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

71–80 of 232 posts

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#71

Post by mobiuscog »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #27
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…

"my young daughter doesn't get any unaccompanied internet access" - you will discover that you are mistaken about this. Kids do not tell adults about the hole in the fence. The reality is that we have a misogyny problem, not really a porn problem per se but one that's reflective of a society that could, for example, produce Trump. Trying to solve this by blocking porn is basically misogyny trying to protect itself th…

This is fast becoming a new part of Godwin's law.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#72

Post by mobiuscog »

NLips wrote: post #51
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 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…

But the status quo of today is different to the status quo of ten years ago - should they be compared, or do we just accept society wherever it goes ?

(Genuine question, not rhetorical)

It used to be (and still is in many countries) that religion directed the people. These days it is more often corporations (through advertising).

How should society be directed ?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#73

Post by westiseast »

asadjb wrote: post #43
hiisukun wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, I don't think that something has to be done. While your definition of said problem is fair and reasonable, and I share some of your concerns for children going online, overall I don't agree. I don't think the internet reflects more than the real world offers. It is challenging as a parent (and a school, employer, etc) to govern (!) or monitor how people use your internet access. Certainly much harder th…

"I don't think the internet reflects more than the real world offers. It is challenging as a parent (and a school, employer, etc) to govern (!) or monitor how people use your internet access. Certainly much harder than preventing your kids from going to a particular physical place." A thought just popped up in my head about this. Yes, the internet is a reflection of the physical world, but it doesn't have any of the…

The difficulty is that there is a world of difference between a system which allows a simple, independent and anonymous ID check like you'd get at a bar, vs. an online system that inevitably stores and records your interactions.

Perhaps the best way to think of the problem is like this: Yes, kids having access to porn and NSFL content is potentially damaging to society.

However, a society where the state keeps a detailed record of everyone's personal sexual preferences is potentially even worse off.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#74

Post by mobiuscog »

appleflaxen wrote: post #39
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…

> When society has reached a point that anybody with internet access can ... be exposed to imagery that really is not going to help them be well-adjusted in life ... there is something wrong I am really trying to understand your point of view, and am failing. Are you saying that you go online, and are bombarded by images that you don't want to see? Then why do you still go online? Have you taken a community college c…

I suppose my point (which I obviously failed at, as most people are just suggesting an internet filter) was that it has become - thanks to the internet - to be exposed to a lot of areas of life which would not normally be encountered.

Many people don't see this as a problem, and many people likely never experience it (either through limited internet use, or otherwise).

Perhaps it isn't a problem, but if it is, such that enough interest it pushed in solving it, how can society grow to cope with it ?

Or something like that.

Perhaps people honestly believe that a child, growing up into their twenties and beyond, constantly watching porn and NSFL content, is a typical example of a well-adjusted member of society. Maybe that's correct these days.

shrug

Perhaps I'm completely out of touch and my ethics/morality mark is completely on the wrong end of the scale - I'm not sure (hence the flameproof suit).

I just think this topic is worth discussion, rather than being instantly dismissed as nanny-state takeover.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#75

Post by JulianMorrison »

mobiuscog wrote: post #71
JulianMorrison wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"my young daughter doesn't get any unaccompanied internet access" - you will discover that you are mistaken about this. Kids do not tell adults about the hole in the fence. The reality is that we have a misogyny problem, not really a porn problem per se but one that's reflective of a society that could, for example, produce Trump. Trying to solve this by blocking porn is basically misogyny trying to protect itself th…

This is fast becoming a new part of Godwin's law.

It would be intensely surprising if a discussion of porn didn't turn into a discussion of misogyny. Because they relate, obviously.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#76

Post by Kenji »

mobiuscog wrote: post #67
darklajid wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>Shouldn't a government, govern?

With this argument, I could argue for any fascist dictatorship I want. A government should serve its people, first and foremost. Remember, a law always has to be kept with the threat of force, or actual force if it is broken. This is a classic example of a regulation that cuts deeply into personal freedom and causes much more harm than good. Ironically, the burden of proof is now suddenly upon us, the people, to argue against it.

Can you tell me, what is the justification of the government's power over us to decide when we are ready to watch porn? How dare they interfere with deeply private matters like this one? How about them showing first, without a doubt, that porn without ID is harmful, and that enforcing such an ID helps at all?

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#77

Post by darklajid »

mobiuscog wrote: post #67
darklajid wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Where do you draw the line though? I understand the point you're trying to make, but don't you agree that I can counter your 'else .. anarchy' point with 'govern, like in Brave New World'? People that argue that the government doesn't need to track people's porn habits and decide at which age porn is acceptable aren't automatically against governing/governments.

I understand what 18 years represent in the UK (and here as well), but the reasoning between 'porn' -> 'has to be an adult' is .. unclear. I see no connection here. I assume most people in the UK have sex before the age of 18 for example. Why is that unrestricted? Are you allowed to drive motorized vehicles below the age of 18? Why?

That completely ignores that porn is undefined and porn != porn. You might consider something as pornographic that I consider natural or vice versa? Why would you really want to throw a couple having sex on tape in the same bucket as - say two girls, one cup?

What about content that is brutal and gory? I know there are rules in place for movies or games, but random websites? I don't think they're required to ask for a proof of adulthood, are they?

What about questionable ideological content? Why aren't forums required to make sure that the visitors are adults as soon as the topics are too far off to the left or right?

You can expand this argument ("Think of the children, seeing porn") again and again.

Anyway: In the end I see no way, none, that this proposal can help parents. You, we, have to judge any content for ourselves and our kids - be it a simple comic, a Hollywood movie, random mp4s or .. written text on the internet.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#78

Post by asadjb »

westiseast wrote: post #73
asadjb wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I don't think the internet reflects more than the real world offers. It is challenging as a parent (and a school, employer, etc) to govern (!) or monitor how people use your internet access. Certainly much harder than preventing your kids from going to a particular physical place." A thought just popped up in my head about this. Yes, the internet is a reflection of the physical world, but it doesn't have any of the…

The difficulty is that there is a world of difference between a system which allows a simple, independent and anonymous ID check like you'd get at a bar, vs. an online system that inevitably stores and records your interactions. Perhaps the best way to think of the problem is like this: Yes, kids having access to porn and NSFL content is potentially damaging to society. However, a society where the state keeps a deta…

True. I'm not saying that this system works. I'm just saying that we can't just outright reject every system, just by saying "freedom of speech" and the related arguments that are used to reject any such efforts.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#79

Post by aethertron »

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…

1. Sure, the open Internet is not a child-safe network.

2. Changing the Internet to be child-safe would mean adding restrictions such that it changes into a non-open network.

3. People who like the Internet the way it is, don't want this to happen. This explains

> some people feel very strongly that even questioning the situation is wrong

-- they will cede no point that could support measures that would close up the Net. This is tactically understandable. Unfortunately, it's a barrier to communication and fully-open debate on the issue.

4. I, for one, like the Internet the way it is.

5. My sort of proposal: building an alternative family-safe network upon the existing protocol. Put regulations into this new thing, leave the old one alone.

6. Family-friendly computing needs a whole new paradigm, as I see it. First, put aside the 'personal computer' as a basic unit. All terminals on the famnet will be shared, household ones. Like a a game console that sits in the living room. No personal accounts. No private email that the superuser parents can spy on, just no (fake) privacy at all. A radical re-imagining is needed!

7. Or let some some corporation take care of it for you. Block all sites except Facebook.

Re: UK Government proposes porn-viewing ID

#80

Post by rayiner »

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…

This is not a problem that needs solving. It's hard to "accidentally" run across something really harmful on the internet. And run of the mill porn isn't. By the time your kid knows what's going on in those pictures the cat's out of the bag. My wife and I admitted to each other once that we first downloaded porn around age 10-11 (over our 2400 baud modems!) We turned out, by all accounts, normal and well adjusted. So did my friends, who were doing the same thing at the same ages. We're job-holding, child-raising respectable adults ourselves now.

My wife and I have a young daughter, and we can't see any reason to control what she does online. Bigger picture: kids don't really need to be protected from the world. They need to be taught right and wrong and how to protect themselves, but it's an enormously bad idea to try to sanitize the world to be more suitable for kids, instead of raising kids that are suitable for the world that actually exists.

Post reply on HN