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

251–260 of 369 posts

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#251

Post by Nursie »

tehwalrus wrote: post #109
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"?

IIRC, the UK's existing pornography laws make a distinction between, for example, partial nakedness (page 3 of the sun - not regulated) and sexual nakedness (what you think it is - regulated, restrictions on who can buy, what a licensed shop is, etc). There is also a separate rating above 12, 15, 18, which classifies films as subject to pornography controls or not. Internet sites are completely unregulated compared t…

A Clockwork Orange springs to mind.

Most folks I know who have actually watched it think it's horrific (at least in parts). It was banned for a long time due (IIRC) to the fact that you could watch it 'straight' and see it as glorifying all sorts of stuff. Especially when you take into account that the second half of the film is about government conditioning and then un-conditioning our anti-hero, so that by the end he's once again able to commit atrocities.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#252

Post by rmc »

conroy wrote: post #12

> Every household in Britain connected to the internet will be obliged to declare whether they want to maintain access to online pornography These declarations will only be used to shame public figures once the list is leaked. > 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 t…

> These declarations will only be used to shame public figures once the list is leaked.

Actually it's the common person I'm more worried about. Applying to work as a teacher? They might ask you (or the Government body with the details) if you watch porn. "We can't let someone who watches porn teach 5 year olds!" will be the excuse.

> Video footage of two consenting adults, acting out a scene, will be illegal to own.

This is already the case in the UK, with violent and extreme pornography, a new law that (I don't think) has any convictions yet.

> it seems a short hop to outlaw videos of simulated murder.

Again, other way around. They made porn of that technically illegal a few years ago AFAIR,

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#253

Post by rmc »

EarthLaunch wrote: post #75
droopyEyelids wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish he would have at least nodded his head to the idea that creating censorship infrastructure today, even for the right reasons, might lead to problems tomorrow. Also I wish whatever reporter wrote the story had asked his take on that.

What do you think his intention is, to do the right thing? He knows what he's doing and there's no reason to expect him to acknowledge the "side-effects" of an evil regulation. And the reporter is not responsible for realizing this; you are.

What do you think his intention is, to do the right thing?

Win votes. That's the definition of success in politics.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#254

Post by MarkMc »

Isn't this policy electoral suicide? Sure, there's a vocal minority who want to 'think of the children' and are backing Cameron's plan. But I'd imagine the vast majority of the population want to view pornography without putting their name on a smut-list. These people aren't going to form campaign groups but will be happy to express their view in the anonymous confines of a polling booth.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#255

Post by beaker52 »

People may find these links interesting:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisexualism

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_repression

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libido_(Psychoanalysis)

"It is this need to conform to society and control the libido that leads to tension and disturbance in the individual, prompting the use of ego defenses to dissipate the psychic energy of these unmet and mostly unconscious needs into other forms."

Say... consuming material goods?

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#256

Post by vidarh »

user24 wrote: post #224
gjm11 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a young daughter and I live in the UK. I think this legislation is bloody stupid. Yes, some people might reasonably not want their children to run across pornographic material on the internet. Here are some other things some people might reasonably not want their children to run across on the internet: Anti-religious material. Religious material. Depictions of violence. Any mention of prejudice against racial…

Great comment. > won't require her to seek out dubious illegal channels which are likely to be full of stuff much "worse" than she'd easily have found without all the censorship. This is one of my biggest fears. As an analogy (and a true story); they banned selling knives on ebay[1]. Now I have to go to specialist knife-selling websites to buy my knives (I am a collector). Those websites have a much better range and…

"Hardcore" porn (anything with penetration or erect penises) was illegal in Norway when I was a child. As a result my generations source of porn was illegal imports sold in shady shops which, because they were already breaking the law, had few reasons to avoid selling anything that was available from their sources.

So if you wanted just "mainstream" porn, you'd get that from places with prominent displays of all kinds of fetishes many of us would never have even heard of otherwise.

Then came the BBS's, and the same was the case - normal mainstream stuff in between every fetish imaginable.

Now I don't necessarily see that as a problem, but it does mean that by adding these kind of restrictions, they are effectively losing all control. They are also likely to massively hasten the move towards technologies to better anonymous, encrypted browsing.

If anything drives "darknets" and systems like Tor to the next level, it will be more extensive porn filtering even more so than piracy, especially because of the amount of money in porn that is legally manufactured and distributed, but that is or may become illegal in large potential markets.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#258

Post by InternalRun »

ollysb wrote: post #216

According to the guardian's article at [1] it appears the system will actually be opt-in. From a leaked letter sent from the Department of Education to the ISPs: "Without changing what you will be offering (ie active-choice +), the prime minister would like to be able to refer to your solutions [as] 'default-on'" active-choice+ is a set of filters that may be enabled on request. [1] http://www.guardian.co.uk/commenti…

I think that it is a online system where the box is ticked by default. This is his version of opt-in to porn.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#259

Post by rmc »

petercooper wrote: post #228
conroy wrote: post #12

> Every household in Britain connected to the internet will be obliged to declare whether they want to maintain access to online pornography These declarations will only be used to shame public figures once the list is leaked. > 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 t…

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. I'm no lawyer, but it already is, if they're in a pornographic "context": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_63_of_the_Criminal_Just... This 2008 act outlaws possessing or publishing explicit and realistic imagery of acts that threaten life, would cau…

> So fisting ... already illegal.

Actually there was a case in 2012 of someone tried under this law for having fisting videos. They weren't convicted. This is strong evidence (and precedent) that fisting per se would not fall under this law.

Re: David Cameron cracks down on online pornography

#260

Post by rmc »

conroy wrote: post #104
yk wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And on top of this, they want to create a database of all of child porn. ( What could possibly go wrong?)

If the database just contains hashes of offending images, I don't see the harm. Similar databases exist for copyrighted movies, television shows, and music. Edit: The harm is combining such a database with broad internet surveillance. Also, since the database is only hashes, false positives are likely. YouTube, who probably has the best content matching algorithms, can't even get it right all the time.

Actually child porn images are probably much easier to detect than YouTube blocking videos. One aspect of copyright infringement that makes content detection hard is that there is fair use. There is absolutely no fair use for child porn.
Post reply on HN