12 posts • joined Thursday 12th March 2009 17:23 GMT
A quick scout through the list of chosen schools and i find that 3 of the chosen few on the list are using less than secure WordPress websites, the swiss cheese of hosting platforms, how long before they are not only inadvertently "selling" Louis Vitton products, "Raybans" and making my penis bigger but also providing miscreants with the fun of hacking other IoT systems.
The words security and schools websites are seldom together in the same sentence. recently received a spam email including link to no less than 5 academia websites using the erstwhile swiss cheese platform with pages created that they had no clue about, there was even a "webdesign" company on the list ffs. When are they going to stop and take a look at the basics before they charge head first into IoT implementation.
I emailed they affected organisations to inform them about their inadvertent retail/malware spreading acitivity and of the 7 emails i sent only one bothered to reply.
I hope some action is taken
Not because i'm from the censorship camp, i have flamed, close to the knuckle, with the best of them back in the day, i hold freedom of speech close to my heart, however any resulting legal action may actually help to focus the mind of the younger generation regarding online abuse, newsround here we come, it may also do the same for the couldn't care less parenting attitude that obviously exists when it comes to the appropriate use of today's technology. It may also help to dismiss the stereotypical view about internet trolls being sad 20-30 something guys in their mums house locked in the bedroom (i'm in my 40's before you start fucktards).
Why allow a 14 year old to be on sites like that?
I just dont get it, once again lack of parental knowledge and education is way down on the check list it seems.
Don't get me wrong im aware that teenage kids can be underhanded and devious to try and get on to these types of websites if they have already been using them and are then banned by parents, but this assumes that parents have the knowledge to know the difference between harmless and free for all social websites.
Most readers of this forum will have a clue (broad brush i know when you read some comments) but parental education is surely the key. "call me dave" needs to get on the cluetrain
Re: @mark darwen
your agreeing with my initial point, i was replying to another reply to my initial "misguided strategy" post, confused.com
Re: misguided strategy
last time i checked a ten yr old kid couldn't reach the top shelf but they sure can click a mouse. your point is ridiculous.
available shortly on youpr0n.com lmfao
Re: Jimmy has been listening to radio 5 live
Mike, apologies, i wholeheartedly agree with you, i did use a bad example to underline my point, but i'm sure you understand what i meant. Lets hope it doesn't get to that point.
I may be wrong but i think the vast majority of people agree that taking some action to stop innocent users stumbling upon pr0n on the internet is a good thing, however the use of device installed filters will technically just not work and while clair perrys et al's intentions are admirable their obvious lack of technical knowledge is the main problem. The strategy which the government is following will just not work, unless they also propose to remove the 1000's of instruction videos from youtube and the likes providing step by step instructions as to how to bypass the filters that will undoubtedly spring up overnight
Jimmy has been listening to radio 5 live
Nice to hear that Mr Swales has obviously been listening to radio 5 live recently. In his latest interview with channel 4 news he almost verbatim echoed what i said to Nicky Campbell during a recent appearance on the 5 live breakfast show, including branding the measures as "ridiculous". On hearing the announcement from "call me dave" i had a mental picture of server administrators throughout the land shaking their heads and laughing at the ridiculous suggestions coming from an ill informed government and its advisors (claire perry.... really).
Whilst i agree that some action to stop innocent users stumbling onto pr0n filled web pages is a good idea yet again the goverment has demonstrated a total lack of understanding from a technical point of view.
I bet they will also tell you that UK internet cannot access the likes of the pirate bay and h33t.
Maybe i'll give them a call and offer to help...
All this talk of filters and opt in is just a waste of time, look how long it took to get around the network level isp blocking of piratebay, h33t, etc. A quick search on youtube and hey presto a step by step guide to getting round the blocking, problem is that the people making the decisions about this are very ill advised, while i agree that hc pr0n should be kept out of kids eyes, this is just not the correct technical solution. the problem is many fold imho, the gulf between some parents knowledge and their child's knowledge means that the child is left to their own devices, particularly ones in their teens and they run IT rings around their parents.
whilst it may well stop the innocent stumbling on to the wrong site which i agree is good it will by no means deter the teenager who wants to find the odd grumble clip. in fact the block will probably be seen as a good thing as we all no kids love a challenge
this does smack of a control agenda by the back door (pardon the pun) next thing you know they will be trying to ban TOR
Thats the funniest thing i have read all day, almost as amusing as Ballmers admission of 'Challenges' with IE8 and his statement that it is apparent that websites are not yet ready for our software (IE8). Now forgive me but the website were here first you conceited tossers. shurely shome mishtake - Ed