• 77 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Embryonic (145 posts) -

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

So our government (UK) are bringing in a new law which means you have to Opt-In to be able to access porn on the web. Is this the biggest single choice men have ever faced? Opt-In and forever be on a database of pervs or opt-out and lose all perving privileges.

On a more serious note, is this not a bit scary? If they censor the internet a little, it just makes it easier to censor the internet a lot more.

#2 Posted by TyCobb (1972 posts) -

Sounds like anonymous services are about to get a nice surge in sales.

#3 Edited by MooseyMcMan (11276 posts) -

Okay, I know this is cliched, but...

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.

Also, give it a week, people will find a way around it.

Moderator
#4 Posted by BigJeffrey (5074 posts) -
#5 Posted by TooWalrus (13234 posts) -

For real? So... If this goes through, will it be tougher for kids to get porn?

...nah, nature finds a way.

#6 Posted by jimmyfenix (3858 posts) -

Cameron you bell end!! another good reason for Scotland to become independent!! (don't hate me union supporters)

#7 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

#8 Posted by Blu3V3nom07 (4233 posts) -

#9 Edited by FunkasaurasRex (847 posts) -

Yo so like, maybe wanting to curb the amount of real messed up porn on the internet isn't the most terrible thing, but this law seems fucking stupid and possibly more problematic than a great deal of the media they're attempting to censor.

#10 Posted by pyromagnestir (4326 posts) -

So do you have to be from the UK to opt in? Because I might want to visit the UK some day...

#11 Edited by Reisz (1517 posts) -

Greetings United Kingdom, my name is Usenet, You and I are going to be close friends.

#12 Edited by FancySoapsMan (5839 posts) -

those motherfuckers

#13 Posted by Demoskinos (15010 posts) -

I seriously doubt they will be able to block ALL pornography. Sure the big commercial sites like Brazzers and what not will obviously get locked down but then you've got subreddits on Reddit that have tons of porn in them. Not to mention tumblr blogs...ect... I don't see how they are going to be able to filter all of that.

Still, in one way this is kind of hilarious that you need to call someone to open up the floodgates of porn.

#14 Posted by Levio (1784 posts) -

The funny part is that the politicians who made the law are going to be the first in line to get black market porn because it would be political suicide for them to get their name on that list.

#15 Posted by DarthOrange (3866 posts) -

DVDs and magazines are making a comeback!

#16 Edited by CircleNine (381 posts) -

It should have been an opt-in service rather than an opt-out service, but otherwise this isn't a huge deal? Also I'm sure that within minutes of the first ISP putting a filter up there'll be an easy to use workaround.

#17 Edited by Strife777 (1604 posts) -

Well that's pretty dumb.

And please, women watch porn too.

#18 Posted by MooseyMcMan (11276 posts) -

Well that's pretty dumb.

And please, women watch porn too.

Yeah, but everyone knows that women are responsible, and aren't rapists or child molesters, and thus it's okay.

Moderator
#19 Posted by EpicSteve (6490 posts) -

UK seems super controlling over its citizens.

#20 Posted by TheHT (11507 posts) -

DEY TUK ER PERN

#21 Edited by TheManWithNoPlan (5797 posts) -

That's really dumb.

#22 Edited by PeasantAbuse (5138 posts) -

Woods porn making a comeback.

#23 Edited by Akyho (1677 posts) -

You know what's the funniest thing?

Page 3 is a feature found in the British tabloid newspaper The Sun, consisting of a large photograph of a topless female glamour model usually published on the newspaper's third page. The Sun has featured topless models (known as Page 3 girls) in its print edition since November 1970 as well as on its official Page 3 website since June 1999. Although "Page 3" and "Page Three" are registered trademarks of NI Group Ltd, parent company of The Sun, the feature has been widely imitated in other British tabloids and by newspapers internationally.

Page 3 is popular with many readers, but it has also attracted sustained controversy. Some critics have argued that Page 3 objectifies and demeans women, while others have argued that the feature is softcore pornography that should not appear in a generally circulated national newspaper. Some campaigners have advocated for legislation to ban Page 3, while others have tried to convince newspaper editors to voluntarily drop the feature or modify it so that models no longer appear topless.

The british tabloids the experts in easily accessible smut were you get past the front page and you are greeted by a topless woman in see through panties. Were the back end of the "Newspaper" reads like a phonebook on sexlines and brothles. Were even half the paper can be nothing but naked women. Sold in every shop next to actual Newspapers will not be touched.

There is an agony aunt column that is simply to read like penthouse. "Hi I was living with my girlfriend when her mother stopped by to give her something. She was away at work, we opened some wine.........." ECT ECT ECT its just sex stories that ends with "what should I do?"

It really is a shame on this country.

#24 Posted by Tireyo (6445 posts) -

#25 Posted by Petiew (1353 posts) -

Woods porn making a comeback.

You never forget your first woods porn. Truly the most glorious school day ever.

#26 Posted by Freshbandito (689 posts) -

@petiew said:

@peasantabuse said:

Woods porn making a comeback.

You never forget your first woods porn. Truly the most glorious school day ever.

think of it, a generation that doesn't know what woods porn is...

This whole initiative is ridiculous, it's the flimsiest of measures that basically amounts to sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "la la la la! pornography and sexualization doesn't exist! la la la la!" whilst not dealing with the fact that sexual imagery will eventually cross the gaze of a young person even if they clamp down on everything to the point where youngsters are trading around hand drawn pictures of boobs on an all too crumpled sheet of A4 paper astheir first experience of titilation.

#27 Posted by Embryonic (145 posts) -

I left some porn in the woods once. I managed to get a go of my dad’s work laptop when I was 12 or 13, and of course the first thing I did was a Google search for “big tits”. Obviously I couldn’t consume all of the glorious images at once so I decided to print some off to enjoy later.

Eventually after a few hours the post wank shame kicked in, and I realised it might not be a good idea to have a stack of porn sitting under my bed so I decided I had to get rid of it. I threw it all in a plastic bag and whilst walking the dog that night I placed it under a bush in the field across from my house.

I went back a couple of days later to retrieve the bag and its contents, but all I found was the empty bag.

It makes me oddly proud and ashamed to have continued the cycle of porn in the woods.

#28 Edited by FancySoapsMan (5839 posts) -

@embryonic: I printed off some pics too, but my bright idea was to flush them down the toilet.

Unfortunately, the ink from the pictures washed off and I had to explain to my parents what the fuck was up with the water in the toilet.

good times.

#29 Posted by believer258 (11984 posts) -

Okay, I know this is cliched, but...

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.

Also, give it a week, people will find a way around it.

A week? Bah. People will be around this in a matter of hours.

#30 Posted by LeYcH (216 posts) -

Who needs porn?
Our earliest ancestors didn't use the internet and neither will I.

#31 Posted by Largo6661 (336 posts) -

I bet the vast majority of people will have to opt-in simply because of the restricting nature of the law. Even non pornographic websites like Vice and even activist sites like The Open Rights Group will be blocked because they discuss mature content. The new legislation is a joke, the notion that these restrictions will stop actual criminals is laughable.

#32 Edited by Embryonic (145 posts) -

@fancysoapsman: Haha, that's brilliant.

I remember being super idiotic with my used tissues. My house was always busy so I couldn't make a mad dash to the toilet and I always thought someone would cotton on if I threw them in the bin. So, I instead, hid them behind the TV stand. One day my Mum came in to clean my room and discovered my crime, my excuse was "I've had a really runny nose lately".

#33 Posted by Zeik (2536 posts) -

@embryonic: I printed off some pics too, but my bright idea was to flush them down the toilet.

Unfortunately, the ink from the pictures washed off and I had to explain to my parents what the fuck was up with the water in the toilet.

good times.

Ha, I remember doing that once, except I ended up having to flush the toilet so much to get it to go down that the water usage alarm went off and I had to explain to my dad it was because I had just taken a really long shower.

#34 Edited by Nals (80 posts) -

@leych said:

Who needs porn?

Our earliest ancestors didn't use the internet and neither will I.

The bigger issue is the control this gives the government over the internet.

Finland put out a similar initiative a few years ago, where the government decided to start blocking/banning "extremist/pedophilic" porn sites. Sounded good, until people started looking at the logs, and realized they also started blocking sites/forums/bbs that supported/discussed political views in disagreement with the current government. When they tried to bring it up in the Finnish media, they got lambasted as "pedophile protectors" and "perverts", because obviously, they were just trying to protect their precious child porn. "Why don't you think of the children" is the best defense something like this could ever have.

The UK is not well known for the proper use of power. This will likely be abused in a similar way, although I doubt it'll even make the news for the UK.

The idea of making grown men and woman call in to gain access to porn is amusing, and a bit annoying for some I'd guess, but it's not that bad. The fact the government just signed a law that said they have the right to decide what can and cannot be viewed by British citizens, and it's entirely up to them to make those calls? That's downright frightening, especially since they slipped it out while everyone was paying attention to the Royal Baby.

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/797_domains_on_Finnish_Internet_censorship_list,_including_censorship_critic,_2008

Thailand and Finland are the only two other countries to have similar laws. They both abuse them heavily, especially when they feel they have the need, and have since expanded the laws to move past pornographic content. Since these lists are not public, there is no public oversight. Like Finland and Thailand, there is no judicial oversight, only governmental. That means only the government knows whats on the list, which is a huge issue, for obvious reasons.

#35 Posted by RandomHero666 (3181 posts) -

Just like they blocked ThePirateBay, it's impossible to use that now.. oh wait, there's hundreds of different urls to get there.



#36 Edited by EvilNiGHTS (1093 posts) -

@akyho: Actually, the Sun haven't been a part of that campaign. Which is probably just as well, because they already have a website devoted to their pin-up legacy which would presumably see a lot less traffic. Good thing the Daily Express isn't involved either, considering they're owned by a porn tycoon.

The chief supporter as far as the press is concerned has been the Daily Mail, which is a bit odd considering how they've been obsessed with bikinis as of late. I remember when I found out about it last year, their website was proudly displaying a photo of Katie Price in a sheer top with no bra on.

Dubious moral high horses aside though, I struggle to see this really having the effect they think it will. They're trying to push the anti child porn argument, but I can't help but feel that if you have a penchant for child porn, and all you have to do to get your sweet porn back is call your ISP and ask them to lift the ban on the 'regular' stuff, that's getting off easy.

While it'd be foolish to argue against the notion that the internet has facilitated children's exposure to adult content at ages that were unthinkable 20 years ago, I think it's naive to expect this is going to suddenly stop that. As we've seen with piracy, anyone who really wants it will find a way eventually, so it's dumb to think that teenagers won't be able to use a proxy browser or even a VPN. So, like with piracy and DRM, you're just causing extra hassle for the intended audience.

And of course, it's easy to see ways this could go horribly wrong for everyone...

Minor scenario: We have this system on phones already. They block access to Urban Dictionary. That's a little extreme, but first world problems am I right?

Major scenario: Since these systems are automated, they'll presumably need to have databases of the people who opted in. Thus, it's not unreasonable to hypothesise that your ISP has a database where everyone therein is a potential sex offender. Under British law, there's no anonymity for defendants in a sex offence case, regardless of whether they get convicted or not. Want to imagine how that's going to impact your life if you get falsely accused?

#37 Edited by Korwin (2889 posts) -

Okay, I know this is cliched, but...

BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU.

Also, give it a week, people will find a way around it.

A week? Try 30 seconds, all it takes is a putty client, a remote non UK based SSH server and browser proxy extension (SwitchySharp is good). Government HTTP filters are the stupidest things on the planet, they cost a pile of money and are completely ineffective.

#38 Posted by benpicko (2010 posts) -

Just use Opera and you'll most likely be able to circumvent these like you can TPB

#39 Posted by MildMolasses (3223 posts) -

Still, in one way this is kind of hilarious that you need to call someone to open up the floodgates of porn.

One time I was staying at a hotel with a girlfriend and she wanted to watch porn together. So i started going through the menus and when I accidentally hit the "block porn" button so I had to call the front desk to get them to reopen the floodgates

We picked a movie almost immediately the screen was scrolling weird and the sound was all fucked up. So then she had to call the front desk to cancel our porn order to ensure we didn't get billed for it

#40 Posted by Dacnomaniac (442 posts) -

THANK GOD FOR PROXIES.

#41 Posted by RollingZeppelin (2025 posts) -

You have to get the porn, what if your guests want to use it? That's just being a bad host to your guests.

#42 Posted by CaLe (4018 posts) -

I fully support this.

#43 Posted by s10129107 (1184 posts) -

This way ONLY kids will be able to download porn. They'll be mostly the ones who know how to get around the IP restrictions. Hooray Britain!!

#44 Edited by AlexW00d (6302 posts) -

UK seems super controlling over its citizens.

I forget that our government attempts to control the entire planet...

(if you didn't guess, what you said is the dumbest thing I have read all day)

#45 Posted by Subject2Change (2966 posts) -

Why are you assuming it's just Men that will Opt In to this?

#46 Edited by pweidman (2342 posts) -

Censorship of the internet is impossible. Resistance is futile you silly English. :P

#47 Edited by pyrodactyl (2178 posts) -

ever heard of proxy servers?

#48 Posted by Godlyawesomeguy (6399 posts) -

What a nonsensical, ridiculous waste of time.

#49 Posted by Random45 (1233 posts) -

THANK GOD FOR PROXIES.

Haha, I was thinking the same thing. Even if you don't know how to use a proxy, just Google it and you'll be good to go...

... Unless if they censor Google next so you can't Google it.

#50 Posted by Fattony12000 (7517 posts) -

alt.binaries