+ Post New Thread
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 193
General Chat Thread, Cameron is at it again..... in General; Originally Posted by Geoff A In my case with GiffGaff you have to go into the web account management interface ...
  1. #76

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,620
    Thank Post
    845
    Thanked 883 Times in 731 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    A In my case with GiffGaff you have to go into the web account management interface and put in your passport number for checking.
    That's interesting but throws up three immediate questions

    1) The ISP's systems are linked into the central passport office database? (doesn't sound like a good idea, but a-ho)
    2) Everybody wanting an (unfiltered?) internet connection needs a passport
    3) Little Johnny didn't pinch Daddy's passport form the draw and disabled the filtering when he wasn't looking...

    I bet they wish they hadn't scrapped the National ID card now...

  2. #77

    Dos_Box's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Preston, Lancashire
    Posts
    9,843
    Thank Post
    583
    Thanked 2,162 Times in 987 Posts
    Blog Entries
    23
    Rep Power
    627
    And you just know you will have to opt-out anyway because of all of the false-positive websites that get blocked you use!
    Last edited by Dos_Box; 22nd July 2013 at 01:21 PM.

  3. #78

    Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Fylde, Lancs, UK.
    Posts
    11,803
    Thank Post
    110
    Thanked 583 Times in 504 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    I bet they wish they hadn't scrapped the National ID card now...
    That's next weeks policy announcement.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dos_Box View Post
    And you just know you will have to opt-out anyway because of all of the false-positive websites that get blocked you use!
    I'll be interested to see if they block facebook, because surely some of the stuff on there falls well within their definitions.

  4. #79
    mthomas08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,608
    Thank Post
    132
    Thanked 165 Times in 146 Posts
    Rep Power
    62
    Quote Originally Posted by LosOjos View Post
    No, that's not so bad really but do you honestly believe it'll stop there? As usual, this is an example of a government using an emotionally charged subject (child protection) to put in infrastructure that will later be used for all sorts of oppressive behaviour. A forum post slating the government? Can't have that! Blocked. A footballer doesn't like this website's photos of him and has lots of cash to throw at the problem? Blocked! A website detailing some embarrassing government blunders gained via a whistle blower? Blocked!

    We have to fight crap like this otherwise little by little we're going to lose all freedom we have. Look at North Korea: as extreme an example as they are of a controlling paranoid government, do you not think that deep down, all governments would love to be able to control the people to the extent they do? I know this all sounds so far fetched but I'm getting sick of being fed crap now and being expected to enjoy it because "it's for the kids" or to "catch the terrorists." Our fears are being plundered and as a nation we're letting it happen.

    The saddest part of it all is that most people don't even notice or care. They're winning.
    I feel you are over thinking it, I cant see the government banning forums for those who want to openly criticise them. That's like stopping protesting.

    That reminds me of this hate preacher who claimed his human rights were being abused and it took far too long to get him thrown out of the country. All this "technicality" garbage excuses people are using.

    The government are trying to ban illegal stuff e.g. child porn and forcing ISPs to give an opt in/out etc for normal porn to protect families and children. I don't see how that's comparing to basic forum discussions etc.

  5. #80

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,033
    Thank Post
    591
    Thanked 1,945 Times in 1,345 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    I'll be interested to see if they block facebook, because surely some of the stuff on there falls well within their definitions.
    People have used Facebook has been used to groom children, therefore Facebook is evil and should be banned to protect children.

    What? You mean I should tell my kids NOT TO TALK TO PEOPLE THEY DON'T KNOW? Don't be silly, that involves doing things.

  6. #81

    Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Fylde, Lancs, UK.
    Posts
    11,803
    Thank Post
    110
    Thanked 583 Times in 504 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by X-13 View Post
    People have used Facebook has been used to groom children, therefore Facebook is evil and should be banned to protect children.

    What? You mean I should tell my kids NOT TO TALK TO PEOPLE THEY DON'T KNOW? Don't be silly, that involves doing things.
    Well that and I'm wondering how much lobbying facebook is willing to throw around to stay off the 'bad' list.

  7. #82

    JJonas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Walsham, Norfolk
    Posts
    3,090
    Thank Post
    382
    Thanked 429 Times in 318 Posts
    Rep Power
    383
    So to opt-in I need to buy a 75 passport? ker-ching

    also I wonder how long before opting-in shows up on a CRB check?

  8. #83

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,033
    Thank Post
    591
    Thanked 1,945 Times in 1,345 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    813
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    Well that and I'm wondering how much lobbying facebook is willing to throw around to stay off the 'bad' list.
    That depends on who they sell user data to.

    If they send data about film/music "likes" to MPAA/RIAA then they'll have a LOT to spend.

    MPAA/RIAA already got the government to misuse [whatever the filter is called] to block COMPLETELY LEGAL* torrent sites. [Ironically, the wiki page for "internet filter" is filtered.]


    *Completely legal as they don't host ANY infringing material. PirateBay, et al are google for torrents.

  9. #84

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    4,934
    Thank Post
    861
    Thanked 1,438 Times in 988 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    616
    Quote Originally Posted by mthomas08 View Post
    The government are trying to ban illegal stuff e.g. child porn and forcing ISPs to give an opt in/out etc for normal porn to protect families and children. I don't see how that's comparing to basic forum discussions etc.
    Because there will be false positives. Because someone, somewhere, very soon, will have an agenda to push and will use these rules to get their way. With the level of understanding that the government has shown regarding the technical underpinnings of the internet, I expect you could get any site you didn't like banned by going to an article through an anonymiser, posting a dodgy link/image, then reporting the site and watching it get taken down "to be on the safe side".

    Example: all the legitimate parody/remix/whatever videos that get taken down on YouTube through DMCA complaints, despite the fact they clearly meet the legal definition of "fair use" under law. The problem there, and the problem we will have here, is that with the resources involved the fight is as one sided as Mike Tyson vs Stephen Hawking. They get you taken down, no matter how erroneously, and you are effectively shut out from fighting your corner by virtue of the incredible financial barrier.

  10. Thanks to sonofsanta from:

    LosOjos (22nd July 2013)

  11. #85

    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,254
    Thank Post
    111
    Thanked 242 Times in 193 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    74
    No one from ISPA was available to day to talk to Radio 4. Hmm. Says to me that they might not really have got a robust argument for the default on policy.

    The question I look forward to having answered (in about 5-15 years time): is this better than nothing. I have doubts.
    Last edited by psydii; 22nd July 2013 at 01:33 PM. Reason: sonofsanta said it better.

  12. #86

    tmcd35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    5,620
    Thank Post
    845
    Thanked 883 Times in 731 Posts
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by Geoff View Post
    Well that and I'm wondering how much lobbying facebook is willing to throw around to stay off the 'bad' list.
    Ahh, when viewed along side this story - BBC News - Election countdown: 94 weeks to go - it all makes sense now. You cynical old dog, you!

    This isn't going to happen at all, he just want donations for his election campaign from BT and Virgin Media to make it all go away

  13. #87

    Gatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    6,658
    Thank Post
    858
    Thanked 646 Times in 429 Posts
    Rep Power
    498
    Hmm - only glanced through the speech and not too impressed on how he plans to do this:

    Also, is it just me or is it coming across as if he is blaming the ISPs and Search providers for the amount of child related imagery?

    As others have hinted - whats next? what happens to those who "opt-out" eihter so they can look at pr0n or because of false positives?

    He has also, rather foolishly, stated that typing in words such as "child" and "sex" will provide a list of options for what you meant.. Nice one Dave taht's bound to work, cos they wont think of putting in lots of "safe" meta tags ont heir nasty images so they appear..

    I doubt this will be very effective, because the people that are doing this, arent making their images searchable anyway - ok the odd amateur may do, but the big fish so to speak will not be putting content anywhere public or searchable.. No! They will all be behind firewalls and special secure VPNs and secretive mailing lists or whatever

    So here we have another rushed through policy that is only going to affect the innocent users of the internet and annoy them even more...

    Finally - what will be the next thing to be censored by No 10 - free speech?? - we are getting closer and closer to "1984" every day

  14. Thanks to Gatt from:

    LosOjos (22nd July 2013)

  15. #88

    Geoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Fylde, Lancs, UK.
    Posts
    11,803
    Thank Post
    110
    Thanked 583 Times in 504 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    224
    Quote Originally Posted by sonofsanta View Post
    Because there will be false positives. Because someone, somewhere, very soon, will have an agenda to push and will use these rules to get their way. With the level of understanding that the government has shown regarding the technical underpinnings of the internet, I expect you could get any site you didn't like banned by going to an article through an anonymiser, posting a dodgy link/image, then reporting the site and watching it get taken down "to be on the safe side".
    This has already happened before. The ISPs self regulation in this area under the guise of the IWF url filtering list has already gone down this road.

    Scorpions tale leaves IWF exposed ? The Register
    IWF block causing problems for Fileserve

  16. #89

    LosOjos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    West Midlands
    Posts
    5,447
    Thank Post
    1,438
    Thanked 1,168 Times in 797 Posts
    Rep Power
    707
    Quote Originally Posted by mthomas08 View Post
    I feel you are over thinking it, I cant see the government banning forums for those who want to openly criticise them. That's like stopping protesting.

    That reminds me of this hate preacher who claimed his human rights were being abused and it took far too long to get him thrown out of the country. All this "technicality" garbage excuses people are using.

    The government are trying to ban illegal stuff e.g. child porn and forcing ISPs to give an opt in/out etc for normal porn to protect families and children. I don't see how that's comparing to basic forum discussions etc.
    I feel you put too much faith in a government that does not deserve it (and no, this isn't a Tory bash - I don't trust any of them!)

    Child porn is already "banned" by virtue of the fact it's illegal. Blocking pornography is not going to do anything except give the government the power to filter as they see fit - which is exactly what they really want I suspect.

  17. #90
    flyinghaggis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    994
    Thank Post
    99
    Thanked 70 Times in 57 Posts
    Rep Power
    114
    Quote Originally Posted by tmcd35 View Post
    Oh-hum, Getting ISP's to install a central filter that I can opt out off via a simple web interface isn't such a bad, end of the world as we know it, idea. How ISP's go about confirming that it's an adult that turned the filtering off is perhaps more interesting.
    To me the key question is exactly who decides on the "naughty list" of websites to be censored. It worries me that our PrimeMinister has started off with the straw man argument of approaching from the Daily Mail 'think of the the children...' side of the debate rather than treating people like they have a brain.

    I'd have taken him more seriously if he'd said 'there's unsuitable content for minors on the web; how can we stop them accessing it?". As it stands I suspect this has far more to do with individuals/groups lobbying him than protecting children.

    Still, at least now the the Daily Mail can claim the moral high ground in it's stand for family values....

    Cameron is at it again.....-untitled.png

    Last edited by flyinghaggis; 22nd July 2013 at 01:45 PM.

  18. Thanks to flyinghaggis from:

    sonofsanta (22nd July 2013)

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Gloria is at it again
    By ayoward in forum Yorkshire & Humberside Grid for Learning (YHGfL)
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 22nd November 2012, 11:14 AM
  2. [Pics] The Daily Mail is at it again...
    By Arthur in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 27th January 2012, 03:16 PM
  3. America is at it again
    By glennda in forum General Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 21st April 2011, 03:54 PM
  4. [Website] top Gear at it again - James May Crash!
    By rad in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 13th October 2009, 02:57 PM
  5. TES Forums: They're at it again!!
    By Dos_Box in forum General Chat
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 10th April 2008, 12:23 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •