New UK "Online safety bill" means you will have to ask your ISP if you want to access Porn

"Internet service providers (ISPs) would be required to prevent customers accessing pornographic images unless those customers actively notify the ISPs that they want to access the material if draft new UK legislation being proposed receives backing."

From: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/05/online_safety_bill_isp_uk_gov/

The fact that all the systems implemented so far for this have blocked content that is not porn, means that if you want full internet access, you will have to make an embarrassing call to your ISP.

Yay....

This and the monitoring proposals. Anyone noticing a trend? Also under the new monitoring proposals wouldn't people know you have opted for the porn option without a warrant?

Well like the main guy behind SOPA said "we are afraid of the internet because we can't control it"... and fear makes people do crazy things, like waving basic human rights.
But do not worry bretheren of UK, if the Great Firewall of China got busted so will yours.

Meanwhile I suggest you look into project Tor.

That will never work. Sure, they'll score some points with the moral watchdogs and perhaps send a few not very tech-savvy everybodies back to the nuderags-shelf, but the vast majority will find new ways. Or even better, so many will make that embarassing phonecall that it simply stops being embarassing, and the whole guilt-complex surrounding porn is washed away.

Hell, I'm not even a porn-consumer, and I'd make that call out of solidarity. Honestly, my prediction is that it'll just be the digitalized equivolent of dumping people's porn stashes on their doorsteps, only to find that almost all households got one. And really, is it anyone's business if I more or less tick the mature-filter checkbox on or off? Except dry old puritans, who would even care?

And again, if China, who can back up their law with policemen beating firewall-hoppers with rubber-batons if needed, can't keep everyone in the fold, how on earth do they expect an open society to do that?

I swear I've been hearing about this law for something like the last 2 years, yet I still haven't noticed a single difference in the filtering of the Internet (unless it was only for smartphones or something). Anyways, if they are actually doing anything this time around, combined with the whole Internet-tracking thing, then fuck the coalition. Seriously, during New Labour, it was the Conservatives who were criticising Labour forits use of surveillance, the hyprocrites.

Th3Ch33s3Cak3:
The reasons for the passing of this bill seem just; to protect people from the unsavoury discricts of the internet. Children could easily stumble upon dirty websites, which could lead to everything from slight disgust to emotional scarring. However, as the OP said, it is also blocking savoury websites, leading to some temporary acess issues.

In my opinion, it would have just been easier if people were more careful on the internet. As for minors, parents could just monitor their child's activity.

The problem is the onus should not be on the government or ISP's to protect children from things that are too old for them on the Internet. The onus should be on parents using the tools they already have, parental controls, etc. They are not that complicated to use any-more and laziness is not an excuse.

The government and ISP should be on the line to offer help and assistance on setting this up, but that it. Governments are not expected to get involved in other parental jobs like enforcing curfews, etc. Why should they in this case just because parents are too lazy to get to grips with the technology already available.

At most this should be an opt-in scheme where parents who want the filtering ask for it rather than people want porn / unfettered internet access. The internet by standard as been delivered unfettered as standard up until now, those wanting a different service should be the ones who need to do the work of requesting it.

Muspelheim:

Hell, I'm not even a porn-consumer, and I'd make that call out of solidarity. Honestly, my prediction is that it'll just be the digitalized equivolent of dumping people's porn stashes on their doorsteps, only to find that almost all households got one.

I would advise doing so even if you are not a porn fan, as may just want unfettered access instead of being on filters that are notorious for blocking content not in scope of the filtering. Just read the stories from the mobile networks where this has been implemented.

Xenowolf:
I swear I've been hearing about this law for something like the last 2 years, yet I still haven't noticed a single difference in the filtering of the Internet (unless it was only for smartphones or something). Anyways, if they are actually doing anything this time around, combined with the whole Internet-tracking thing, then fuck the coalition. Seriously, during New Labour, it was the Conservatives who were criticising Labour forits use of surveillance, the hyprocrites.

You are right it has been talked about for a while, a bill being introduced is brings this to new level.

Xenowolf:
I swear I've been hearing about this law for something like the last 2 years, yet I still haven't noticed a single difference in the filtering of the Internet (unless it was only for smartphones or something). Anyways, if they are actually doing anything this time around, combined with the whole Internet-tracking thing, then fuck the coalition. Seriously, during New Labour, it was the Conservatives who were criticising Labour forits use of surveillance, the hyprocrites.

I still believe that everyone who voted for the Conservatives was either a rich prick or a misinformed moron, angry at Gordon Brown because they thought he single handedly destroyed the economy.

This has been talked about a lot - in fact, I'm sure it was said to have been implemented a few months back, and nothing's changed.

But yes, they're taking the piss and they're hiding behind The Children to do so.

Make parents aware of internet filters. And if the parents don't care and are fine with 12-year-olds getting at porn (and let's face it, most 12-year-olds have gotten at porn, even pre-internet 12-year-olds must have seen some) then that's that.

Something like this seems to be with good intent and a step in the right direction. But, like SOPA, doesn't it come off as a bit vague? And hold the potential for bad side effects? What about fashion-style sites and other clothing departments? These things are usually built to be sexually-arousing. And what about the case of, say, if a husband were keeping such pictures of his wife on a tightly-locked, private account, or something to that effect. Would they be blocked from him?

I, myself, completely detest the very idea of pornography. But, when you're writing a bill, you've got to be very careful with what it is you are actually speaking in exact words. SOPA is solid proof of this. (If only a bit of a towering comparison.)

I predict downloads of Tor in the UK are about to skyrocket. Governments don't seem to realise all their Big Brother schemes don't work on the Internet- the other side is always one step ahead.

This is basically SOPA, PIPA, ACTA, etc coming through the back door.

does anyone know if this will effect yaoi

Xenowolf:
I swear I've been hearing about this law for something like the last 2 years, yet I still haven't noticed a single difference in the filtering of the Internet (unless it was only for smartphones or something). Anyways, if they are actually doing anything this time around, combined with the whole Internet-tracking thing, then fuck the coalition. Seriously, during New Labour, it was the Conservatives who were criticising Labour forits use of surveillance, the hyprocrites.

Its the joys of modern politics

Group A does something and group B is against it in every single way

Group B then comes in to power and does something that is either exactly the same, or remarkably similar to a fault and then group A is against it in every single way

Continue until you get so bored of these arseholes that you don't watch the news unless you want to kick the shit out of something just because its there.

Oh and then you have group C who, if in a coalition will roll over and screw over the people who voted for them.

Yeah...I really despise the lib dems.

lolreaper:
does anyone know if this will effect yaoi

Only if it's pornographic.

Th3Ch33s3Cak3:
Children could easily stumble upon dirty websites, which could lead to everything from slight disgust to emotional scarring.

And they can also take knives from their parents' kitchens and mug people.

It's not up to the government to educate children full time. It seems like parents don't want to be responsible anymore.

ok, thanks

edit: damn forgot to quote

I don't want to have to buy porno mags :( you have to find a place to stash them AND you actually have to pay for them! i like my porn to be free :P

I sense an opportunity for some fun if this does come to be. You see, you keep calling your ISP until you get to speak with someone you think will be flustered by your request, then you drop the question in the bluntest manner you can come up with.

Worst comes to worst you end up on the sex offenders list.

I can sort of see the reasoning on this one, since it hardly censors the net (yet), just basically acts as a firewall to prevent those underage having a wank. However, I still disagree with it. The internet could do with being recognised as a sovereign, neutral state. Like Switzerland. Only with more porn.

And now I want to see the US try to invade the internet.

Th3Ch33s3Cak3:
The reasons for the passing of this bill seem just; to protect people from the unsavoury discricts of the internet. Children could easily stumble upon dirty websites, which could lead to everything from slight disgust to emotional scarring. However, as the OP said, it is also blocking savoury websites, leading to some temporary access issues.

In my opinion, it would have just been easier if people were more careful on the internet. As for minors, parents could just monitor their child's activity.

I like how you imply the 'stumbling' is accidental.

This seems like a smoke-screen to me. I'm sure that there is a minority of politcians and "leaders of industry" that would like to stop pornography but most of them are more depraved than anyone we would meet in day to day life. It seems more likely that this is an attempt to get a draconian system put into place on the back of something they hope the general public will be too embarassed to get outraged about, when it's all set up then it's a lot easier to ammend the UELA to include sites that encourage piracy and copyright infringement. The mistake they are making is underestimating the power of porn.

 

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked