My son for example is 6 - and very inquisitive - for that reason he is already restricted when he goes online.
But given how widespread advertising is for ISPs (Billboards, Magazines, Radio, TV, etc, etc) my son knows a lot about ISPs (even if he doesn't know the term itself)
He doesn't yet know about a VPN but he knows about the internet and wireless and windows, etc purely by being around us and through his own initiative he has learnt about stuff we haven't told him - We've found him on sites like Argos and Smyths and with toys added to the shopping basket!
Children soak in information like a sponge - hell he can find his way round Windows 8 better than I can!
The Little Johnny scenario is not that far from the truth..
it comes back to Education - the more we educate our children about the dangers the more they will be aware of them.
Children choke on food - we don't ban them - we educate the child on how to eat it safely
Children get knocked down - we don't ban cars or buses - we educate them on how to cross safely at crossings.
Children can drown in a paddling pool - do we ban them? no we don't - again we EDUCATE the child and we supervise the child whilst they are playing.
Children can get kidnapped - bugger all we can do about banning other people - we EDUCATE them on not talking to strangers, on what do do/say if someone tries to take them (We say to scream very loudly, make a lot of noise and if possible find a policeman)
Ergo, we should be doing the same with Pr0n - we should be deciding whether to have a filter on or not, we should be educating our children on the dangers of what they see online, on how to be safe - we should be watching what they are up to..
Complacency is a very dangerous thing...
CAM (23rd July 2013)
Is there anywhere else in Europe that has a similar policy because most of the countries I know of who pro-actively censor the internet aren't places I'd like to live!
Last edited by flyinghaggis; 23rd July 2013 at 01:49 PM.
Kids today are no less smart than we were. VPN tor shell etc are point and click these days. Some of the stuff they do to bypass our filters is jaw dropping (pdfs calling embedded dlls that contain wrapped tor entry points and a portable browser launched using the 'bypass applocker' switch - for example.) This stuff comes from the darker side of the internet, the places that most kids don't go at the moment. It would be extraordinarily naive of ministers, civil servants and ISPs to believe that a prohibition will do anything other than increase the number of people learning how to break it.
There is sufficient nasty/objectionable stuff out there not covered by porn filters that even if they get this idea through, the internet will still not be a safe place to leave a child unsupervised.
They must launch a public information campaign on sky virgin and the beeb about the risks (after the watershed and aimed at the parents) coupled with a 'be nice, be tolerant, and don't take any pleasure in watching people be nasty to each other' message aimed at the kids. In this context the 'porn' filter could be *part* of the solution.
The solution isn't hard. It needs to be holistic.
Last edited by psydii; 23rd July 2013 at 02:18 PM.
IrritableTech (23rd July 2013)
The ISP will then have a log of who you are and that you want access to porn (well, that's how the government will look at it). The government may not do anything with that data right now, but in the future? Government has form for doing stuff like that.How does hitting a no button intrude on your liberties?
Sorry, but we can't negatively damage the rights of society because some people are crap parents. If there are crap parents, they need to be helped instead. If you have crap drivers, you don't ban every driver from the road - you target the bad ones.and for those poor children who have parents that do not give a sh*t they will be expossed to images that might send them on a path that is rather dark and twisted.
Why not educate your sister to do things herself? She has a responsibility to do so, rather than expecting the government to do it for her.I am trained in IT and will be choosing to disable the filtering and use my own filtering but my sister who is not trained in IT will be very grateful to have some filtering for her children even if it is only partial, as partial is much better than nothing.
I actually know a High Court Judge. He did not know Hardcore Pornography when he saw it. He had to take expert advice (from his grown up children)...
They were pretty liberal (and this was over 10 years ago, they'd not grown up with the internet and were only just getting broadband).
I am a parent.
If they passed a law that said: "all parents must ensure they have considered internet filtering from their ISP" and that all ISPs were required to ship routers that did transparent filtering as an option, I would not object, in fact I would be for this; for a start, it would save me time rolling my own!
But control needs to be with the parent, and so does the decision, and the record of that decision. The state has no right to know, because once they know and have control of a national level filtering service, we are not a free people.
Last edited by psydii; 23rd July 2013 at 02:13 PM.
It doesn't even mention the false sense of security or educating parents aspect of it all.
I thought the filters for mobile networks was aimed more at trying to stop people running up huge bills, rather than keep naughty content at bay?
Do we know what form the blocking system is going to take anyway? The current DNS blocking they're doing (i'd assume with Cleanfeed but I don't know) relies on you using DNS servers provided by your ISP. If you set your PCs DNS to Google DNS (18.104.22.168/22.214.171.124) you can get around it that way and still get access to blocked sites like The Pirate Bay and KAT with no problems. If this is how they're planning on blocking porn too, I can't see it being very long before kids start figuring things like this out.
This needs to be made opt-in, otherwise non-techy parents will just get complacent about things like this. To those of you saying they won't opt-in, surely they have had to fill out a form or talk to someone to sign up for their broadband service in the first place? Why can't that person say "Do you want a porn filter?"
MUCH more focus needs to be placed on education as a means of prevention rather than looking for technological solutions. The problem is, that would mean openly discussing pornography with people. Most people don't really want to talk about that sort of thing, especially not with their children, and would rather just pretend it doesn't exist. Also discussing porn like this means accepting the damage it's done, which is something people will also find hard to deal with as they have probably enjoyed porn themselves in the past. It's much easier to pretend that the government has it all covered and not think about it. Self deception is something that we as a species are extremely good at.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)