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

UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

boingboing.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 232 posts

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#61

Post by adrianratnapala »

mobiuscog wrote: post #2

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…

Here is a simple solutions: porn sites use a .xxx domain or some such, and browsers can trivially be configured to block that domain.

I'd be fine with government enforcing such a rule.

But years and years after we started talking about such a solution, we don't have it, but instead have intrusive privacy distroying solutions that don't see to even address the problem.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#62

Post by pmyteh »

Accacin wrote: post #37
viraptor wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> simply by 'accidentally' going to the wrong website, be exposed to imagery Is that a real problem though? You did quote the accidentally after all. Both kids and adults have access to things they seek - whether that's going to be internet, magazine brought to school, or some other means. If they don't seek such content, they won't see much more than what's already available to everyone in the daily mail. I think th…

> (Once it's tracked and officially acted on, it's going to be a sex offender case like sexting became, right?) I'm not 100%, but I think recent guidelines in the UK advised that is an underage person is caught "sexting" with another underage person of the same age, they'll be no criminal repurcusions.

That's right. The Crown Prosecution Service (the national body which prosecutes essentially all criminal cases on behalf of the state) takes the view that charging under-18s for genuinely consensual sexual activity is generally not in the public interest. This policy (and guidance on essentially all other charging decisions) is helpfully published online as part of the CPS legal manual.

It's still a matter of prosecutorial discretion rather than being actually legal, though.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#63

Post by Asooka »

krapp wrote: post #14
mobiuscog wrote: post #2

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…

Outside of, maybe, image searches and 4chan (where there are no filters at all), it's not that easy to accidentally stumble across pornographic images on the web nowadays. Legitimate sites with a vested interest in preventing minors viewing inappropriate content will make that content opt-in. I don't see a problem when you have to go looking for it to find it. At that point it's not the fault of the internet, but som…

> 4chan (where there are no filters at all),

Except that's wrong. All forms of child pornography are banned and posting one nets you a permanent ban. Several boards (i.e. everything outside the 18+ section) disallow posting any erotic content and doing so gets you a ban. 4chan was never meant as a free-for-all.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#64

Post by belorn »

NLips wrote: post #49
belorn wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There used to be a option here in Sweden and elsewhere in the world, and it was called the national censors. They would look at movies, tv, music, books, and decide if it posed a serous problem where someone could 'accidentally' be exposed and harm the efforts to be well-adjusted citizens. And, in most part, it was not that bad. Sure, Swedes could not watch the Texas Chain Saw Massacre, and the UK banned Monthy Pytho…

Actually the UK hasn't discarded it's system, but you've possibly misunderstood what the system is. Monty Python was rated as suitable for ages 14+ by the BBFC. Some local authorities (which have power over what may be shown in cinemas) banned cinemas from playing it, but buying a physical copy was never banned. Nowadays there are only a small number of films outright 'banned' by the BBFC, almost always due to rape o…

Well, reading about "Monty Python's Life of Brian" gives a rather strong message that censoring played a significant role in the UK for that movie. But you make a good point that rather than it being national censors, it was town councils. Not sure if the general public or artistic creator feel that its much of a difference.

Looking at history of censoring in uk, or looking at examples in other countries, is it a productive, effective and favorable method in keeping citizens well-adjusted?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#65

Post by mobiuscog »

jamesrcole wrote: post #58
mobiuscog wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

I will not allow my daughter free access to ice cream, either ;)

I see your point. I think that, unsurprisingly, this is a much bigger issue than just 'porn' and everyone sees it from different viewpoints (humans, eh).

Thanks for the reply.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#66

Post by notahacker »

mobiuscog wrote: post #2

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…

Sites which spawn porn popups in the face of children involved in innocuous browsing aren't going to respect laws concerning "porn IDs" anyway.

Any hypothetical positive consequences of a national database of porn access traced to particular individuals are more than outweighed by the glaringly obvious negative ones.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#67

Post by mobiuscog »

darklajid wrote: post #59
mobiuscog wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Shouldn't a government, govern ?

If so, what is their remit, and if not, what's the answer... anarchy ?

For reference, 18 is the legal 'adult' age in the UK, hence the age in this proposal.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#69

Post by Kenji »

mobiuscog wrote: post #41
Kenji wrote: 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…

Thank you, I don't want anyone to feel responsible for me. I want to be FREE, first and foremost. If other people feeling responsible for me is conditioned on them owning my body in ways of e.g. banning what drugs I can take and what porn I can watch, then no thanks. I will never push my feeling responsible on people in forceful or even violent ways because I respect liberty too deeply, and I don't want that to be done to me.

This is not a modern way of entitlement. This is basic liberty at the most fundamental level. A sense of entitlement is what the government has. What is the justification of the government's power? Back in the age of kings, they argued that god instated them. At least they were trying to come up with a reason for their power. Today it is me, the single individual, who has to argue for his liberty. It is ridiculous.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#70

Post by yodsanklai »

witty_username wrote: post #23
mobiuscog wrote: post #2

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 saw porn accidentally at around 11 by visiting python.com (I was trying to python.org). I turned out fine, I'm not really sure what's the big danger. It's just sexualized naked humans. Big deal. Maybe people are just uncomfortable that children might like porn.

Even before internet, many (most ?) teenagers had access one way or another to sexual contents. Videotapes, magazines and so on... I wonder why it's such a big deal. I think it's the role of the parents, or even school, to educate them about this.
Post reply on HN