Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 232 posts

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#151

Post by Retric »

Freak_NL wrote: post #146
rayiner wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is lots of stuff on the internet that may hurt a child's development [Citation needed.]

Are you seriously doubting that there are peer reviewed articles that assert that there are things on the internet that can harm a child's development and well-being? Have a look at Google Scholar for a plethora of papers about cyber-bullying, grooming, self-esteem issues (mental and physical), pro-anorexia blogs, etcetera. You can combine the keywords "internet" and "children" with any of the above to get an extensi…

Pick 3 that don't A) bias the result by only looking at negative outcomes and B) don't bias the result by their funding or researches massive bias.

EX: Cyber-bullying has many positive outcomes preparing sheltered children to the kind of people that live in the real world. Just look at what happened to the US hikers captured by Iran for an idea of what a sheltered upbringing results in.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#152

Post by Unbeliever69 »

viraptor wrote: post #40
mobiuscog wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's certainly easy to stumble across unsavoury content - I have done so accidentally in the past and was amazed how easy it was. I can't say how much of a problem it is, but then I suspect nobody can. As a parent (and yes, as stated already, I do limit internet access) I know that most parents definitely wouldn't want these things to be viewed early in life - I have no problem with adults viewing whatever they want,…

If you want to filter traffic at home, I don't think it's that hard. There's a whole industry trying to solve that problem. Google "internet family filter" and choose one. Your ISP probably provides one as well (my last 3 ISPs did) I'll likely use one as well when I have kids. But I'm absolutely against any government program to enforce the same. But my experience is much different. Apart from sexualised models adver…

It is SO easy to break NetNanny an the like. They don't work. Any 12 year old determined kid can figure it out. MAYBE if you combined a family friendly ISP with a parental controlled fire wall, AND several layers of software/browser based filtering this could be accomplished.

Putting this aside, no matter how much you protect your children at home, you can't protect them away from home.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#153

Post by Unbeliever69 »

vertex-four wrote: post #85
joosters wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Combine that with ensuring that your child's computer is in a public place, not their bedroom. Not really practical advice in an era of tablets and mobiles.

Very practical - don't give your <12yo child a tablet or smartphone. They're not necessary parts of human existence, and certainly not of a child's existence.

There will always be that kid at school or at a friend's house that DOES have access to these devices. We are already a paranoid, helicopter parent society as it is. Next step, strap kids into their beds and chairs and spoon feed them only what you want them to consume. Never let them leave home. Problem solved.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#154

Post by ManlyBread »

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.

You can already solve this problem - install uBlock.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#155

Post by Thriptic »

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…

Have we actually established that this is a problem? Is viewing porn or violent imagery or whatever on the Internet actually harmful to children or does it just make parents uncomfortable?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#156

Post by abdias »

Why don't UK government leave that responsibility to the parents which are to decide what their children are allowed to watch or not. In the old Soviet the communists very much wanted government to replace both parents and God - seems like that idea has gotten new fuel in the UK.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#157

Post by jsprogrammer »

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…

>be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life

How can you judge what will 'well-adjust' someone? What does well adjusted even mean and how could viewing an image prevent someone from becoming it?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#158

Post by Lio »

Senji wrote: post #142
DanBC wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Adblock

I don't think that help DanBC's problem with ads in iOS apps though.

One of the downsides of apps vs the open web is that you lose control of the experience.

With the open web the user can decide to remove sign up/social media/breaking news/in your face modals and pop-overs.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#159

Post by throw2016 »

The puritans are back. Here is a better idea, implement a vote-id so responsible adults can dismiss such inane ideas and recall offending MPs without delay so matters of the state can be attended to.

There only way we can realistically rehash the debate on pornography and entertain the idea that sufficient controls don't exist and are in some cases not practical or reasonable is by being intentionally obtuse and disingenious.

The idea that we can even consider implementing an adult-id for an entire population before considering its use for more effective democracy is telling of our current priorities and the complete reduction of the enlightenment of western democracy to a crude form of corporatocracy and control systems.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#160

Post by rrobukef »

rayiner wrote: post #137
DanBC wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Because I don't want my son to think that drinking is considered something he should do without knowing limits (although there are warnings, he can't read). Because gambling is a designer addiction and I don't want him to install such an app before he can know the consequences of his actions.

But mostly because I don't want him waking up at night screaming from nightmares. I like my dearly won sleep.

Post reply on HN