Ephelyon Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Cameron's answer would seem to be "block British"...
tmcd35 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Will Google pull out of the UK? Does Cameron really think that child abuse images are easily found with a google search? If it was that easy I'm sure Google would have already fixed it but the answer is that no it's not. Ben I thought something similar earlier. So google.co.uk is defaulted to uber strict safe search turned on. Fair enough, what happens when I go to google.com? Auto-redirect to google.co.uk based on originating IP? Fine, what if I use a VPN or transparent proxy? I'm guessing ISP's will be asked to block these then? I tell you it's like being at school
mthomas08 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 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. To be a little bit fair I am not surprised by this, nor am I massively for or against. Problem is there are parents who simply don't care, I have met many of them. They know the dangers of the internet but their attitude is "If my kids access it I don't really care" and I wish I was joking on that quote as well...... There are parents like my older sister who has it setup on all internet equipment in her house and monitors what her kids are doing including limiting Facebook access and knowing their passwords. Any sign of abuse then they lose it, prime example would be my nephew decided to use Youtube to access naked women and he lost access to that. Although on a funny note he did say "So what, means im straight", for a 13 year old it made me laugh. If parents took more responsibility then perhaps we wouldn't be in this situation to begin with? Only my view though.
pcstru Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 On the upside, presumably that bastion of right wing journalism (ha!) "The Sun" will be blocked as it contains ... pornographic content! Expect "Barmy Swivel Eyed Loons Ban British Boobies" or similar headlines.
mthomas08 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 On the upside, presumably that bastion of right wing journalism (ha!) "The Sun" will be blocked as it contains ... pornographic content! Expect "Barmy Swivel Eyed Loons Ban British Boobies" or similar headlines. Oh some people will use the sad excuse that its "ART"!!!!!
Geoff Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Will Google pull out of the UK? Does Cameron really think that child abuse images are easily found with a google search? If it was that easy I'm sure Google would have already fixed it but the answer is that no it's not. Ben Given this and the tax issues it would not surprise me if Google (and others) decide it's not worth the time and effort. They can still participate in the UK market without a UK office of course. To my mind it's not useful to be driving technology companies away when we still have such big economic issues.
CAM Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 You know, I see why the gay marriage bill was delayed and passed when it was. Plenty of liberty-based smoke and mirrors to try sneak a Police State under our noses. "Look at us, we are British and all liberal and give our people choice! Now don't visit that website and stop looking at Wikileaks, we will be banning all diplomatic cables on news websites next week anyway. After our friends at GCHQ have finished monitoring everything coming in and out of the country of course."
LosOjos Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Between this and the US's SOPA, we're fast heading for an Internet where the only type of website that will be allowed to exist (or at least be "risk-free" enough for anyone to bother) will be corporate websites. They're trying to turn the Internet in to a digital business card database. Of course, it'll never happen - there are already hacker groups planning to build an alternative, free Internet system but it certainly seems to be what various governments are aiming for. Remember people, this is not a democracy. You can vote when they tell you to vote. You can vote on what they tell you to vote on. You will swallow your medicine like a good citizen. They will do what they want and you won't argue. Now close your eyes and get back to work.
X-13 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Now close your eyes and get back to work. XKCD #303 [Has XKCD transcended the need to be linked/posted? Is a simple comic number sufficient for the joke?]
Popular Post Geoff Posted July 22, 2013 Popular Post Posted July 22, 2013 There is a bright side to all this. Owning 50 Shades of Grey will incur a 3 year prison sentence. 5
CAM Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 http://i.imgur.com/xGqSJ.jpg Can't see the meme. Ohhh let me guess, uhhh aliens? 1
X-13 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Can't see the meme. Ohhh let me guess, uhhh aliens? What do Mexicans have to do with it? [Mexicans picked purely for the stereotypical links to illegal immigration.]
psydii Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 (edited) So in a straw poll of Sys Admins who maintain/manage internet filtering in an environment where child protection is a key tenet of operations, to this legislation they say: NO. The thing that bothers me that hasn't really been pushed by those who've railed before me is two fold: 1) The press were initially conflating images of non-consensual physical/sexual abuse and the set of all images that might be catagorised as pornography and 2) Filtering stuff people want drives those people to look up ways to bypass these filters i.e. towards the very dark corners of the internet that enable and are inhabited by the child abusers etc.. a complete reversal of their intentions... Though of course most people on the planet who use annonymisers and firewall bypass tools are in fact people trying to get free speech in oppressive environments. Another thought: The teach them to swim analogy, great, fair point. Where is the counter argument from proponents of this legislation? Final question: I wonder how long before your home/mobile internet pornography opt-out status becomes available to prospective employers? Edited July 22, 2013 by psydii adjusted my observation about the conflation, DC's speech makes it clear they are two separate issues. H
CAM Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 What do Mexicans have to do with it? [Mexicans picked purely for the stereotypical links to illegal immigration.] I don't know. Ironically imgur is filtered that's why I can't see it.
X-13 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 I don't know. Ironically imgur is filtered that's why I can't see it. Same here.
psydii Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 From the horse's mouth. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-internet-and-pornography-prime-minister-calls-for-action
X-13 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 From the horse's mouth. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/the-internet-and-pornography-prime-minister-calls-for-action [censored] this guy. How do I go about making my own country? I want to declare war.
Dos_Box Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 I see someone has started an e-petition about this: Do Not Force ISP Filtering of Pornography and Other Content - e-petitions Shame they didn't really think out their argument very well and missed out some major points.
X-13 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 I see someone has started an e-petition about this: Do Not Force ISP Filtering of Pornography and Other Content - e-petitions Shame they didn't really think out their argument very well and missed out some major points. IIRC, one of the IT teachers at my old secondary school was called Iain Simms... Small world.
tmcd35 Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 He was doing ok for the first couple of paragraphs. Then he seemed to suggest the likes of Google manually vet each webpage they trawl, confused a search engine with an ISP, and forgot that most of this stuff is hosted in foreign institutions beyond his control. I came away wondering if he had any idea how the Internet actually works beyond "wires and pixie dust"? 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. I think he needs to talk our friends at Smoothwall about transparent proxies on our out going connections at LINX... (then we can all just get VPN's to Somalia and be done with it!)
Fleetwood Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Thinking about it, what's going to happen with the people who do choose to opt-out? Are we going to be kept on some sort of list? There isn't a chance in hell that the gov. will simply take "No, I don't want the filters" as a viable response and then walk away from that person. If anything they'll end up monitoring our internet activity, text messages and invade our privacy/personal life because we've said no we're immediately targeted/labelled as a potential risk, surely? ( Should all of that monitoring stuff actually be true. I'm not trying to start the debate again or whatever, just saying in context. Don't attack me please )
Geoff Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 He was doing ok for the first couple of paragraphs. Then he seemed to suggest the likes of Google manually vet each webpage they trawl, confused a search engine with an ISP, and forgot that most of this stuff is hosted in foreign institutions beyond his control. I came away wondering if he had any idea how the Internet actually works beyond "wires and pixie dust"? Americans are quite fond of their 4th amendment rights. I very much doubt Google has much interest in being the Internet police for the British government. 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. Tech for this already exists. This kind of filtering is already done on Mobile data connections. In my case with GiffGaff you have to go into the web account management interface and put in your passport number for checking.
Grey-gear Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 Just read thought report and all it seems to sum up is him saying : - 1
LosOjos Posted July 22, 2013 Posted July 22, 2013 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. 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.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now