UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID • Hacker News Board

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#131

Post by DanBC » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:42 PM UTC

viraptor wrote: post #13

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…

> simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery Is that a real problem though? You did quote the accidentally after all. Both kids and adults have access to things they seek - whether that's going to be internet, magazine brought to school, or some other means. If they don't seek such content, they won't see much more than what's already available to everyone in the daily mail. I think th…

> Is that a real problem though?

Yes. I search for children's content on Youtube. Youtube returns children's content. We click to play, and I get a pre-roll ad for a horror film, or alcohol, or gambling.

An iOS app advertises itself as suitable for ages 4+. It contains ads. Those ads are sometimes for gambling, or alcohol services. I'd say that app isn't suitable for children, and the uk regulator is looking at that.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#132

Post by d4nt » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:42 PM UTC

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…

My primary concern isn't leaks or shaming. What I really have a problem with is the role of government here. Elections are not perfect, that's why we have separation of powers. But it's hard to see how any government imposed solution can be implemented without upsetting the balance and opening the door to government censorship/manipulation further down the road.

The responsibility to block this content should be with the parents and the free market. As a parent I can already purchase content filtering services. The UK government is meddling in an area it doesn't need to, with potentially disastrous consequences, presumably for PR purposes.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#133

Post by pc86 » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 1:57 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…

Nobody accesses the internet and has pornography thrust upon them.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#134

Post by noir_lord » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 2:00 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.

They float this stuff all the time and it often gets beaten down quickly, frankly its a distraction compared to the other stuff they already do.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#135

Post by DonaldFisk » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 2:01 PM UTC

mobiuscog wrote: post #104

DonaldFisk wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Something has to be done. This is something. Therefore, this has to be done. Before internet porn became a thing, we were warned by various people about the harm that pornography does, and in particular, how it increases the incidence of rapes and sexual assaults, and is bad for the status of women in society. It was being proposed that it be banned outright. Now that pornography is widespread, and free, has there…

This says a lot about society, but possibly not in the way you think, or in the way that the discussion was aimed. This is not a gender issue (there may be gender issues, but this is not one of them).

If you're worried about harm it might cause to children (whatever that might be), you've already answered your own question: you control their access. Children cannot (or should not) set up internet access themselves.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#136

Post by darklajid » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 2:08 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #131

viraptor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery Is that a real problem though? You did quote the accidentally after all. Both kids and adults have access to things they seek - whether that's going to be internet, magazine brought to school, or some other means. If they don't seek such content, they won't see much more than what's already available to everyone in the daily mail. I think th…

> Is that a real problem though? Yes. I search for children's content on Youtube. Youtube returns children's content. We click to play, and I get a pre-roll ad for a horror film, or alcohol, or gambling. An iOS app advertises itself as suitable for ages 4+. It contains ads. Those ads are sometimes for gambling, or alcohol services. I'd say that app isn't suitable for children, and the uk regulator is looking at that.

Wait, but is that related to the proposal? Not my native language and all, but I thought this is basically age-gating .. porn sites.

If you have a random app (unrelated, not a porn site) showing ads (unrelated unless a porn site) of alcohol services (not sure what that is, but .. unrelated/not porn), how does this apply?

How would you age-gate ads? Wouldn't that require a new X-KID-PRESENT: 1 http header so that each and every ad network can suppress ~questionable~ content? In fact: That's a great thought experiment: Is a site that serves ads that might contain 'adult' ads at times a porn site according to the British government and would need to verify that the visitor is of age?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#137

Post by rayiner » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 2:16 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #131

viraptor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery Is that a real problem though? You did quote the accidentally after all. Both kids and adults have access to things they seek - whether that's going to be internet, magazine brought to school, or some other means. If they don't seek such content, they won't see much more than what's already available to everyone in the daily mail. I think th…

> Is that a real problem though? Yes. I search for children's content on Youtube. Youtube returns children's content. We click to play, and I get a pre-roll ad for a horror film, or alcohol, or gambling. An iOS app advertises itself as suitable for ages 4+. It contains ads. Those ads are sometimes for gambling, or alcohol services. I'd say that app isn't suitable for children, and the uk regulator is looking at that.

> Yes. I search for children's content on Youtube. Youtube returns children's content. We click to play, and I get a pre-roll ad for a horror film, or alcohol, or gambling.

Out in the real world, people will think you're weird and/or a religious nut if you don't drink at a business function. So why should I worry about my daughter seeing an advertisement for alcohol before her episode of Paw Patrol starts playing?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#138

Post by rayiner » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 2:17 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…

> There is lots of stuff on the internet that may hurt a child's development

[Citation needed.]

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#139

Post by spikengineer » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 2:18 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #131

viraptor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery Is that a real problem though? You did quote the accidentally after all. Both kids and adults have access to things they seek - whether that's going to be internet, magazine brought to school, or some other means. If they don't seek such content, they won't see much more than what's already available to everyone in the daily mail. I think th…

> Is that a real problem though? Yes. I search for children's content on Youtube. Youtube returns children's content. We click to play, and I get a pre-roll ad for a horror film, or alcohol, or gambling. An iOS app advertises itself as suitable for ages 4+. It contains ads. Those ads are sometimes for gambling, or alcohol services. I'd say that app isn't suitable for children, and the uk regulator is looking at that.

There is a simpler solution. Ban advertisements for alcohol and gambling products like many countries already do.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#140

Post by JulianMorrison » Wed, Oct 19, 2016, 2:18 PM UTC

pmlnr wrote: post #129

JulianMorrison wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oh? How is it possible for them to not relate at all?