Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter • Hacker News Board

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#161

Post by xtreme » Sat, Dec 21, 2013, 7:01 AM UTC

hahainternet wrote: post #136

colinbartlett wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an American, I haven't paid much attention to this until now. Can you please enlighten us?

ISPs are implementing optional filters that are no different to the standard 'Protect yer kiddies' software ones. They're doing this ostensibly to avoid regulation and government interference. Because of this, lots of people are decrying regulation and government interference. It's quite frustrating.

There is one additional factor: the filters are opt-out and you have to request the ISP if you don't want the censored experience. I believe this changes the dynamics quite a bit.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#162

Post by desas » Sat, Dec 21, 2013, 10:05 AM UTC

7952 wrote: post #151

desas wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blocking via web browsers is definitely not going to work. It would require that every browser on each PC, phone, TV and other internet enabled device all activate the filters, all of them have a facility to activate/deactivate the filters, all of them don't allow other web browsers to be installed and don't allow booting from alternative sources. Most parents don't know how to do this. They do know how to tick a box…

So you believe that the best way to help parents is to have network level blocks? People should use poorly designed technology because they are stupid? But to prevent kids getting around network level filtering you still need to have all the anti-circumvention measures baked into the OS/browser/anti-virus. The UK government have created a network level filter that still needs client level changes to actually work. I…

I think that network level filtering will make access to porn more difficult than browser level filtering at less effort to the public, which is the governments objective. I'm not saying it's a good thing.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#163

Post by PeterisP » Sat, Dec 21, 2013, 10:33 AM UTC

SilkRoadie wrote: post #114

DanBC wrote: post #87

This 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…

Generally speaking there seems to be a lack of engagment by experts in a varity of subjects. This is no different. The problem is the ease of access to pornography for anyone, mainly children. It is hard to deny this is a problem. A solution is an opt in web filter. I don't like web filters but in this case I see little alternative. The only other option is to try to prosecute websites that do not do some form of age…

An opt-in[1] filter isn't a solution, it's a snake oil pill that has no effects whatsoever on trivial access to pornography anyways.

It will hamper a stressed kid trying to go to the local youth NGO's site with info on condoms (a true example blocked by one of the UK filters). It won't hamper a horny teenager trying to look for porn, he'll find it rapidly anyway and tell his peers how to do it.

In short, these web filters are a worse solution than simply doing nothing. You're accepting a tradeoff of real harm for imaginary, nonexistant benefits.

[1] By the way, isn't the implementation on-by-default, making it an opt-out filter instead of opt-in?

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#164

Post by DanBC » Sat, Dec 21, 2013, 10:40 AM UTC

madaxe_again wrote: post #144

hahainternet wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Answer: Us. Because Kafka runs the criminal justice system. Bringing crimes to the attention of the police is just not worth the risk. Kafka does not run the criminal justice system. Your actions are disgraceful.

His spirit quite certainly does. I would assume that you've never attempted to report a crime in the UK. It's a fruitless endeavour that typically results in the police threatening the reporter, or simply declaring it a civil matter in which they have no interest.

> that typically results in the police threatening the reporter,

Typically? Really?

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#165

Post by Nodex » Sat, Dec 21, 2013, 1:12 PM UTC

The block does not have to be on the backbone level, Cameron could simply plug all the money he has so far into writing a free application for Winblows, OSX, Linux etc that does all this blocking. People can then choose to install it or not on their devices.

Ultimately it's not my responsibility to protect my neighbors kids from seeing pornography online - it's down to the parents of the children. By making us opt in / out of something at a backbone level we are without a doubt paving the way for something more sinister.

This is not about protecting children - if it were it could be done with the method described above and or countless other net nanny type apps.

Cameron's motives will be revealed soon enough, mark my words.

Re: Go away Cameron – Bypass UK's porn filter

#166

Post by gravedave » Sat, Dec 21, 2013, 9:22 PM UTC

What's the point of this? The filter can be opted out of, and if you're in circumstances that deny you such control (say, at work), then maybe you should just obey "the house rules".

I expect lots of workplace masturbators to downvote this post.