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

Considered "18+"

daniel.haxx.se

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 156 posts

Re: Considered "18+"

#51

Post by LorenPechtel »

j_san wrote: post #44
edent wrote: post #17

Many years ago, I used to work for Vodafone - and had some responsibility for their filtering stuff. One of the main problems was that, at the time, it was all managed by Blue Coat. As they were a US company, many of the "violations" that they picked up just weren't considered problematic for a UK / EU audience. Similarly, they would use blanked keyword blocking. So sex education resources would frequently get blocke…

> As they were a US company, many of the "violations" that they picked up just weren't considered problematic for a UK / EU audience. Just out of curiosity: could you provide some examples?

While I can't provide examples a UK company isn't going to care about bare breasts.

Re: Considered "18+"

#52

Post by _joel »

dmlorenzetti wrote: post #39
edent wrote: post #17

Many years ago, I used to work for Vodafone - and had some responsibility for their filtering stuff. One of the main problems was that, at the time, it was all managed by Blue Coat. As they were a US company, many of the "violations" that they picked up just weren't considered problematic for a UK / EU audience. Similarly, they would use blanked keyword blocking. So sex education resources would frequently get blocke…

Similarly, they would use blanked keyword blocking. So sex education resources would frequently get blocked. I had a colleague whose surname, Sextro, was part of his email address. He occasionally had messages blocked by blanket filters like that.

Praying for all the people who use the shortened form of Richard

Re: Considered "18+"

#54

Post by LorenPechtel »

astura wrote: post #23

Sigh Automatic classification of material as "adult" has always sucked. I remember watching a news report where schools filters had classified webpages referencing the current Super Bowl (Super Bowl XXX) as adult content due to XXX typically being associated with adult material. The opposite happens too - see Elsagate. The newest version of Elsagate material, which I've only seen one person talking about, is weird/in…

There is no decent solution to the Scunthorpe problem. It doesn't matter how many try, they never succeed.

Re: Considered "18+"

#55

Post by gus_massa »

freedomben wrote: post #45

Meta-comment mostly meant for @dang daniel.haxx.se is Daniel Stenberg's blog (famously known as curl maintainer), and would best be displayed with the subdomain as daniel.haxx.se rather than haxx.se, similar to how substacks include the subdomain to make it clear at a glance what the source is.

Send an email to hn@ycombinator.com He usually reply the same day. IIRC they only show subdomains for sites that have a lot of posts, but it's not a hard rule so he may make an exception.

Re: Considered "18+"

#56

Post by rajangdavis »

_joel wrote: post #52
dmlorenzetti wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similarly, they would use blanked keyword blocking. So sex education resources would frequently get blocked. I had a colleague whose surname, Sextro, was part of his email address. He occasionally had messages blocked by blanket filters like that.

Praying for all the people who use the shortened form of Richard

Rich?

Re: Considered "18+"

#60

Post by mperham »

It's maddening that there's no audit trail or public record you can use to debug "why?".

I had my domain put on a phishing blacklist due to DNS caching. During a 30 minute cache window, I decommissioned a server and a bad actor picked up the recycled server's IP address. The IP reverse lookup showed my domain due to the cache.

Post reply on HN