Live data from Hacker News

UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

boingboing.net

51–60 of 232 posts

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#51

Something has to be done. It's not just about porn or violence of NSFL etc... but there is a serious problem on the internet, that is always lambasted with the "Won't somebody think of the children" memes. When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, wit…

I agree with the concept that it would be nice to do something, but that the current proposed solutions aren't good. I'd just like to point out that 'something has to be done' is a dangerous phrase which can easily lead to bad law. 'Something has to be done' leads to 'this is something', which leads to 'we have to do this'.

Whenever someone proposes one or more 'solutions' to a problem, they must not only be compared against each other, but also against the status quo. If they don't beat the status quo, then no - nothing 'has to be done'.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#52

Something has to be done. It's not just about porn or violence of NSFL etc... but there is a serious problem on the internet, that is always lambasted with the "Won't somebody think of the children" memes. When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, wit…

My take is - you don't even have to go to wrong websites to be deeply hurt. A lot of niche sites monetize using shady AD networks which serve deeply disturbing semi-porn ads to shares of audience.

Given this situation, I find attention to porn sites misguided. At least a person going to porn hub decided to be there, as opposed to going to a gaming wiki and seeing degenerate ads.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#53

Something has to be done. It's not just about porn or violence of NSFL etc... but there is a serious problem on the internet, that is always lambasted with the "Won't somebody think of the children" memes. When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, wit…

> When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, without any safeguards in place, there is something wrong. "is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life" is an extraordinarily weak argument for harmfulness. Eating ice-cream is also not going to help…

Indeed. We definitely don't have an obesity problem.

Isn't one of the main values of a society, that it strives to help everyone within that society ?

What is the 'correct' social attitude towards looking after the welfare of others ?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you define the problem more pointedly? It sounds like the problem is 'information (and ergo imagery) is accessible ", which I do not see as a probely

Not the op, but it doesn't sound like you're trying very hard to understand. Simply put—and speaking as a person who doesn't care about what adults do and see on the internet involving other adults—there is simply no bulletproof way of reliably ensuring children do not see or experience something online that is inappropriate for their age (or against a parent's personal sensitivities), while preserving a parent's fre…

Well put.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#55
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you seriously think this is a viable solution that doesn't compromise society freedoms and scales well really securing children at the same time? I am really, really sceptical about that. Are we guarding our kids when they play with their friends, who can expose them to all kind of nasty content/ideas/materials/behaviours? Are we censoring ads that are everywhere and are filled with sexual/erotic conotations? Are…

Proper advice/education is really the only solution. We all know how ridiculous any attempts to censor the internet is to people with even a minimal amount of tech savvy, especially if gov.uk are involved... I mean, take the UK's attempt to block e.g thepiratebay.org which is defeated by simply putting https:// infront of it (at least, currently, on virgin media).. The actual issue here though is the progression that…

> an epidemic of erectile dysfunction

Ok, that got a chuckle out of me. But really, as a serial porn consumer, I can tell you that people don't progress towards more and more extreme stuff. This isn't like drugs where you start developing resistance to the active substance. If it were, we'd see people give up sex in a few months after starting and the entire human race would die off.

You're basically designing a system for perfectly horny teens in frictionless vacuum.

Another thought - someone should get PornHub to release stats on if and how people's tastes in erotica progress.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#56

Something has to be done. It's not just about porn or violence of NSFL etc... but there is a serious problem on the internet, that is always lambasted with the "Won't somebody think of the children" memes. When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, wit…

My kids are 2.5 and 4 and have no access to devices that connect to the internet. Yet. So remember the 'no battle plan survives the contact with the enemy' thing. Honestly - while the internet makes it easier to get to questionable content and is a unified interface to both lots of good stuff all the way to the really ugly parts: I don't think that changes the responsibilites compared to my childhood. Parents decide…

Not arguing against you, but I'd like to point out that using your power to lobby government to create rules and regulations such that your children won't have the ability to step out of line, is a valid way of enforcing your rules.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, without any safeguards in place, there is something wrong. "is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life" is an extraordinarily weak argument for harmfulness. Eating ice-cream is also not going to help…

Indeed. We definitely don't have an obesity problem. Isn't one of the main values of a society, that it strives to help everyone within that society ? What is the 'correct' social attitude towards looking after the welfare of others ?

Given what was being discussed in the context, what you're saying equates to "there's something wrong that the public can get free access to ice-cream".

Restricting access is not the only way to address issues in society.

In any case, my only point was that the person I was replying to provided a very weak argument that the thing is bad in the first place. Note that this is not the same as me saying it isn't bad in any way.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#59
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no problem. I grew up with the internet. Had full access as a kid. Many people did too. The only problem is that fascists want to control the internet, that's the real problem.

I appreciate this comment, as I know a lot of people who grew up with the internet. I would therefore ask another question: Is it really fascism trying to control the internet, or people afraid to accept responsibility for what they want to do ? (I suspect both) The modern way of entitlement means everybody should be free to do whatever they want without government interfering, which demonstrates that the meaning of…

Not the GP, but in my world you're responsible for your part of society - not all of it. There's no consensus on when - for example - kids should be allowed to look at some random.jpg.

As a parent, you make decisions for your daughter every day. Whether she gets unfiltered internet access or not is one of these. I think most rational people wouldn't criticize your personal decision, even if they disagree.

But handing this responsibility out to the state seems wrong to me on multiple levels. Privacy issues (which are actually HUGE) aside: There's no clear cut answer for the questions

- what is considered porn/inapproriate nudity anyway

- at which age is my kid allowed to watch porn (this proposal says 18 for some reason?)

- what kind of porn is agreeable and what is not

The government shouldn't meddle in issues of morality.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#60

Something has to be done. It's not just about porn or violence of NSFL etc... but there is a serious problem on the internet, that is always lambasted with the "Won't somebody think of the children" memes. When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can, simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life, wit…

The thing is, if you want to prevent your children from accessing sites you'd prefer them not to without accompanying them in the future... there's been commercial solutions to that almost since the first porn site existed. Net Nanny's been around almost as long as I've been alive. Combine that with ensuring that your child's computer is in a public place, not their bedroom. Frankly, if people are going to be exposed…

> Frankly, if people are going to be exposed to said imagery at some point, they probably need to be educated about it.

That's what this is all about isn't it? There is lots of stuff on the internet that may hurt a child's development, and I honestly doubt porn is one of the bigger bad influences. Kids are growing up watching popular peers give them beauty and fashion tips or perform dangerous stunts and pranks on extremely popular Youtube channels. Of course all you see is the side they want you to see: the successful prank with hilarious consequences, the perfect look by that pretty girl with the perfect figure.

But left to their own devices your children won't see that girl's bad hair day, or the stunt that backfired and landed one of the kids in hospital. Your kids won't realize that the brand of lipstick the popular beauty vlogger promotes also sends her plenty of free samples in return for the favour, or that that hilarious prank was staged.

It's our responsibility as parents and educators — as adults — to teach kids about this.

Now for porn this always gets tricky, because a lot of people would like to stick to just the basic birds and bees (if even that) and just pretend that sexuality is something you receive with your drivers licence. It doesn't work that way, and believing that blocking a vaunted digital commodity will make it go away is an age-old fallacy. There will always be that one kid who can get the goods, with that one app or website that completely circumvents the blockade.

Meanwhile you get to register for your approved pervert ID if you actually want to comply with the system and watch porn. It boggles my mind how anyone can think that this will benefit society rather than take another step towards a full Orwellian surveillance state.

> I'm all for a better solution, but nobody seems to be proposing one.

You are probably doing all right already. The computer and tablets stay in the living room where you can supervise incidentally until they reach the teenage years. And then the smartphones stay with you after bedtime. For the rest, it is up to you to set a good example, and to explain the world to your kids as they encounter it. That means talking about sex too, and that means explaining what they are looking at when they do stumble upon adult content — not acting embarrassed and making them feel guilty as if they've bitten into some forbidden fruit.

"Oh this is just adult sex, you'll understand better when you are older. Any questions?"

If it really bothers you; install filtering software. Filtering the parts of reality deemed not yet suitable from your children is responsible (just don't pretend it doesn't exist); filtering it from society at large is unbearably sanctimonious.

Post reply on HN