the level of action. As a result the school and approaching roads are now to be covered with blackout tunnels, so that parents can pick up their kids as they are, one by one, but through a kind of airlock. You counter this idea by stating that this opens up the possibility of getting the wrong child handed out and advocate a 'chip and pin' system with a code that the parents have to provide to obtain the correct child.

Your opponent brings up the argument that this might be error prone and to complicated to enforce and has the better idea of an automated system with several failsafes: face recognition of both parents and children, together with DNA testing and skin-embedded NFC tags on a cloud-based, nationwide platform*.

And so on . . .

Not to raise means you lose. To lower measures means to lose. The only way is up.

*At which moment the original pervert gets all his kiddie pix from the badly secured (because it was created by some ICT advisory panel that has members qualified by having A-level knowledge in PowerPoint) cloud storage without having to take them himself. But that's not the point.

7
0
Silver badge

Unregulated content

It's terrible, people can watch "stuff we don't like" on their TVs and they don't even have to sign up to our I'm a pervert list!

Maria Miller: But how is this possible? We have our new 100% effective "stuff we don't like" filter don't we?

The TV apps drill right through the filter, we can't even tell what they are watching! We could block the app but it would be unpopular, we have to do something!

Maria Miller: Ok, you go stir up the rabble, I'll start talking about needed regulation and we will get this sorted out just like the ISPs.

1
0

Talk about leave it be and supervise your offspring! AGAIN! I'll import TV's without parental controls. Bad enough iPlayer prompts you for parental controls you don't need. I don't have ANY children in my household so stop asking EVERY TIME!

3
0
Silver badge
Devil

@ dougal83 -

>. . .

I don't have ANY children in my household

. . . <

"Then you must obviously be a pervert because you want to expose other people's kids to your smut! Be ashamed, you sicko!" says Mrs Sloverton from across the road.

That's the kind of response we'll hear more of in the future.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

They keep trying

Censorship, censorship, censorship. As, the delight of being the person who reviews all this tagging.

3
0
Anonymous Coward

REGULATE...REGULATE...REGULATE...

and ALL the humanity's problems will be solved. And boy, does it feel good when the universe' under control!

0
0
Silver badge

Re: REGULATE...REGULATE...REGULATE...

Next up, no internet streaming without a TV license...

0
0
Silver badge

This problem was solved in 2003

Next time a politician wants something like this, refer them to RFC 3514

3
0

Re: This problem was solved in 2003

problem with that is most politicians will never have heard of RFCs - those that can spell it, that is.

1
0
Gold badge
Thumb Up

Re: This problem was solved in 2003

" RFC 3514"

All the virtue of a "simple" solution politicians so love to see combined with all stupidity that they display.

Priceless.

Whatever your thoughts on Mr Wales I think it's still clear he knows a damm sight more about how the internet really works than Clare Perry

2
0
Bronze badge

Simple solution

Hand over all UK internet policy to the Daily Mail.

Oh wait ...

3
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Very Useful Idea

I for one would be glad for an indicator that I'm about to unintentionally slip into the dangerous and distasteful realm of regulated content.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Very Useful Idea

And how would you be able to tell?

0
0
Gold badge
Childcatcher

Ms Perry is the UK's formost expert on sexualizing and exploiting children.

It says so in her job title.

You do wonder is that something you really want to be proud of ?

Should we look forward to her writing a wiki page perhaps?

Relax folks, I'm just f**king with you.

About the Wiki entry. The title is quite real.

3
0
Silver badge

I know what *would* be nice

What would be really nice, would be a machine-readable indication of whether what is being broadcast was editorial content or advertising, so my recording apparatus could know to discard the latter.

2
0
Holmes

Re: I know what *would* be nice

What would be really nice, would be a machine-readable indication of whether what is being broadcast was editorial content or advertising

Now that would be actually be the government doing something useful for us for a change. It might actually win votes!

People tend to consider connected TVs to be a TV-like experience and expect to be more protected than they are from content accessed through PCs and laptops.

No they don't. If they have bought a connected TV they have bought it to access the Internet. People understand the difference and don't need the nanny state to warn them.

1
0
Bronze badge

the gov should go back to bed, theres not much point in smart tv`s without the porn

there is no difference to having to waste electricity having you 1kw PSU in your desktop box on, to watch some internet porn when your bored with a modern tv/monitor plugged into it anyway

0
0
Bronze badge

when smart tv`s are standard, and you can watch porn on them, there will be a new ice age 20 years later

0
0

Err, Babestation...?

So, given that the above mentioned late-night, all-night-for-a-fiver booty-fest is apparently regulated content - it's transmitted, on purpose, over the Govt. sanctioned network, right? - does that indicate the (current) boundary, smut strength-wise, between bad porn and wholesome adult entertainment? Or what?

I'm ^H^H^H My mate is quite fond of the booby-baring, booty-shaking, adjust-the-crotch-of-yer-panties-quick-before-OFCOM-gets-a-woody bait 'n switch, tie 'n tease antics of those pneumatic ladies (especially Lori, he tells me) and I'd^H^H he'd be gutted if it somehow got, umm, watered down to fit some new puritan's idea of where the red pen goes. Or can we expect full-on FTA hardcore, unencrypted grip content in 2017? Some people worry about this stuff, you know.

3
0

Is There Any Point To This?

Surely any decent citizen will have already instructed their ISP to block this filth-laden smut at source, won't they?

0
0
Bronze badge

Re: Is There Any Point To This?

good porn get 25m hits in a day and there are 20 big video sites

decent people have laptops and dont need sli and studio sound cards and overclocked 8 core cpu's

0
0
Mushroom

Re: Is There Any Point To This?

"Surely any decent citizen will have already instructed their ISP to block this filth-laden smut at source, won't they?"

Logic error. The ISP will almost certainly have no control over the source of the smut.

1
0

Warning Labels

Personally I think this whole porn thing can be fixed with a simple sign you could hang on your front door. Mine is a tasteful golden oak sign, weathered and suitably decked with flashing red lights. It reads "Porn is readily available on multiple connected devices within this building. Fuck off and take those delinquent little shits you call kids with you if that's a problem."

0
0
xyz
Bronze badge

King Canute had more luck against the sea than....

...Cameron shouting "No, No and thrice No!"

One day soon he'll wake up and notice the bloody great idiot hole he's dug himself.

0
0
Silver badge

Warning icons for government activities?

Fucking the welfare state

Circle jerks in Parliament

Voyeuring on the voters

Shafting the economy

1
0
Silver badge

Groundhog Day

Why do I keep thinking the gubbermint can't get any more stupid... and then have to admit I'm wrong?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Groundhog Day

Are you saying it is YOUR fault?

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Groundhog Day

Maybe. Perhaps my thinking it can't get worse creates some sort of psychic resonance in their empty heads.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.