Severed bunny head
Register | User Profile | Member List | F.A.Q | Privacy Policy | New Blog | Search Forums | Forums Home
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > UK Restricts Internet Porn
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »  
Author
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:29. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Technician
Still no custom title


Posts: 7956
Registered: 08-04



Online pornography to be blocked by default, PM announces

Most households in the UK will have pornography blocked by their internet provider unless they choose to receive it, David Cameron has announced.

In addition, the prime minister said possessing online pornography depicting rape would become illegal in England and Wales - in line with Scotland.

Mr Cameron warned in a speech that access to online pornography was "corroding childhood".

The new measures will apply to both existing and new customers.

Seven years ago David Cameron told a Google conference that politicians should encourage companies to change, not over-regulate them.

Today, he announced he had reached agreement with the four biggest ISPs on pornography filters, after some behind the scenes tussling.

But he hinted that if search engines like Google didn't agree to a blacklist of search terms, he would legislate.

From Downing St, he can supplement the art of persuasion with the smack of firm government.

Back in his opposition days, Cameron made waves presenting himself as a man on the side of parents against firms that sold chocolates at checkouts and children's bikinis.

If he can mould a similar image in Downing St, as a PM doing battle with big business on behalf of fellow parents, he will be more than happy.

Mr Cameron also called for some "horrific" internet search terms to be "blacklisted", meaning they would automatically bring up no results on websites such as Google or Bing.

He told the BBC he expected a "row" with service providers who, he said in his speech, were "not doing enough to take responsibility" despite having a "moral duty" to do so.

He also warned he could have to "force action" by changing the law and that, if there were "technical obstacles", firms should use their "greatest brains" to overcome them.

[cont.]

Sounds really nice on paper. I'd much prefer that they simply rely on the parents to choose what content their provider provides their household and not the public, but I digress.

If you read the article closely, you'll see a per-verbal door on pornography closing and a new window of government monitoring opening; from black listing simple search inquiries and sites, making some porn scenarios illegal (even if fictitious/simulated), new file monitoring protocols, and imposing conservative moralities on the populace.

Basically, if you cut the shit down to it's core, it's simply the UK placing new information monitoring protocols like America, only using teh childrens instead of teh terrorists.

Last edited by Technician on 07-23-13 at 02:32

Old Post 07-23-13 02:26 #
Technician is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
darknation
Forum Staple


Posts: 3083
Registered: 03-02


I approve of this, only because it will draw anon's ire upon Mr. Cameron's government of conservative piss-drinkers. A surfeit of lulz will follow.

Old Post 07-23-13 03:08 #
darknation is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Technician
Still no custom title


Posts: 7956
Registered: 08-04



darknation said:
I approve of this, only because it will draw anon's ire upon Mr. Cameron's government of conservative piss-drinkers. A surfeit of lulz will follow.
Anon has been castrated and replaced by social justice advocates.

Old Post 07-23-13 03:22 #
Technician is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
GreyGhost
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 8716
Registered: 01-08



"In addition, the prime minister said possessing online pornography depicting rape would become illegal in England and Wales - in line with Scotland."

It's about time! Filth like this has been accessible on the Web for way too long!

Old Post 07-23-13 03:33 #
GreyGhost is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
MRB_Doom
Forum Regular


Posts: 690
Registered: 09-02


Oh no more Jasmine Webb for the British. Great Britain is a police state on monster steroids with four million CCTV cameras placed on the streets. Would not want to visit or live there.

Old Post 07-23-13 04:10 #
MRB_Doom is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Aliotroph?
postCount++


Posts: 2658
Registered: 03-02


Let's lobby for a coalition to invade Britain and restore freedom. That could be fun.

Old Post 07-23-13 05:19 #
Aliotroph? is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Belial
Senior Member


Posts: 2332
Registered: 09-05



Article said:
Mr Cameron also called for some "horrific" internet search terms to be "blacklisted", meaning they would automatically bring up no results on websites such as Google or Bing.

Whee China.


online pornography depicting rape

Cue panels watching confiscated porn to decide whether BDSM or asphyxiophilia is rape.

Old Post 07-23-13 06:26 #
Belial is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Maes
I like big butts!


Posts: 12583
Registered: 07-06


I bet some lawyers and sociologists will be rubbing their hands -this is just a breeding ground for litigations, court cases, endless debates etc.

The only thing that will keep it -and other such laws- from working is that places like the UK and the US have a -relatively- functional parliamentary democracy and an Enlightement-driven social/moral system, thus making it hard or impossible to impose certain types of moralist authoritarian rules (especially if they depend upon some random-ass guy to arbitrate what's "right" and what's "wrong" from scratch).

Oh yeah, there's also a thriving business behind porn, and there are soon gonna be so many loopholes that the law will be self-defeating.

Old Post 07-23-13 07:32 #
Maes is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
andrewj
Senior Member


Posts: 1638
Registered: 04-02


On a purely technical level, I cannot see this being successful. New sites will appear just as quickly as old ones are blocked, like a big game of whack-a-mole. Anonymizing services like Tor can also be used to get around the blocks, without having to say "opt in" to removing the blocks.

On an ethical level, it is simply wrong for a government to block an adult from seeing images of one (or more) other adults engaged in legal, consential activity.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out on the political level. I expect common sense will prevail, eventually, and cause such a stink that other western democracies will not consider trying the same thing, akin to the Prohibition of alcohol in America.

Old Post 07-23-13 07:57 #
andrewj is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Maes
I like big butts!


Posts: 12583
Registered: 07-06


Now that I think about it, such "prohibitions" come and go every now and then in cycles -some "moral guardian" proposes them, debates ensue, the technical impossibility of enforcement comes to light, then common sense prevails and it slides back into the pit where it came from. Rinse and repeat about every 3 years.

In general, they don't work for the same reason that various parental or corporate web-browsing blocks, "safe Internet initiatives" etc. don't work.


  • Unless people don't have 100% control over the computers they use for browsing, it's impossible for a client-side scheme to work. Even today, this is a very rare scenario outside of e.g. corporate workstations, as even on mobiles you can still choose among multiple web browsers (unless they go towards a Walled Garden model, which abolishes web browsers altogether and ony website-surrogate apps are used, and those CAN be 100% controlled and censored).
  • On the server side, for "free-roaming" Internet, all ISPs would have to collaborate and apply a goverment-endorsed and daily updated blocklist of domains and IPs. This is very crude and error prone, too, e.g. a legitimate business may end up being harmed by a blanket IP range block imposed on "suspected" websites. Of course, if you're like e.g. China or North Korea, you probably don't have such sensitivities.
  • Blocks only work when they are total or target a single site, like the cases of NK, China and Egypt (during the riots) can show.
    NK manages it by virtue of not allowing ANY Internet access for the general populace, while China only successfully applies censorship in the case of Google through a combination of coercion, bribery and, well, Google being only one website with a single management entity, after all, not a clusterfuck of 1.000.000 different ones. Egypt (during the 2012 riots) blocked either all of the Internet (not really something you want to do for long in a functional economy, nowadays, unless you're NK) or very specific sites (e.g. Twitter, Facebook).


That's why such schemes often go the way of the WebTV, the Clipper chip etc.

Old Post 07-23-13 09:07 #
Maes is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Obsidian
Forum Staple


Posts: 2572
Registered: 05-12


Let me know when the porn sites declare war upon Britan. That'll be worth watching.

Old Post 07-23-13 10:12 #
Obsidian is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Graf Zahl
Why don't I have a custom title by now?!


Posts: 7747
Registered: 01-03


Yay, more politicians who do not understand the internet.
Utter failure of this initiative is a certain thing.

Old Post 07-23-13 11:47 #
Graf Zahl is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
j4rio
Forum Staple


Posts: 2621
Registered: 07-10


Think of those poor UK pornstars. :(

Old Post 07-23-13 11:55 #
j4rio is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
TheCupboard
Forum Regular


Posts: 897
Registered: 02-06


This was unexpected news to me! What about popular sites like tumblr, isn't there infrequent nudity there?

We will see how much stomach the government has in this fight. I can't see an outcome in which they are able to enforce this measure effectively. Seems like a waste of money and an extra excuse for citizen surveillance.

Old Post 07-23-13 11:56 #
TheCupboard is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
printz
CRAZY DUMB ZEALOT


Posts: 8871
Registered: 06-06



TheCupboard said:
This was unexpected news to me! What about popular sites like tumblr, isn't there infrequent nudity there?
Yeah, but i think it's more about nudism than pornography. They're naked: so what?!

__________________
Automatic Wolfenstein - Version 1.0 - also on Android

Old Post 07-23-13 11:58 #
printz is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
geekmarine
Senior Member


Posts: 1777
Registered: 05-00


You know what's fucked about about this? No official government action is actually being taken. ISPs are cooperating with this plan VOLUNTARILY! Oh sure, he threatens legal action if he doesn't get his way, but so far it's not even like anyone can even legally challenge him on this because most UK IPSs are going along with it anyway. The censorship business is screwed up enough, but to me it's even more messed up that he doesn't even have to force it - he makes what amounts to little more than a polite suggestion and these companies are like, "Sounds great to me!" I can't believe anyone would ever voluntarily support censorship like that.

Old Post 07-23-13 13:22 #
geekmarine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
hardcore_gamer
Fáviti Member


Posts: 2369
Registered: 03-07


To be honest, this would actually be fine if it were the other way around with people not being blocked by default and being able to ask their providers to block it for them if they so pleased.

Its the fact that its the other way around that makes this fucked.

EDIT: Amusingly enough, it Iceland its actually the leftist parties who want to ban porn rather then the conservatives. I wonder why elsewhere its always the evil conservatives who want to ban things while in Iceland its the left.

Old Post 07-23-13 13:31 #
hardcore_gamer is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
schwerpunk
Senior Member


Posts: 2057
Registered: 05-12



printz said:
Yeah, but i think it's more about nudism than pornography. They're naked: so what?!
There's a sort of continuum with a lot of Tumblr websites. Black & white stills of penises? You're fine. Colour photos of penises? What's it, buddy... Animated .GIFs of penises? Yup, that's wank material.

But there so much content in the middle. For instance, what about webcomics like Sexy Losers or Oglaf? Is it porn if you laugh at it?

Old Post 07-23-13 14:20 #
schwerpunk is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
GoatLord
I really should think before I post.


Posts: 2654
Registered: 07-02


The problem with pornography is that developments in technology increase both accessibility and interaction. Restrictions on content will stop nothing. We may be looking at a future where an adult and a child can use avatars to simulate fully immersive, highly idealized, photorealistic rape simulation. Pushing a moral agenda on the public is a poor solution. Rather, humanity as a whole should question how necessary it is to create an industry of increasingly perverse sexual alienation. Many regard casual porn viewing as harmless, which is a bit naive if you've ever seen the "Your brain on porn" video or considered how its mainstream presence might impact gender roles and perceptions of sexual interaction. Technologically speaking, it has the potential to negatively affect human behavior, especially since we aren't mentally evolved to handle high levels of visual stimulation.

Old Post 07-23-13 14:53 #
GoatLord is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
Technician
Still no custom title


Posts: 7956
Registered: 08-04



hardcore_gamer said:
Amusingly enough, it Iceland its actually the leftist parties who want to ban porn rather then the conservatives. I wonder why elsewhere its always the evil conservatives who want to ban things while in Iceland its the left.
Same kind of people trying to force their insecurities and moralities on the public from different sides.

The left: Quit objectifying women, CIS scum!

The right: Degeneracy is ruining the world!

Both: Won't somebody think of the children!

Old Post 07-23-13 16:54 #
Technician is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
geekmarine
Senior Member


Posts: 1777
Registered: 05-00



GoatLord said:
The problem with pornography is that developments in technology increase both accessibility and interaction. Restrictions on content will stop nothing. We may be looking at a future where an adult and a child can use avatars to simulate fully immersive, highly idealized, photorealistic rape simulation. Pushing a moral agenda on the public is a poor solution. Rather, humanity as a whole should question how necessary it is to create an industry of increasingly perverse sexual alienation. Many regard casual porn viewing as harmless, which is a bit naive if you've ever seen the "Your brain on porn" video or considered how its mainstream presence might impact gender roles and perceptions of sexual interaction. Technologically speaking, it has the potential to negatively affect human behavior, especially since we aren't mentally evolved to handle high levels of visual stimulation.

I think you might have to explain yourself here, because I'm a bit overwhelmed with the number of issues you try to address at the same time, and I really don't think those issues should be lumped together.

I get the issue of minors and adults interacting together in a virtual environment, and I certainly understand the concerns there. That can be very dangerous. However, you then try to lump that in with issues of gender roles as well as "deviant" sexual behavior. First off, I have no problem questioning gender roles. I think it's healthy. We've come a long way as a species by simply questioning traditional gender roles. And personally, I kind of object to the notion of saying we need to rein in sexual freedom or preference, at least when it comes to consenting adults. You act as if deciding to let go a little and experiment or whatever is going to lead to sex taking over your life.

I'll admit, I've experimented a little here and there, and I can honestly say that experimentation has made me take a MORE realistic view of sex, and as such, it doesn't have the hold on me that it would if I held back and never tried new things. You experiment a little, and you realize that no, it's not the most friggin' important thing in the world. I don't think weird sex or porn or whatever turns you into a sex fiend, I think it gives you perspective. Think about it like this. When you're a horny virgin teen, sex dominates your mind. Everything you do is with the goal of getting laid. You get a little older, a little wiser, you get laid, and suddenly you realize there are other things in life. Doesn't mean you stop enjoying sex, but now you have perspective.

Plus, consider the recent study that showed that "sex addiction" doesn't affect the brain the same way other addictions do. Oh sure, we crave sex, but in the same way we crave food and water. It's not artificially screwing with our brains, we're biologically programmed to desire it. Honestly, if anything, restraint is a recent concept.

Once again, I don't disagree with your concern about minors, but it seems to me that it's a real stretch to go from that to saying that porn and technology are going to turn us all into a civilization of perverted sex fiends.

Old Post 07-23-13 16:57 #
geekmarine is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
yukib1t
Will DDR for food


Posts: 2535
Registered: 06-02


http://static.rogerebert.com/redactor_assets/pictures/far-flung-correspondents/v-for-vendetta-guy-fawkes-in-egypt/v_for_vendetta_chancellor_tv-thumb-425x242-36152.jpg

Old Post 07-23-13 17:02 #
yukib1t is online now Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
CorSair
Forum Regular


Posts: 885
Registered: 11-12


Oh yes. It's all porn's fault. Whee.

They're trying to get more votes from that, I suppose. Whatever it is, it is always politics.

Old Post 07-23-13 21:23 #
CorSair is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
hardcore_gamer
Fáviti Member


Posts: 2369
Registered: 03-07



CorSair said:
They're trying to get more votes from that


From whom?

I honestly thought things like anti-porn were pretty much a thing of the past in most of the Western world. Sure there are always at least some people who will dislike it, but I think most western nations don't have enough anti-porn individuals on a large scale for politicians to actually benifit from hating on it.

You can apply this to things like video games and booze as well.

Polls have shown that about 70% of Icelanders drink and that at least 50% drink regularly, and yet a considerable portion of our politicians (though most of then are on the left, with there being rather few anti-booze right-wingers) hate on booze and want it restricted or even banned.

I personally think that many of these people who want to ban booze or get rid of porn don't actually reflect general public opinion very well. Even in spite of the anti-booze politicians in my country I personally know perhaps 2 people who don't drink, and not a single one who feels it should be banned.

There is a good chance that some of the older generations dislike things like porn, but those fuckers will die soon enough anyways, and it makes me wonder whom these politicians will by appealing to then.

Old Post 07-23-13 21:58 #
hardcore_gamer is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
darknation
Forum Staple


Posts: 3083
Registered: 03-02


there are pedophiles, therefore there is pedophile porn. Not the other way round.

until we admit this basic fact and start treating pedophilia like a mental illness then this shit is going to go around and around in circles.







same goes for furries.

Old Post 07-24-13 00:56 #
darknation is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
GoatLord
I really should think before I post.


Posts: 2654
Registered: 07-02


Geekmarine, I admit I was glib in my wording. It was very stream-of-consciousness. I don't think porn in of itself is dangerous. And I don't think questioning gender roles is dangerous. But when I imagine what "future porn" might encompass, I can see it being benign, and I can also see it having negative effects. If there was a point to my rant, it's that there is potential for it to cause social and mental problems depending on the direction it goes in, and that questioning the possibilities now is more constructive than placing bans and restrictions.

Old Post 07-24-13 16:27 #
GoatLord is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
DooMAD
Bitcoin IS a religion.


Posts: 1494
Registered: 07-02


And possibly more than just porn:

https://www.openrightsgroup.org/blo...into-censorship

Then there's also the plan to completely outlaw peaceful protests:

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/53083

And some new legislation which will mean that workers will have to pay for their fees (up to £1200) up front just to take their employer to court for unfair dismissal, discrimination and even failure to pay minimum wage.

http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/pol...1075082.article

//EDIT: And conscription too, it's gets even better:

http://services.parliament.uk/bills...nalservice.html


Terrifying government is terrifying.

Last edited by DooMAD on 07-29-13 at 21:35

Old Post 07-29-13 17:51 #
DooMAD is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
fraggle
Filled with the code of Doom


Posts: 7665
Registered: 07-00


The important thing to realise about these plans is that it isn't about pornography. Pornography (and particularly child abuse images) is just the tool to whip up a moral frenzy so that an infrastructure can be set up to censor the Internet. Once the system is all in place they can censor other things as well (as DooMAD has pointed out); they can also potentially set up special categories of things that you can't opt out of.

I particularly hate how lots of people (even the UK Pirate Party are doing it) keep referring to this as "web filtering". It's a form of newspeak-style propaganda to play down what this really is: censorship of the Internet.

Old Post 07-29-13 18:15 #
fraggle is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
DooMAD
Bitcoin IS a religion.


Posts: 1494
Registered: 07-02


Time for some image manipulation methinks:

http://www.teamhellspawn.com/c_for_camdetta_2.png

Old Post 07-29-13 19:18 #
DooMAD is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Homepage || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
hardcore_gamer
Fáviti Member


Posts: 2369
Registered: 03-07


I personally think your reactions are completely overblown.

I don't want porn to be banned, but I completley disagree with the idea that the internet should be some kind of a lawless international water where people can just do as they please with there being no effects from bad behavior.

While it is true that some kind of a "internet police" could be abused, that same thing also applies to conventional police. If we accept the existence of a conventional police even though it can sometimes be abused, there are aren't really any good arguments against an internet police. Thus I am fairly supportive of the government being able to regulate the internet.

Not that we will get to choose about this matter anyways. The regulation of the internet was/is bound to happen at some point.

Old Post 07-29-13 19:50 #
hardcore_gamer is offline Profile || Blog || PM || Email || Search || Add Buddy IP || Edit/Delete || Quote
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:29. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »  
Doomworld Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.2.5 Doomworld Forums > Misc. > Everything Else > UK Restricts Internet Porn

Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are OFF
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - Doomworld >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.2.5
Copyright ©2000, 2001, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.