Cameron's internet filter goes far beyond porn - and that was always the plan

[sonofsanta]

"The government is attempting to block all online extremist videos that help to radicalise impressionable young men"

 

"help to radicalise impressionable young men"

 

The only word in that sentence with a definite meaning is "men". Help, radicalise, impressionable and young are all so vague as to be completely useless as a guideline. Wouldn't the WikiLeaks video of the helicopter shooting "help to radicalise" someone, despite absolutely being something that all of us as citizens need to see and be aware of? What do you even mean by "radicalise"? Aren't all young people "impressionable"? How young is "young"? Why only men, anyway?

[Garacesh]

So where's the outrage? Or do we just let this happen?!

I think it's a typical case of "First, they came for the.. And then they came for me". I don't want to watch extremist videos, therefore I don't care if they ban them. Obviously there's the 'feature-creep' as to where non-extremist videos that go against the current government are censored too, but that's 'in the future', and of course there's the vagueness of the word 'extremist' anyway.

There's no outrage right now because it's not affecting many people - and the people it is affecting just switch the filter off.

 

Not saying this is right. I'm just saying that's how it is. I admit even I, who knows what is happening and what will happen, am a little too complacent about things because so far I've been given the opt-out.

 

You want that to change? Then you change it. Start doing it yourself rather than waiting for others to be outraged. Get on board with campaigns against this filter. Educate people on its potential for abuse, to silence the 'little guy'. Stop waiting for others to do it for you.

(Just to have it on record: That's by no way meant to be an attack, but cold motivation, and it isn't directly aimed at just you either, @psydii.)

Edited February 11, 2014 by Garacesh

[LosOjos]

Oh look, exactly what everyone with a shred of common sense said would happen is happening.

 

You just know if protests were organised the media would play it down as a "bunch of perverts don't want porn filters."

[localzuk]

Theoretically, this would have affected a website I used to run called 'ARMORY' (an animal rights video/image site). It used to have all sorts of animal rights movies online, such as exposé stuff, hidden camera videos, factory farm process videos etc... In the eyes of the government, that stuff would be 'extremist' and therefore blockable.

 

Its simply proof that the government cannot be trusted with powers over internet access - they simply don't 'get it'.

 

I'll be writing to my MP again.

[Roberto]

They 'get it' very well. All the parties want to censor the internet and now they have. They will position it as censoring things that are unreasonable and use that as a smokescreen to hide behind when it comes to using it to impinge on other things.

 

Now they've got it and someone else had to pay the political price for it, Labour might wring their hands and make political capital out of some of the grossest errors in the filters imposed by the coalition but if they get into power they will find reasons not to turn it off and none of the other parties will give them too much of a hard time over it.

Edited February 11, 2014 by Roberto

[Garacesh]

They 'get it' very well. All the parties want to censor the internet and now they have. They will position it as censoring things that are unreasonable and use that as a smokescreen to hide behind when it comes to using it to impinge on other things.

 

Now they've got it and someone else had to pay the political price for it, Labour might wring their hands and make political capital out of some of the grossest errors in the filters imposed by the coalition but if they get into power they will find reasons not to turn it off and none of the other parties will give them too much of a hard time over it.

 

That's exactly how I see it. Even if any of the big 3 stand up against it, if they lost power I'm Aladeen positive they'd find some reason to keep it on. Maybe they'd spout that they've changed it or some carp (possibly they did, possibly they didn't), but there is no way an asset this close to 'total control' will be wilfully relinquished.

[6Foot2]

Link: Senior Tory adviser Patrick Rock arrested on child abuse images allegations - Crime - UK - The Independent

 

...The Daily Mail quoted a friend of the Prime Minister as saying: “He has known Patrick for a long time and never expected anything like this.”

[Garacesh]

Campaigns for kiddie porn filter.

Accesses kiddie porn at 10 Downing Street.

 

At first it was possible the filter was 'deflecting attention'.. Campaigning for a filter so people didn't think he was doing it. Now it just seems to be a good ol' case of ID-10-T

[mthomas08]

Sounds like as always their is the Political agenda beyond doing the actual job, which is protecting our kids.

 

Having talk to some Parents who know very little about IT they have said they welcomed it and feel more comfortable with it. I also heard one Student who said he hated it.

 

Still at the end of the day they do need to concentrate on the actual goal post instead of worrying about the linesman.

[mattx]

Still at the end of the day they do need to concentrate on the actual goal post instead of worrying about the linesman.

 

An excellent example of Management dribble speak.....

[CAM]

You raised the thread from the (not very) dead?

[elsiegee40]

You raised the thread from the (not very) dead?

 

A, now deleted, spam post raised it.

[Dos_Box]

Actually I'm going to side with Matt here as, and this is a strange coincedence, I've just picked up a magazine late last night that I'd overlooked (I brought it for a show in Manchester and never got chance to read it) and read a very good article about this very thing.

IMO, centralised govt control of the internet is a very bad thing and considering that both Apple and Microsoft have had free filtering tools available for their operating systems for years which take very little time to set up I do have to wonder why they decided to spend so much time and money debatign this at all.

Why not just say to concerned parents 'Turn this feature on'?

My guess is that many parents will end up turning it off once they find some sites they use blocked (either by mistake or otherwise) and never bother turning it back on again.

[cobra427col]

Think we needed a NSFW tag due to the language used in the report... jussayin

[psydii]

Quote from the Beeb today:

 

 

The Home Office said it wanted to "further restrict access to terrorist material" and use "family-friendly filters" to block other extremist content.

 

"extremist" is already a category on most filter systems.

[Arthur]

Ministers push for new legislation to track phone usage « The Guardian

 

Ministers are poised to pass emergency laws to require phone companies to log records of phone calls, texts and internet usage, but Labour and Liberal Democrats are warning that they will not allow any new law to become a backdoor route to reinstating a wider "snooper's charter".

 

Inter-party talks, likely to bear fruit this week, are being held against the backdrop of an increased terrorist threat posed by British Muslims being radicalised by travelling to fight in Syria, and by the continuing controversy over the revelations by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

[sonofsanta]

BBC News - New broadband users shun UK porn filters, Ofcom finds

 

The industry watchdog Ofcom found fewer than one in seven households installed the feature, which is offered by BT, Sky, TalkTalk and Virgin Media.

 

...

 

Of the four main ISPs, all of whom now offer a filter at the point of sign-up, TalkTalk was the only company to persuade more than 10% of people to subscribe.

The percentage of customers taking up the option for each service provider are as follows:

 

• Virgin Media - 4%
  
• BT - 5%
  
• Sky - 8%
  
• TalkTalk - 36%

Isn't the filter developed/sold by the owner of TalkTalk? Seems strange that they, of all the ISPs, manage to get 5-8x as many people opting in as anyone else.

[localzuk]

Nah, each one has developed their own filtering system/bought a system in. Talk Talk have had theirs since 2011 - so 3 years longer than everyone else.

[Geoff]

Also includes films and music.

 

Britain just decriminalised online game piracy | VG247

[abillybob]

Also includes films and music.

 

Britain just decriminalised online game piracy | VG247

 

Don't want a note a VNP Connection will do you proud!

[Fleetwood]

Sad thing is, those that will refuse the filtering opt-in will end up going on a "keep a close eye on that one" list. It's lose-lose either way.