+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 193
General Chat Thread, Cameron is at it again..... in General; http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076 So after cutting their funding, the moron announces this !! You could not make it up. Thats right Dave, ...
  1. #1

    mattx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    9,240
    Thank Post
    1,058
    Thanked 1,068 Times in 625 Posts
    Rep Power
    740

    Cameron is at it again.....

    http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23401076

    So after cutting their funding, the moron announces this !!
    You could not make it up.
    Thats right Dave, all pedos use google to search for their stuff. You idiot.
    Last edited by Dos_Box; 23rd July 2013 at 10:10 AM.

  2. #2
    Peter_W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    20
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
    Rep Power
    3
    Once again... The Government deciding on something that they don't understand.

    There are tones of proxies still working for 'a questionable torrent website' that are not blocked by my ISP.

    If you are trying to censor the Internet it will not work.

  3. #3

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,791
    Thank Post
    517
    Thanked 2,468 Times in 1,912 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    835
    Yay, a mandated false sense of security for parents. Just what they need.

    Not to mention the whole 'slippery slope' of it all.

    If the government really wanted to clean up the web in this country, they would stop leaving the child porn stuff to a charity funded mainly by donations. They would stop messing around with the agencies that exist to deal with it (CEOP, for example).

    Instead, they'd create a cyber-crime police agency. Fund it properly and put all cyber crime under their remit. Rather than making it a subdivision of some other agency where it gets sidelined.

    A tool like Tor would blow Cameron's mind...

  4. #4

    plexer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Norfolk
    Posts
    13,657
    Thank Post
    656
    Thanked 1,624 Times in 1,453 Posts
    Rep Power
    422
    It's hard enough to stop adult porn nevermind nasty stuff.

    Cameron just doesn't get it does he. He thinks all he has to say is "right Mr Google it would be awfully nice if you blocked all this stuff" what an idiot.

    Ben

  5. #5
    Peter_W's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    London
    Posts
    20
    Thank Post
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
    Rep Power
    3
    @plexer It's like these movie companies dmca'ing google but not going after the source.

  6. #6

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    17,791
    Thank Post
    517
    Thanked 2,468 Times in 1,912 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    835
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter_W View Post
    @plexer It's like these movie companies dmca'ing google but not going after the source.
    Indeed. And the side effect of that is there are loads of false-hits. The VLC site was in a DMCA takedown notice a few weeks ago, for example.

    So, with a system like the one Cameron is talking about, who is maintaining the lists, who gets to say what goes on which list etc...?

  7. #7

    Miscbrah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    906
    Thank Post
    248
    Thanked 255 Times in 154 Posts
    Rep Power
    115
    Enjoy it while it lasts! This sort of dissention will get EduGeek blocked as a terrorist website. I for one welcome our new internet overlords.*

    *Sarcasm, posted with Tor via proxy.

  8. #8

    sonofsanta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Lincolnshire, UK
    Posts
    4,988
    Thank Post
    864
    Thanked 1,451 Times in 998 Posts
    Blog Entries
    47
    Rep Power
    618
    This from the government who have cut funding to CEOP.

    It took less than ten years for the CleanFeed system - set up with the express purpose of blocking confirmed images of child abuse - to be shoehorned into blocking torrent sites. I have zero faith that this would ever be kept to its intended purpose.

    It is the most ostrich-inspired head burying move you could make. The slippery slope, the false sense of security, driving the stuff you're trying to stop further underground so it's even harder to actually stop, the sheer technical impossibility of it - why do people still not understand the distributed anti-establishment nature of the internet? It's like they believe everything is checked by some authority before it's posted!

    The problem is that on the surface it sounds reasonable, because it is pandering to the kneejerk parenting reaction of "protect the children!" and arguing against that instantly makes you look like the bad guy, despite the fact that what you are arguing for is protecting the civil liberties those children will inherit.

  9. 5 Thanks to sonofsanta:

    bmdixon (22nd July 2013), LosOjos (22nd July 2013), mattx (22nd July 2013), speckytecky (22nd July 2013), witch (26th July 2013)

  10. #9

    JJonas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Walsham, Norfolk
    Posts
    3,112
    Thank Post
    387
    Thanked 436 Times in 324 Posts
    Rep Power
    384
    I have a number of problems with this...

    False sense of parental security, parents should probably be more concerned about what their kids are doing on things like Kik and WhatsApp

    I dont trust the government to look after the lists

    Its the slippery slope of censorship, What will be the next thing added to the list?

    I wouldnt think the dodgy stuff is stored en-masse on the web, its going to be places like P2P, Tor etc which probably wont be covered

    If I opt in am I going to be labeled a pervert? are we going to reach a point where an employer says you have opted in to recieve adult material therefore you cant work in a school or we a going to have a really good look at you Internet usage.

  11. 4 Thanks to JJonas:

    bmdixon (22nd July 2013), LosOjos (22nd July 2013), mattx (22nd July 2013), speckytecky (22nd July 2013)

  12. #10

    Ephelyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Cheshire, England
    Posts
    1,692
    Thank Post
    294
    Thanked 323 Times in 197 Posts
    Rep Power
    142
    "A secure database of banned child porn images gathered by police across the country will be used to trace illegal content and the paedophiles viewing it."

    I'm almost not sure what to make of this part. Does it mean they actually store these images centrally? Is it really necessary to store the exact images you are banning just so you can say "ah yes, that IS a naughty one!" :P

    I don't mean not to be taking it seriously, I'm just really not sure what they mean by this database business. Also, is the government sufficiently above the law that they can get around the legislation that says it's not permissible to store or access such imagery?

  13. #11
    CAM
    CAM is offline

    CAM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Burgh Heath, Surrey
    Posts
    4,163
    Thank Post
    833
    Thanked 364 Times in 285 Posts
    Blog Entries
    60
    Rep Power
    282
    I guess they could store a hash or some other markers in the image so they aren't actually hosting the picture themselves, just a key to recognise it.

  14. #12

    Ephelyon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Cheshire, England
    Posts
    1,692
    Thank Post
    294
    Thanked 323 Times in 197 Posts
    Rep Power
    142
    Sounds much more plausible!

  15. #13

    JJonas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Walsham, Norfolk
    Posts
    3,112
    Thank Post
    387
    Thanked 436 Times in 324 Posts
    Rep Power
    384
    Quote Originally Posted by Ephelyon View Post
    "A secure database of banned child porn images gathered by police across the country will be used to trace illegal content and the paedophiles viewing it."
    Is it just me or can anyone else see certain elements of the Internet seeding lots of rogue URL redirectors?

  16. #14

    X-13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    /dev/null
    Posts
    9,141
    Thank Post
    596
    Thanked 1,960 Times in 1,358 Posts
    Blog Entries
    19
    Rep Power
    818
    Quote Originally Posted by Ephelyon View Post
    Also, is the government sufficiently above the law that they can get around the legislation that says it's not permissible to store or access such imagery?
    In theory, no. The law is the law and nobody is above it.

    In practice, however...

    Quote Originally Posted by JJonas View Post
    Is it just me or can anyone else see certain elements of the Internet seeding lots of rogue URL redirectors?
    I actually had something like that a little while ago... I ended up on the Virgin Media "Das ist verboten" page. [Blocked by IWF...]

  17. #15


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,110
    Thank Post
    271
    Thanked 829 Times in 622 Posts
    Rep Power
    330
    "In his speech, Mr Cameron will say that possession of online pornography depicting rape will be made illegal."
    What does this "Posession of On-line Pornography" mean? Are my copies of Straw Dogs, Deliverance, Frenzy, Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia are likely to land me in Jail?

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... 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
  •