[UK] Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users opt in.
166 replies, posted
[IMG]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/10/11/1318293319824/Someone-watching-pornogra-007.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE]Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography.
The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron hosts No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.
The prime minister is expected to announce other moves in line with the Christian charity's review, such as restrictions on aggressive advertising campaigns and certain types of images on billboards.
There will also be a website, Parentport, which parents can use to complain about television programmes, advertisements, products or services which they believe are inappropriate for children.
The site, which will direct complaints to the regulator dealing with that specific area of concern, is expected to be run by watchdogs including the Advertising Standards Authority, BBC Trust, British Board of Film Classification, Ofcom, Press Complaints Commission, Video Standards Council and Pan European Game Information.
The service providers involved are BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin. Customers who do not opt in to adult content will be unableto access pornographic websites.
Cameron gave strong backing in June to the Mothers' Union proposals after he commissioned a six-month review by the charity's chief executive, Reg Bailey. However, Cameron did not commit to legislation.
Bailey's recommendations included providing parents with one single website to make it easier to complain about any programme, advert, product or service, putting age restrictions on music videos and ensuring retailers offer age-appropriate clothes for children.
Cameron wrote to Bailey in June to thank him for his report. "I very much agree with the central approach you set out," the letter said.
"As you say, we should not try and wrap children up in cotton wool or simply throw our hands up and accept the world as it is. Instead, we should look to put 'the brakes on an unthinking drift towards ever-greater commercialisation and sexualisation'."
Bailey's report asked for government and business to work together on initiatives such as ending the sale of inappropriately "sexy" clothing for young children, for example underwired bras and T-shirts with suggestive slogans.
However, he recommended that if retailers do not make progress on the issue they should be forced to make the changes in 18 months.
[/QUOTE]
Source: [url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/11/pornography-internet-service-providers[/url]
Poor fathers
And this is gonna stop it...how?
What is this meant to achieve? Also I'm with Virgin so I'm fucked.
I predict speakeasies of 14 year olds in their parents basement.
Seriously, this will work the same way as prohibition did with alcohol.
Fuck. Oh well , there's always going to be a couple of websites that aren't blocked
Damnit.
fuck
off
cameron
thanks B.T by doing this you're doubling my bandwidth :v:
[quote]
Bailey's report asked for government and business to work together on initiatives such as ending the sale of inappropriately "sexy" clothing for young children, for example underwired bras and T-shirts with suggestive slogans.
However, he recommended that if retailers do not make progress on the issue they should be forced to make the changes in 18 months.[/quote]
Surely it's not the retailers fault if people WANT to buy this, I know I sure wouldn't but there must be some demand if it sells.
Not this again...
Guess I'll just have to get laid instead, damn.
Opt-out would be better :v:
PUNkS are gona need extra content in the hot girls thread now !
Why, if people want to view the material then why don't let them?
Virgin etc makes huge money of these people.
This is fucking dumb, if people want porn blocked at subscriber level (and people should have the [B]option[/B]) they should [B]opt-in[/B] to the filter service.
In before this blocks something harmless like Facepunch, Wikipedia or 4chan. Filters are notoriously bad at filtering "bad" stuff.
Perhaps people should just learn to be better parents instead of relying on the government to force ISPs to block stuff for them.
this whole thing is a fucking waste of public money
I mean look at this shit;
[quote]Bailey's report asked for government and business to work together on initiatives such as ending the sale of inappropriately "sexy" clothing for young children, for example underwired bras and T-shirts with suggestive slogans[/quote]
And in other news, sales of VPS's and VPN's increase by 450%.
If you want to get around this, buy a VPS, SSH in using PuTTy, go to 'Connection' , 'SSH' and then 'Tunnels'. Add Dynamic 8080 to the list. Go into FireFox / Chrome Proxy Switchy settings and add localhost/127.0.0.1 port 8080 as a SOCKS5 proxy.
I recommend [url=fanaticalvps.com]FanaticalVPS[/url].
[quote]as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography.[/quote]
Why? I know Cameron's out of touch with reality but does he really think that this is a wise thing to do given how we need to make tons of cuts and shit.
implying we dont have proxies
Facepunch in its crusade against injustice should provide every Brit here with as much porn as possible. They can shut down the sites but they can't tear down Facepunch!
[QUOTE=Generic.Monk;32727015]this whole thing is a fucking waste of public money
I mean look at this shit;[/QUOTE]
What if they daughters have sex before 40! Then what can they do?!
Idiots
There's a slightly important technical detail that I feel is important. If this is filter is going to be done in the same way a page on Wikipedia was blocked a few years ago the UK is fucked.
During that period every single person coming out of the UK that went through the cleanfeed system to websites that were blocked had one or two IP addresses. So in theory if they blocked a certain page on Google because it contained bad results anyone accessing google would appear as each other, causing a headache for them.
[img]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2011/10/11/1318293319824/Someone-watching-pornogra-007.jpg[/img]
Just look how hardcore that is man. Especially that "2". Countdowns are so fucking hardcore and hot.
Kind of redundant so I doubt it's got any truth, there's a reason google has it's own search filters and other such search engines have filters. Oh and don't forget those programs you can install to protect the children.
implying it wasnt on the news
Oh wow, dumbest, shit, ever.
Cameron's so out of touch. It's like they found a head frozen in a fridge from the 1700's and figured he'd be a decent prime-minister.
I feel bad for the brits here on facepunch, as well as everyone else in the UK that enjoys porn.
I can feel it:
[b]Breaking news: Anonymous attacks completely unrelated site in a virtual protest against blocking porn in the UK[/b]
Anyway, this is stupid. Porn isn't illegal, why are they doing this
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.