UK to ban access to porn for all internet users...

[Brk]

UK users will have to "opt in" to be able to access pornographic sites. Of course, "opting in" means the government can more easily track your activity. First porn, then political websites, alternative news sites, etc. All to "protect the children", natch.

Coupled with this anti-free speech push with this bit of more reporting on the U.S. government amassing a database of non-criminals; these control freaks are more brazen than ever. They just announce it and everyone rolls over.

When Hugo Chavez and the U.K. government have the same idea of internet censorship, you know it's all part of the globalist control agenda.

[YARDofSTUF]

I think you can add China to that group too.

Definitely sets a bad standard. Another database hackers could grab your info, censorship, and it does nothing to help parents keep their kids away from porn.

[Sava700]

Net Neutrality comes to mind.... you have to put a stop to controlling what traffic one wishes to access over any internet service provider - period. You open up too many doors once you let one company such as Comcast control torrents, or a country like the UK to control porn... pretty lame.

[Philip]

Something one would expect from China, but I thought the UK was more democratic than that... It's more than lame, it can get scary pretty fast.

[RoundEye]

We gots to protects the childrens.

Yeah right, how about watching them?

[Lefty]

Big brother is already watching us.

[chimdogger]

If you outlaw porn, only outlaws will fap.

[MadDoctor]

How does/do sheep fit into this new rule?

[PsykoPenguin]

if porn is outlawed.. i figure they'll have more rape/murder/pedophilia things going on over there... maybe some incest.. well that last part aint so bad but the rest...
not so sure.. though bestiality... that doesn't sound so bad either, especially for maddoc.

How does/do sheep fit into this new rule?

Bestiality has been outlawed for a long time now... but that doesn't stop them from doing it.

[Shinobi]

Net Neutrality comes to mind.... you have to put a stop to controlling what traffic one wishes to access over any internet service provider - period. You open up too many doors once you let one company such as Comcast control torrents, or a country like the UK to control porn... pretty lame.

Hey Hi

Don't forget-> F.C.C. Is Set to Regulate Net Access
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/busin ... 21fcc.html

Time to fire up those analog modems and get those Telnet / BBS servers back up? Kind of sad but true now, isn't it? Ah.. direct dial up access... with no ISP middle man. (Slight long distance charges may apply ) Call the Speedguide BBS at 555-555-5555 j/k

[loop2kil]

Would be a good time to get rid of any stocks based on companies that deal with hand lotions.

[MadDoctor]

*pats 10 TB of backed up .jpgs' and smiles*

[YARDofSTUF]

USA should also think about these kind of activities, i think the majority of the porn sites are from USA.

You're probably a spam bot, but whatever.

This does nothing to stop children from seeing porn as they don't get it from the porn sites.

[Dan]

USA should also think about these kind of activities, i think the majority of the porn sites are from USA.

he whatever'ed you

[David]

I do not agree with the whole sale ban on porn however, wishing to keep the dirty magazines behind the counter is not tantamount to oppressing alternative perspectives. It would help if the websmut purveyors were not so aggressive (NB. They are not as bad as they used to be).
We have been a cataloged society since the invention of the pen and ledger. Databases which control our credit rating, our driving records, spending habits and other characteristics have been collected and utilized be the private and public sector for a couple of decades. I admit, the methods of today's information collection are peevishly subtle.
I understand, the internet is a precious resource for the freedom of opinion and flow of information, both factual and specious. Evidently, "firebrand" Islamic cleric can still spout their fatwas. The prisonplanets, renses, ronpauls, and their like, should run with little impediment. I do not see a limit on free speech, however it has become obvious that freedom of assembly has been severely compromised.

[Paft]

The interesting problem with this whole setup is that, if pushed too far, we the people can just come up with another unregulated 'internet' that sidesteps all the current ISPs and systems in place. The entire internet was set up to be fundimentally open, and there's nothing to stop us from essentially all becoming servers and clients that connect each other in a huge web. You don't strictly need ISPs to have a network - think about LANs and concepts like that. Just extend the LAN out through things like wireless connections that act as 'hubs', run by the people, and all of a sudden you have an internet that can't be regulated.

[Philip]

Hey Hi

Don't forget-> F.C.C. Is Set to Regulate Net Access
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/21/busin ... 21fcc.html

Time to fire up those analog modems and get those Telnet / BBS servers back up? Kind of sad but true now, isn't it? Ah.. direct dial up access... with no ISP middle man. (Slight long distance charges may apply ) Call the Speedguide BBS at 555-555-5555 j/k

It's 555-555-6969, but Big Brother's already monitoring phone lines and cell phones

It would have to be either long range Wireless, or supporting single moms at your local strip club.

[MadDoctor]

supporting single moms at your local strip club.

Tell me more of this thing Philip.

[Sava700]

You're probably a spam bot, but whatever.

This does nothing to stop children from seeing porn as they don't get it from the porn sites.

Your right.. they don't get it from porn sites. They get it from Torrent sites or those like rapid share and others... so what are you going to do?? Just flat out block all those sites and then what about others that have traces or types of advertising we see now, how do they define what is and isn't porn? Yeah Phillip had it right..damn scary and something needs to be done to stop it.

[Sava700]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12041063

Well at least the ISP's know this is damn near impossible and opens up all kinds of legal fires to start.. good for them!

The proposal to cut off access to pornographic material was floated by Culture Minister Ed Vaizey in an interview with the Sunday Times.

The government is talking to ISPs to set up a meeting at which the proposal will be discussed.

But, say experts, technical challenges mean any large scale filtering system is doomed to failure.

"Unfortunately, It's technically not possible to completely block this stuff," said Trefor Davies, chief technology officer at ISP Timico.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

If we take this step it will not take very long to end up with an internet that's a walled garden of sites the governments is happy for you to see”

End Quote Trefor Davies Timico

He said the sheer volume of pornographic material online and the number of ways that people access it, via the web, file-sharing networks, news groups, discussion boards and the like, made the job impossible.

[Philip]

Tell me more of this thing Philip.

Er, local farm for you, sorry.

[Philip]

There are always way to tunnel traffic over the Internet as well, not sure how they'd block that...

[Shinobi]

There are always way to tunnel traffic over the Internet as well, not sure how they'd block that...

I am sure that the more control that is enforced on users world wide, the more vpn / direct / darknet / and any other acronym you can think of , will pop up over time.

[MadDoctor]

Build a better mouse trap and the mice get smarter.

Been that way since the age of sheep.

[dwighthuth]

They will find those responsible and force them to quit their jobs. Without a job there is now way to provide money to keep the network going thus the network goes down. I wouldn't say that the government's are soley responsible it is the church and the churches doctrine of absolute control that is dictating the control.

[Paft]

They will find those responsible and force them to quit their jobs. Without a job there is now way to provide money to keep the network going thus the network goes down. I wouldn't say that the government's are soley responsible it is the church and the churches doctrine of absolute control that is dictating the control.

...Wow. Ok, look - ask anyone on the board and they will tell you that I'm not exactly Christian/church friendly. But blaming the church and claiming that they want "absolute control" over the rest of us? That's a little over the top, and you know it. What is driving this is a puritanical sense of morality combined with politicians who feel like they have to be doing something in order to be useful and keep their jobs. The easiest targets are ones that you can cry, "Ban it for the children," against - and so they go after them. It's that simple... there's no government conspiracy or religious power grab going on here. Just good old-fashoned greed.

[MadDoctor]

...Wow. Ok, look - ask anyone on the board and they will tell you that I'm not exactly Christian/church friendly. But blaming the church and claiming that they want "absolute control" over the rest of us? That's a little over the top, and you know it. What is driving this is a puritanical sense of morality combined with politicians who feel like they have to be doing something in order to be useful and keep their jobs. The easiest targets are ones that you can cry, "Ban it for the children," against - and so they go after them. It's that simple... there's no government conspiracy or religious power grab going on here. Just good old-fashoned greed.

What Paft said.....

[Dan]

...Wow. Ok, look - ask anyone on the board and they will tell you that I'm not exactly Christian/church friendly. But blaming the church and claiming that they want "absolute control" over the rest of us? That's a little over the top, and you know it. What is driving this is a puritanical sense of morality combined with politicians who feel like they have to be doing something in order to be useful and keep their jobs. The easiest targets are ones that you can cry, "Ban it for the children," against - and so they go after them. It's that simple... there's no government conspiracy or religious power grab going on here. Just good old-fashoned greed.

whoever this dwighthuth is,(spammer*old banned member*current sarcastic keyboard capone member)
is for sure over the top and a future banned member !


4 posts !?!?!?? give me a break !

[David]

...Wow. Ok, look - ask anyone on the board and they will tell you that I'm not exactly Christian/church friendly. But blaming the church and claiming that they want "absolute control" over the rest of us? That's a little over the top, and you know it. What is driving this is a puritanical sense of morality combined with politicians who feel like they have to be doing something in order to be useful and keep their jobs. The easiest targets are ones that you can cry, "Ban it for the children," against - and so they go after them. It's that simple... there's no government conspiracy or religious power grab going on here. Just good old-fashoned greed.

Stephen,
The "Ban it for the children" screed, is aimed at pornography*, not alternative news sources. Since when does commonsense constraints on adult material become a "Puritanical sense of morality"?

I do agree that porn is a classic soft target for politicians and that the UK model is out of line.

-david

*-and violent video game, though any effects have been disputed.

[David]

Build a better mouse trap and the mice get smarter.

Been that way since the age of sheep.

Longer ago than that, my ovinophilic friend. Natural selection creates the smarter mouse.

[Paft]

Stephen,
The "Ban it for the children" screed, is aimed at pornography*, not alternative news sources. Since when does commonsense constraints on adult material become a "Puritanical sense of morality"?

I'm not sure where you gathered that I was pointing their cries at alternative news sources - I was refering to their attack on pornography, and apoligize for any misconception. That being said, I don't mind common sense constraints on adult material. Those are actually already provided in the form of private (and free) internet blocking software combined with attentive parents. Yes, a kid might see porn or porn ads - and that's where the attentive parent steps in to explain that kind of thing to them. There's no reason for any government entity to create a global blacklist or to censor an entire category of material when there are other measures that can be taken for those who are concerned.

Now, am I against having an .xxx domain and moving pornography there? Absolutely not - in fact, I think it would be a wonderful idea and would making blocking this sort of material trivial (blacklist *.xxx). Unfortunately, since governments seem to be against that idea and are pressuring ICANN to nix the idea, we're left with fewer options that are less effective. But no amount of ineffectiveness should ever be cause for a government agency to step in and restrict an entire genre of material pre-emptively to "protect" the children.



Oh, and to answer your question about my 'puritanical sense of morality' comment? I am pointing that at the fact that under the UK model, porn will be blocked for everyone - kids and adults - unless they opt out of the filter. This is in line with what puritans held to be their moral standard: Nobody was allowed to look at or participate in pornography. If I remember my history right, even showing ankles was abhorent.

[Mad_Haggis]

How does/do sheep fit into this new rule?

http://www.selectcheeses.com/Brillo-Pecorino-DiVino.asp

[David]

I'm not sure where you gathered that I was pointing their cries at alternative news sources - I was refering to their attack on pornography, and apoligize for any misconception. That being said, I don't mind common sense constraints on adult material. Those are actually already provided in the form of private (and free) internet blocking software combined with attentive parents. Yes, a kid might see porn or porn ads - and that's where the attentive parent steps in to explain that kind of thing to them. There's no reason for any government entity to create a global blacklist or to censor an entire category of material when there are other measures that can be taken for those who are concerned.

Now, am I against having an .xxx domain and moving pornography there? Absolutely not - in fact, I think it would be a wonderful idea and would making blocking this sort of material trivial (blacklist *.xxx). Unfortunately, since governments seem to be against that idea and are pressuring ICANN to nix the idea, we're left with fewer options that are less effective. But no amount of ineffectiveness should ever be cause for a government agency to step in and restrict an entire genre of material pre-emptively to "protect" the children.



Oh, and to answer your question about my 'puritanical sense of morality' comment? I am pointing that at the fact that under the UK model, porn will be blocked for everyone - kids and adults - unless they opt out of the filter. This is in line with what puritans held to be their moral standard: Nobody was allowed to look at or participate in pornography. If I remember my history right, even showing ankles was abhorent.

Then context was established in a previous post, extending the ability to ban the profane, to what offends a government. Agree, not by your text.

This is not "puritanic" application, it is supposedly a block what is considered modern pornography. Wouldn't this be hilarious to argue the baring of ankles in today's milieu.

[MadDoctor]

[MadDoctor]

http://www.selectcheeses.com/Brillo-Pecorino-DiVino.asp

[MadDoctor]

Longer ago than that, my ovinophilic friend. Natural selection creates the smarter mouse.

True... but is it not possible to train a mouse? Not sheep my friend..... but a mouse.

[David]

True... but is it not possible to train a mouse? Not sheep my friend..... but a mouse.

A mouse is trainable, but not with a snapped neck.

[MadDoctor]

David... you scaring the small children, women, YellowCat and me. I don't mind myself but YC is going to soil the carpet again.

So the mouse trap ends evolution. Got it.

[blebs]

David... you scaring the small children, women, YellowCat and me. I don't mind myself but YC is going to soil the carpet again.

So the mouse trap ends evolution. Got it.

Don't you mean copulation?

[MadDoctor]

Good call. Copulation works. Take note David.....