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

David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

guardian.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 369 posts

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#151

Post by infinita740 »

yenoham wrote: post #38

TL;DR - "Yea I guess, but..." Personally I don't have huge a problem with the default filtering; most households (with or without kids) don't have the knowledge to effectively enable filtering for all their devices - giving them 'protection' by default, and allowing the option to have full access is currently what most - maybe all - mobile phone operators do in the UK anyway in 3G/GSM connections. However, its import…

>I do wonder what this will mean when accessing sites like The Pirate Bay

Don't worry about the pirate bay, it's blocked in uk

First torrent site, then pornography, then what? arbitrary political movements?

That's a really slippery slope here once the tools are in place, it's hard not to use them.

Personally I'm not against some filtering but IMHO it had to be an opt in plus made at the router level with an "offline" list that you can review and modify yourself. A list made at the ISP level is just too totalitarian

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#152

Post by yenoham »

brokenparser wrote: post #82
yenoham wrote: post #38

TL;DR - "Yea I guess, but..." Personally I don't have huge a problem with the default filtering; most households (with or without kids) don't have the knowledge to effectively enable filtering for all their devices - giving them 'protection' by default, and allowing the option to have full access is currently what most - maybe all - mobile phone operators do in the UK anyway in 3G/GSM connections. However, its import…

Targeted ads would be the least of my worries. What concerns me is fascist governments deciding they get to filter whatever they're contempt with. Such censorship doesn't fit well with civil liberties, we know this from other countries which already have nation-wide filtering.

This is why I believe the 'opt-in/out' switching should be as seemless and accessible as possible - if it is, then to my mind this is no closer to censorship than the film classification system.

"By default the state assumes you don't want to see sexual content; if you do - thats fine by us"

Note that I'm saying this is how I see it balancing with civil liberties - there is of course the chance that it DOESN'T work out like this in practice.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#153

Post by EarthLaunch »

pyre wrote: post #129
EarthLaunch wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad I was able to educate you without either of us resorting to sarcasm.

The problem with this thread is that it's entirely possible to read it as both my post and your reply are sarcastic, or they both aren't. If you really require me to be explicit, I can spell it out for you: * Each person has an individual responsibility to realize such things for their self via critical thinking. * A reporter has no legal responsibility to uphold journalistic principals. * A reporter should have an e…

If you wanted to have a serious conversation about journalistic integrity, you would not begin with sarcasm and continue with condescension. That's why you didn't deserve a serious reply, and still don't. The entire thread you started is also off-topic and as worthwhile as your thoughts in it.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#154

Post by infinita740 »

_mulder_ wrote: post #149
yenoham wrote: post #38

TL;DR - "Yea I guess, but..." Personally I don't have huge a problem with the default filtering; most households (with or without kids) don't have the knowledge to effectively enable filtering for all their devices - giving them 'protection' by default, and allowing the option to have full access is currently what most - maybe all - mobile phone operators do in the UK anyway in 3G/GSM connections. However, its import…

Accessing the Pirate Bay?! We can't allow that... if only there was a compulsory National filter where we could block access to these corrupt sites.

Actually I think they started with th Pirate Bay and then pornography.

A quick google search: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/5-ways-bypass-uk-pirate-bay-blo...

(screenshot of the blocking page)

I believe protection against pornography has to do with education, it's more the problem of the parents than the problem of the government. "Childs" will always find a way to view some adult content, they just need to be educated about it

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#155

Post by krichman »

bulatb wrote: post #60
Sven7 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have kids?

Having kids is no excuse to let your brain check out when someone tells you they're in vague, amorphous danger. When those kids grow up, they'll be inheriting a world where civil liberties can be (and have been) eroded by cynical lawmakers playing on their parents' fears of children seeing things that they consider inappropriate.

It's like how more Americans are killed by police than by terrorists, but we "need" PRISM and more SWAT teams instead of better police training. Children are in far more danger of living in a nanny state than having their lives ruined by online pornography.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#156

Post by jacquesm »

sspiff wrote: post #80
cskau wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > The possession of "extreme pornography", which includes scenes of simulated rape, is to be outlawed. > Video footage of two consenting adults, acting out a scene, will be illegal to own. With this on the books, it seems a short hop to outlaw videos of simulated murder. Even without such an extension, aren't there plenty of Hollywood movies which include "scenes of simulated rape"?

I have a copy of A Clockwork Orange, so I would be an abhorrent pervert owning illegal extreme pornography?

These are 'Strange Days'.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#157

Post by bhickey »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #90
bhickey wrote: post #8

Meh. I doubt the Tories have a clean house in this regard. Every time some politician or other 'moral leader' starts pontificating about moral panic, I get suspicious that they're just trying to ban their vice. Clearly if they're so vocally opposed to it, they mustn't be partaking, right? Glenn Loury and cocaine. Mark Foley and the exploitation of children. Eliot Spitzer and prostitution. John Ensign and 'family valu…

Spitzer was a dem who became a target of banks and credit institutions afraid of his cracking down on their anti-consumer business practices. He was Elizabeth Warren before Elizabeth Warren, and deserves more respect than to be pigeonholed as a politician with his pigeon in a hole. From Wikipedia: "Spitzer used this authority in his civil actions against corporations and criminal prosecutions against their officers."…

Hypocrisy isn't a partisan issue. Sure, I feel some schadenfreude when the other guy screws up, but it's intellectually dishonest to give someone a free pass because you share their politics.

Spitzer was going after human trafficking and prostitution as AG and Governor while he was committing Mann Act Violations on the side. I want the folks on 'my team' to have integrity so their agendas don't get derailed.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#158

Post by venomsnake »

MWil wrote: post #19
bollockitis wrote: post #10

In other news, VPN usage in the UK skyrockets. Strict measures to be taken to reduce sexcrime.

Rule 34 David Cameron.

I think you are more right here than you realize. A porn is whatever a person gets his boner with.

By his descriptions of pornography seem a lot of the internet stuff arouses Mr. Cameron ... the really edgy stuff.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#159

Post by goggles99 »

Everlag wrote: post #15

`The government today has made a significant step forward in preventing rapists using rape pornography to legitimise and strategise their crimes and, more broadly, in challenging the eroticisation of violence against women and girls` What? In what world would 90% of ANY porn be legitimate?! I want rapists using strategies found in the fake garbage you can find online, at least then they will be less effective than th…

That's fucking censorship and I THOUGHT WE ALL AGREED THAT IS A SIGN OF FASCISM

In America, all this type of stuff was completely illegal until relatively recent decades (yes I know that the internet did not exist yet but what difference does that make?). Showing "pink shots" in a magazine was completely illegal until 1978 (See Larry Flynt).

Wow, what a bunch of Fascists we had running the country for the first couple of centuries. This country had no freedom at all man...

He is committing widespread censorship of an entire nation.

Is optional censorship really censorship? I know what you will say in response though - it is only optional for now right?

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#160

Post by marshray »

sspiff wrote: post #80
cskau wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> > The possession of "extreme pornography", which includes scenes of simulated rape, is to be outlawed. > Video footage of two consenting adults, acting out a scene, will be illegal to own. With this on the books, it seems a short hop to outlaw videos of simulated murder. Even without such an extension, aren't there plenty of Hollywood movies which include "scenes of simulated rape"?

I have a copy of A Clockwork Orange, so I would be an abhorrent pervert owning illegal extreme pornography?

A bit of extreme nahstiness, yes?
Post reply on HN