UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID • Hacker News Board

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#121

Post by elcct » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:31 PM UTC

pmlnr wrote: post #42

> "all the porn sites operating in Britain" So... only .co.uk, or full 3/4 of the internet, including Tumblr? This is, of course, is a question for what counts as "operating in Britain". A site that is running on servers in Britain? A site that is owned by a British company? A site that happens to be available on the greater internet? Gosh, countries and borders became relics when the internet got spread wide enough.

How about Google? Apart from illegal movies, you can also find porn there as easily.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#122

Post by mobiuscog » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:34 PM UTC

dajohnson89 wrote: post #120

Does anyone have any ideas how likely this will actually become law? Crazy laws get proposed here in America all the time. From what I've seen by watching the Prime Minister's questions every now and then, lots of far-fetched proposals are made across the pond as well. But they never get far, and not worth getting bothered about.

Highly unlikely, tbh.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#123

Post by elcct » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:34 PM UTC

mobiuscog wrote: post #2

Something has to be done. It's not just about porn or violence of NSFL etc... but there is a serious problem on the internet, that is always lambasted with the "Won't somebody think of the children" memes. When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, wit…

You can accidentally cross the street and die - that doesn't mean we should put guards on the pavements and issue pedestrian ids. There is a better solution. How about parents take responsibility for what their kids do?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#124

Post by wildmusings » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:36 PM UTC

dajohnson89 wrote: post #120

Does anyone have any ideas how likely this will actually become law? Crazy laws get proposed here in America all the time. From what I've seen by watching the Prime Minister's questions every now and then, lots of far-fetched proposals are made across the pond as well. But they never get far, and not worth getting bothered about.

"The government" in a parliamentary system, in this context, refers to what we would call "the administration" in the US, i.e. the Prime Minister and his ministers. And almost by definition, the government controls a majority in parliament ("almost" because it is possible to have a minority government) and has a high likelihood of passing its agenda. But the proposed laws do change a lot as they go through consultations and committees, and intra-party negotiations. There is a sizable libertarian wing of the Conservative Party.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#125

Post by pmlnr » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:37 PM UTC

The more I think about it the more I'm starting to think that this is how you make an army of generic hackers. Want $X? Learn to circumvent the system!

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#126

Post by tajen » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:37 PM UTC

asadjb wrote: post #43

hiisukun wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, I don't think that something has to be done. While your definition of said problem is fair and reasonable, and I share some of your concerns for children going online, overall I don't agree. I don't think the internet reflects more than the real world offers. It is challenging as a parent (and a school, employer, etc) to govern (!) or monitor how people use your internet access. Certainly much harder th…

"I don't think the internet reflects more than the real world offers. It is challenging as a parent (and a school, employer, etc) to govern (!) or monitor how people use your internet access. Certainly much harder than preventing your kids from going to a particular physical place." A thought just popped up in my head about this. Yes, the internet is a reflection of the physical world, but it doesn't have any of the…

> the Internet has none of this

"Good neighbourhood" = Ask your child to only use Facebook. Don't let him go near the train station. Leave the Google Safe Search by default. Let them use a video player, but download the content yourself.

"Signs all over the place": I don't remember seeing the sign "Warning: Guy selling drugs here" in the backstreet next to my town hall (Lyon, France, not a small city), nor the "Beware of aholes" sign in my highschool ;) and I especially remember 3x4m panels of ads for dating Minitel site (in France) with the curve of a woman's back: The bad world has never really been separated from children, but we'd teach them. I would teach my child to not click on ads, blinking stuff and bodies if they still meet any. They'll have to resist when the hormons kick in, so they'd better learn young.

Then, monitor him/her/ah. It's not normal, for a child, to sit unsupervised at a computer for more than a few minutes. Place the computer in the living room, not in their room. They exactly know what to do and where not to click when the parents are around ;)

Which means: Problem solved. Yes, some may fall addicted to porn or see curse words, but only if parents don't spend enough time to supervise them, pretty much like in my youth. But at least, other citizen remain untracked.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#127

Post by DanBC » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:38 PM UTC

MrSourz wrote: post #109

p333347 wrote: post #103

Not sure of the (technical) feasibility of this, but I have some social observations. It seems the motivating factor, ostensibly, is to protect children. However, the primary concern of those who don't like this seems to be with leaks and possible ensuing shaming. So, if the stigma attached to watching (non illegal) porn is done away with, the fear of leak becomes irrelevant. If protecting children is paramount then…

The telecoms already have that type of data that could be leaked to an extent. In 2013 British Telecom enabled porn filtering [1] that was on by default, so when setting up your account you'd have to opt out. [1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/internet-security/1052...

Luckily the filters always included way too much stuff, so calling to have the filters off wasn't ever a conversation about "I want to watch porn", but "I want access to this website about testicular cancer".

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#128

Post by zimpenfish » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:39 PM UTC

Freak_NL wrote: post #60

vertex-four wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, if you want to prevent your children from accessing sites you'd prefer them not to without accompanying them in the future... there's been commercial solutions to that almost since the first porn site existed. Net Nanny's been around almost as long as I've been alive. Combine that with ensuring that your child's computer is in a public place, not their bedroom. Frankly, if people are going to be exposed…

> Frankly, if people are going to be exposed to said imagery at some point, they probably need to be educated about it. That's what this is all about isn't it? There is lots of stuff on the internet that may hurt a child's development, and I honestly doubt porn is one of the bigger bad influences. Kids are growing up watching popular peers give them beauty and fashion tips or perform dangerous stunts and pranks on ex…

> That's what this is all about isn't it? There is lots of stuff on the internet that may hurt a child's development, and I honestly doubt porn is one of the bigger bad influences.

Indeed, I'd list the MRA/PUA/GamerGaters as a much greater risk to young males (directly; young females as a consequence). I'd probably have the alt-right/conspiracy loons above porn as well.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#129

Post by pmlnr » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:40 PM UTC

JulianMorrison wrote: post #75

mobiuscog wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fast becoming a new part of Godwin's law.

It would be intensely surprising if a discussion of porn didn't turn into a discussion of misogyny. Because they relate, obviously.

No, they don't.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#130

Post by pmlnr » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:41 PM UTC

Shanea93 wrote: post #86

adrianratnapala wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is a simple solutions: porn sites use a .xxx domain or some such, and browsers can trivially be configured to block that domain. I'd be fine with government enforcing such a rule. But years and years after we started talking about such a solution, we don't have it, but instead have intrusive privacy distroying solutions that don't see to even address the problem.

This would require international coordination of laws in many different territories. What if I just type in "31.192.120.36", the current public IP of www.pornhub.com?

Depending on the underlying webserver and web sw, it may or may not load. ( think of apache virtualhosts and nginx server names )