Why not just opt out of the filter? Or use one of the many smaller ISPs who don't implement the filter in the first place? You don't need plugins/extensions.
This is a political move to counter-act the filter.
Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
81–90 of 166 posts
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#82Why not just opt out of the filter? Or use one of the many smaller ISPs who don't implement the filter in the first place? You don't need plugins/extensions.
One opt out I've seen requires a credit card. One might not have one. Before you ask, me. I have an internet connection, but no credit cards. Not all ISP cover all of the UK. You also assume that the person wanting to bypass the ISP filter is the same person controlling the connection. So, say a 16yo wants to explore homosexuality, but is not ready to discuss this with parents who simply didn't bother opting out beca…
You also assume that the person wanting to bypass the ISP filter is the same person controlling the connection. So, say a 16yo wants to explore homosexuality
Regardless of the child's sexuality, I'm sure 90% of parents think their teenagers are innocent pure darlings for years after their sexuality appears.
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a UK ISP called Andrews and Arnold that will give you a filter free experience with the caveat that you have to filter your own network, but they are not really a home ISP as such.
Many people think that The Rev is a first class arsehole. Potential customers are warned to carefully research their choice of ISP.
> Many people think that The Rev is a first class arsehole.
You clearly do. But you said "Many". Can you cite any others?
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#84For what it's worth, we bought the lease for our office from a firm who's business it was to provide filtering solutions to schools. Upon moving in, we decided to take a look at what was on the stacks of hardware that had just been left in piles here. To our complete lack of surprise, they were full of the personal details of children, their browsing histories, and even poorly configured squid caches full of things l…
> Needless to say, disks were removed and turned into appropriate bits of broken metal. Were we bad actors, You were bad actors. A serious criminal offence had been committed and you not only didn't report it, but you destroyed the evidence.
And whom exactly would have been pursued? The directors of the defunct company who had variously jumped the country or disappeared? Or us, for being in possession of such data?
Answer: Us. Because Kafka runs the criminal justice system. Bringing crimes to the attention of the police is just not worth the risk.
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I reckon a large proportion of people will opt out HAH! I had a friend one day in tears because her bf had some porn on his laptop. She was shocked, outraged etc. She owned a dildo. Some people have horrific double standards, unless people make a stand against censorship (unlikely) or their desire for porn (even less likely). This is only going to get worse.
I was both bemused and disturbed when it seems the entire female population went nuts for 50 Shades Of Grey recently. On my commute on the train on the way to work, you would see them twirling their hair, chewing their lower lips, writhing in their seats, sometimes even (subconsciously I'm sure) rubbing themselves. Can you imagine what would happen tho' if a bloke was reading a porn mag or watching a movie on his lap…
Can you imagine what would happen tho' if a bloke was reading a porn mag
That does happen. The likes of "Nuts" or "Zoo". Most of those lads mags are as pornographic.
The double stardard is that if a straight woman has lots of sex, she's a slut who should be ashamed; yet if a straight man has lots of sex, he's a stud and should be congratulated.
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#86Why not just opt out of the filter? Or use one of the many smaller ISPs who don't implement the filter in the first place? You don't need plugins/extensions.
IIRC even the small providers have to implement filtering with the IWF blacklist, so there's no way to get a filter-free experience.
IWF membership is entirely discretionary on the part of the ISP.
Even if the ISP is a member they don't have to implement the blocklist. ID Net is an example of this, I had an interesting exchange with one of the execs when I was a customer a few years ago. They were a member in order to 'monitor' trends but didn't use the blocklist. I don't see them listed as a member any more.
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#87This thread elegantly demonstrates the problem.
Most people - even in a technical audience with a deep interest in the subject - have no fucking clue what's actually happen nor how it's happening.
This is how stupid laws get passed. People don't bother to write the correct letters to the correct people to get the stupid laws stopped.
I find it profoundly depressing to realise that so few people know what the filters are doing.
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many people think that The Rev is a first class arsehole. Potential customers are warned to carefully research their choice of ISP.
> Many people think that The Rev is a first class arsehole. You clearly do. But you said "Many". Can you cite any others?
I could if Google Groups search worked, but it doesn't, so I can't. But there are many threads with him demonstrating his behaviour. People can decide for themselves if they think he's an arsehole or not.
He's not the Andy Mabbett level of trolling arse, and he's no MI5guy, but he does have notoriety.
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the EU convention lists internet access as a human right. They're not stopping you from accessing the internet, they're essentially just giving people access to filtering software.
I think the dystopian worry isn't that they're giving individuals access to filtering software. That would be a worthy goal. The real worry is that this system is Government controlled and built into everyone's internet connection. Personally, I'm expecting it to soon have three settings, not two: a) Family friendly browsing (opt-in) b) Access to more adult sites (opt-out) c) Blocking of whatever the government deems…
>>...we're building the machinery of censorship "for the sake of the children."Good quote, thanks. We need simple phrases like that to get past the Daily Fail/Porno Perverts consensus in the UK.
Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are different filters. Some of them already have granularity. > c) Blocking of whatever the government deems objectionable (no choice). This already exists. The IWF provide sites that must be blocked and ISPs block those sites. It also happens when a company uses a court order to force and ISP to block a site.
The difference being that this is centrally controlled. Because of this, it's speed of censorship will be much quicker. Places I expect this to block in future: 1. Discussions of how to bypass the filter (eg Tor) 2. News articles the Government doesn't like (eg discussions barred by injunction such as Ryan Giggs) 3. Information during times of disorder (eg the tweeting by people involved in the Arab Spring). 4. Whate…
This is not centrally controlled. The ISPs that have been pushed into this run their own filters, the government don't run the filters, don't have access to the filtering software and don't recommend a particular filtering product.