[news] BBC News - "MPs call for better porn filters to protect children"

[sonofsanta]

I've made this point in other threads here in the past, but it never fails to amaze me that it is deemed acceptable (from a legal standpoint) in this country to show dead and dying people on the TV and on the front page of newspapers at any time in any place, but the moment you see a nipple, there's outrage.

 

And as I think I've responded in the past, blame 1500+ years of Christianity glorifying violence unto Dirty Furren Types and stigmatising those filthy primal urges.

 

Maybe they should make ISP's employ a cluster of smoothwall boxes ?

 

+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1

 

tl:dr; +12

[mats]

All very true, but some people struggle with tying shoelaces, let alone anything that requires a modicum of intelligence to operate....

 

... and they're allowed to procreate?

[DT2]

Maybe they should make ISP's employ a cluster of smoothwall boxes ?

 

Wouldn't be a bad thing

 

... and they're allowed to procreate?

 

Unfortunately yes.... Like for example the moron on the M62 this morning who almost side-swiped me and was picking his nose, and using his mobile at the same time.... Land Rover 1. Frightened little fool 0

Edited April 19, 2012 by DT2

[X-13]

So long as it's an entirely optional, opt-in system

 

 

It isn't. [At least, it sounds like they want it on by default]

 

 

All the current filters aren't fool-proof and they end up flagging things for stupid reasons.

 

 

For example, this thread [and by extension all of Edugeek] would be flagged as adult material because of the "porn" in the title.

 

 

All this because people don't want to look after their own children.

Edited April 19, 2012 by X-13

[sonofsanta]

It isn't. [At least, it sounds like they want it on by default]

 

Other recommendations included:

 

* A government review of an opt-in filter to access adult material on the internet

 

Clearly, yes, this is all stuff that needs to be done by the parents not a filter. Unfortunately, back in the real world, there is a significant portion of parents who just don't give a damn.

 

 

EDIT: re-reading that quote, it's not actually very clear is it - so it's opt in to access adult material? or it's an opt-in filter? because presumably accessing the adult material is opting out of the filter? if they are genuinely proposing an automatic filter on the internet then yeah, that suddenly shifts into the sinister and my opinion on the matter likewise shifts.

Edited April 19, 2012 by sonofsanta

[januttall]

i agree were becomeing a police state well govement one anyway. itl end up where we cant turn over in bed without breaking the law (extreme I know). but i honestly think that there looking at the wrong end of the stick, and in a way creating / or Created a rod for there own distruction, and people ar getting fed up.

 

what needs to be done is to spred respect, Good morels, by teaching them to the youth. the problem we have is socal unrest lack of plain respect, to each other. not filters by default it realy is removing freedem of speach etc.

 

and parents are the bigest part of that.

 

im not completly againced filters in the write situation's but i dont think they shuld be imposed on everybody everywhere because the govement "think" they shuld be.

[X-13]

EDIT: re-reading that quote, it's not actually very clear is it - so it's opt in to access adult material? or it's an opt-in filter? because presumably accessing the adult material is opting out of the filter? if they are genuinely proposing an automatic filter on the internet then yeah, that suddenly shifts into the sinister and my opinion on the matter likewise shifts.

 

I didn't read this particular article.

 

But, all the other ones I've read say that they're demanding filtering by default.

 

Also, opt-in to access adult material means it's on by default.

[nicholab]

I think openDNS is a good place to start it quite good at blocking stuff does not do Google image search but you could do other things here. I have set my router up to auto update a using a dynamic DNS service I have also blocked all other DNS servers.

[GrumbleDook]

Again, I ask how many have read the full paper instead of just the news report? Have any of you?

[sonofsanta]

Again, I ask how many have read the full paper instead of just the news report? Have any of you?

 

Chance'd be a fine thing this week even skipping the oral evidence bits leaves 24 pages needing to be read.

[X-13]

Again, I ask how many have read the full paper instead of just the news report? Have any of you?

 

It's 89 pages long.

 

And pointless. The correct answer was "look after your own damn children".

 

 

Le EDIT: From the first few pages.

 

Many feel that device-level filters are no longer offering sufficient protection for children online.

 

Vague. Who feels this?

 

technological convergence means that freely available pornography from the internet will be nestling alongside regulated and rated content offerings from broadcasters on the

family internet-enabled television.

 

Scaremongering.

 

A network-level “Opt-In” system, maintained by ISPs, that delivered a clean internet feed to customers as standard but allowed them to choose to receive adult content

 

Always on. Just like I said.

 

and could use the filtering technology already operating in all schools and on some public Wi-Fi hubs.

 

No. The filtering is crap [opinion] too many misflagged sites, with no ability to sort it out.

 

And that's just from the background.

 

 

Many parents report feeling left behind by the evolution of technology and that they lack the knowledge and skills to educate their children about internet safety. Parents are also concerned about many other forms of disturbing internet content including cyber bullying, extreme violence, self-harm, suicide and pro-anorexia websites.

 

As I said. The correct answer is "look after your own damn children".

 

Lack knowledge, seek it out.

Lack skills, learn.

 

 

Le EDIT Mk2:

 

Mumsnet also reported concerns around two specific areas: young children stumbling across material in response to innocent search terms, and older children, especially teenage boys, seeking out more hard-core or violent material

 

[censored] mumsnet.

 

They should spend less time bitching and more time parenting.

 

 

I can't read through this... It's just making me annoyed.

 

It's all "the government needs to do this" and "the ISPs need to do that" with absolutly no mention [that I've seen yet] of "Parents can use this/that/the-other already."

Edited April 19, 2012 by X-13

[sonofsanta]

As I said. The correct answer is "look after your own damn children".

 

Lack knowledge, seek it out.

Lack skills, learn.

 

Much as I wish it were otherwise, online anger rarely leads directly to real world change, particularly in perceptions and attitudes.

 

If education of parents is the answer (of course it is), you're in an ideal position to do something towards that. Talk to your head and run an evening course; it's all well and good saying "learn skills" but a lot of parents don't know where to start, or are too afraid to even go near the internet. Do an hour long PowerPoint with a step-by-step guide and if even one parent starts taking responsibility, it'll have been worth it.

[zag]

I hate censorhip but believe very firmly parents should have the option to apply an adult filter to the internet.

 

Talk talk do a great family service at network level. Why can't BT offer this?

[localzuk]

I hate censorhip but believe very firmly parents should have the option to apply an adult filter to the internet.

 

Talk talk do a great family service at network level. Why can't BT offer this?

 

They do have the option. They can use the feature built into Windows, they can use K9, or any of hundreds of other such programs.

 

All mobile phone services offer such services too I believe, if not there are apps for smartphones that can do it.

[X-13]

Much as I wish it were otherwise, online anger rarely leads directly to real world change, particularly in perceptions and attitudes.

 

If education of parents is the answer (of course it is), you're in an ideal position to do something towards that. Talk to your head and run an evening course; it's all well and good saying "learn skills" but a lot of parents don't know where to start, or are too afraid to even go near the internet. Do an hour long PowerPoint with a step-by-step guide and if even one parent starts taking responsibility, it'll have been worth it.

 

 

I think we actually DO do something like that. [i think... I'm not so sure now.]

 

 

Regardless of the method of delivery, parents have been talking about adult content with children for a long time [to children, not involving children]. About natural curiosity, how it doesn't represent real people, etc.

 

How can a whole generation suddenly lose this skill? Especially as the pervious generation is [possibly] still about and available to consult.

 

 

 

I'm so angry I'm flipping tables into space. [Do you like bananas... Well, you're about to GO bananas... ON THE MOOOOOOOON!]

Edited April 19, 2012 by X-13

[GrumbleDook]

@X-13 so you disagree with the expert evidence due to your experiences?

 

So, you missed the bits about the internet enabling more access to more extreme materials so trying to say "well it was like this when we were young" doesn't really make sense.

 

Yes, we can all lament about poor parenting skills or parents with poor tech skills, but take a deep breath and think about this for a minute or two.

 

Research is showing that the materials which older children are actively looking for is more extreme that previous, affecting their outlook on relationship and sex, linked with violence. The ease of access is a significant factor. If you wanted to control or limit access to something that was a tad risky (physically or mentally) in earlier generations good parents prevented access. No going to see adult films at the pictures (or sneaking in), pr0n mags hidden away, air guns in locked cupboards, etc ... and even when introducing kids to manageable risk (dangerous sports such as rock climbing, diving, martial arts) you took them to someone who knew what they were doing and that is the only time they did the activity.

 

So going on about how previous generations were good parents (yeah ... the generation who would routinely beat kids if you want to believe some reports / papers? [/cynic]) doesn't really fit. We can learn from them, but not follow the same practices because the world has changed.

 

As for saying parents needs to do more, the report pretty much covers that parents who do more can get on and do it, but for those who don't then we are happy to leave kids at risk? The idea of opt-in is that there is the hope that it will force more parents to get involved and do something ...

 

From how I took it, the main argument from the people who went to meetings and gave evidence tends to stem around the ideology of whether it is better to opt-in or to opt-out ... more a case of the perception of censorship than censorship itself. If you have a limiter on a car and you have to go to a garage and get it disabled is that a problem? You can still get it disabled? No-one is saying you can't access the content in question, just that it should be made more difficult for those who could be adversely affected by it and if parents are struggling to sort that bit out (or are not switched on to the problem or simply can't be bothered) then the industry has a choice ... think about whether they need to get it sorted themselves or they run the risk that a Govt decision will be made about it instead.

 

A cynic would turn round and say that this is a handy way of politicians and interest groups to get ISPs and associated folk to pick up the tab to run more training, get involved in more research and help deal with a problem they are part of ... and part of that will involved *them* chatting to parents and getting them involved ... perhaps because the Govt doesn't want to be seen to be doing it themselves and perhaps because the Govt know that some parents will not listen to them but *might* listen to the ISPs and other associated folk.

[X-13]

@X-13 so you disagree with the expert evidence due to your experiences?

 

The only thing I said based on my experience was that filtering in school is crap. [How to make a boat out of cardboard = Pornography... apparently.]

 

Also, I'm 23. I still AM young.

 

I also never said that the previous generations were better parents. I just said they talked about things.

 

Which this generation seems incapable of.

 

 

They're happy for their children to play Call of Duty while being racist and sexist to other players, but a bit of nudity is the most deplorable thing ever.

 

We're going to end up with sexually repressed adults that are desensitised to violence... And that's going to end well.

[zag]

They do have the option. They can use the feature built into Windows, they can use K9, or any of hundreds of other such programs.

 

All mobile phone services offer such services too I believe, if not there are apps for smartphones that can do it.

 

My parents wouldn't know anything about any of those. I'd imagine 90% of the rest of the population are the same.

 

Parents should be given the choice of network level filtering. Simple as. Talk talk already do this and its good.

[localzuk]

My parents wouldn't know anything about any of those. I'd imagine 90% of the rest of the population are the same.

 

Parents should be given the choice of network level filtering. Simple as. Talk talk already do this and its good.

 

No, your parents need to get off their asses and find things out for themselves. I'm sorry but saying something needs to be network level rather than people taking responsibility for their own children and their computer access is just promoting lazy parenting.

 

If the information and education is lacking, improve the information and education!

[CAM]

Hmm got to agree with X on this one! We should all know that filtering is the last line of defence. The first lines should be proper education and awareness to prevent it getting that far. Of course, kids are curious things with access to their own devices, each with Internet access. Spare phones, games consoles, secret copies of software on USB pens that haven't been locked down, the list goes on.

 

Then we look at the privacy issues. You start with analysis of web content for filtering purposes, what happens when something is flagged? Will the data be used to profile the people browsing from that site? Does anyone recall BT's Phorm system which offered filtering as a backdoor means of targetting it's customers with adverts by inspecting traffic?

 

Lastly what about private communications? They won't be so private if your content is being snooped on. How about technical limitations, what if you have a key Internet-based service, such as remote access or some sort of tunnel, but the redirection of traffic through the ISP's filtering proxy decides to interfere? Hell, what if you host your own site and find the ISP objects to a bad word or image that you put up as a joke and stops you gaining access. I've even been denied access to threads in this site simply because the thread title contains the word Unblock.

[zag]

No, your parents need to get off their asses and find things out for themselves. I'm sorry but saying something needs to be network level rather than people taking responsibility for their own children and their computer access is just promoting lazy parenting.

 

If the information and education is lacking, improve the information and education!

 

Sorry I just don't agree with that. Its wrong to assume people have the same technical knowledge as us.

 

My dad can't even double click a mouse

 

Talk talk have been doing this for a while and it works perfectly. Its a really good option and something when you buy their service you simply have to explain to the telephone operator that you want. Any parent can do that.

Edited April 19, 2012 by zag

[X-13]

Hmm got to agree with X on this one!

 

So... awesome...

 

 

 

 

Sorry I just don't agree with that. Its wrong to assume people have the same technical knowledge as us.

 

My dad can't even double click a mouse

 

Google > "internet filtering" > click one > download > install > GUI makes it easy

 

 

There would also be threads and articles on HOW to restrict internet in the search results.

 

It's not lack of technical ability, it's laziness.

Edited April 19, 2012 by X-13

[localzuk]

Sorry I just don't agree with that. Its wrong to assume people have the same technical knowledge as us.

 

My dad can't even double click a mouse

 

Talk talk have been doing this for a while and it works perfectly. Its a really good option and something when you buy their service you simply have to say you want. Any parent can do that.

 

If you don't have the skills to know what your child is doing on the kit, go out and get educated. Simple as that. I cannot and will not accept that ISPs should have to provide massive filtering systems for use by everyone. It will increase costs to all for one, not to mention who decides what is to be filtered?

 

Its like if you buy a pet. What do you do? Just flounder about and get the shop owner to look after it? No, you find out what type of food it needs, what exercise, if it needs a cage etc...

 

With a child its exactly the same, you find out what you need to do to keep that child safe - including on the computer!

[JJonas]

If you don't have the skills to know what your child is doing on the kit, go out and get educated. Simple as that. I cannot and will not accept that ISPs should have to provide massive filtering systems for use by everyone. It will increase costs to all for one, not to mention who decides what is to be filtered?

 

Its like if you buy a pet. What do you do? Just flounder about and get the shop owner to look after it? No, you find out what type of food it needs, what exercise, if it needs a cage etc...

 

With a child its exactly the same, you find out what you need to do to keep that child safe - including on the computer!

 

^ This

 

Why should we all be forced to have extremely filtered Internet connections just because a few parents cant get their act together and work out how to protect their kids

[zag]

If you don't have the skills to know what your child is doing on the kit, go out and get educated. Simple as that. I cannot and will not accept that ISPs should have to provide massive filtering systems for use by everyone. It will increase costs to all for one, not to mention who decides what is to be filtered?

 

I see what your saying but I don't think you quite understand how the talk talk filter works.

 

You can add it to your broadband package when you buy it. On top of that you get granular control over the blocking categories if needed via a web interface. Parents can decide what to filter and what to allow if they are indeed technically minded. You can turn it on or off at will, its not mandatory. I expect most parents will simply ask for the adult filter to be applied upon buying the service. That's what really makes it work, its as simple as a phone call.

 

It really is an excellent system and one I wish more ISPs would adopt.

Edited April 19, 2012 by zag