Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users opt in (UK)

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography.

The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron hosts No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

The prime minister is expected to announce other moves in line with the Christian charity's review, such as restrictions on aggressive advertising campaigns and certain types of images on billboards.

There will also be a website, Parentport, which parents can use to complain about television programmes, advertisements, products or services which they believe are inappropriate for children.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/11/pornography-internet-service-providers

[Art_from_Ark]

1. The kid whose parents "opt in"

is going to be the popular kid on the block.

[Nihil]

6. Exactly what sprang to my mind too!

:rofl:

FWIW, I think it should be an "opt-out" choice (i.e., opt out of
"allowing pornography") not an "opt-in" one simply because anyone
who is that concerned about their kids browsing habits will have
already applied suitable filters and I, for one, don't want any
more of their crappy "net-nanny" filters interfering with my searches
for non-pornography (aka the Scunthorpe problem).

I vote for parental responsibility rather than shitty software substitutes.

:shrug:

[boppers]

2. LOL, good luck with that.

Parentport is going to get swamped with false positives, and to block all (or even most) porn content requires blocking out huge swathes of the internet, like, oh, google.

[Lance_Boyle]

8. 'zactly

But some corp that gets the filtering contracts will make out like a totally ineffective bandit, and that's what it's all about. Well, that and appeasing the "mothers union" (snarf!).

[Fearless]

3. What other content should be allow them to censor?

Opposition views? Violence? Welcome to 1984.

[dipsydoodle]

10. This is being done at the request of various childrens charities

To which opposition views do you refer?

[Fearless]

13. Political.

And if you really think they're doing this because children's charities asked for it I have a bridge for sale.

[dipsydoodle]

14. What the childrens charities requested

was the blocking of aggressive advertising on children's sites which is an associated issue. Advert blocking should be a piece of cake for the ISP's

[Fearless]

15. I believe it is the parent's right to decide what is appropriate and inappropriate for children.

Not the government's.

[joeglow3]

27. Hence, why the parents can opt in

[Fearless]

28. They should be able to opt into censorship not out of it.

[joeglow3]

29. In theory, yes.

However, for the same reason we cover many of the things we do in schools that should be covered at home, it is better this way.

[Fearless]

30. What is porn exactly? Let me guess... you know it when you see it?

[joeglow3]

32. 2 people fucking

A chick spread eagle with a piece of food in her cunt.
A chick with 2 dicks in her ass.
A man dressed in a priest outfit shitting into the mouth of a woman dressed as a nun.

Do you need any more examples?

[Fearless]

35. Umm... we have vastly different opinions on what mainstream porn is.

[ManiacJoe]

31. There is no opt-in, no opt-out.

It is a yes-no decision with no default value that gets made at the time one signs up for internet service. Existing customers see no change unless they change services or explicitly request a filtering change.

[PatrynXX]

4. now if only they can figure out what is porn

there's porn, erotic nude and fine art nude. do'h... Kerry Marie and Brook Little ain't gonna like that (ahem she's not little.. )

[Neurotica]

23. That's the key...and don't forget medical sites

Software programs that do a better job of filtering porn also block more sites that are perfectly fine (e.g., medical information on breast cancer).

[guitar man]

25. You speak of godesses

godesses I say!! :P

And don't forget Lorna Morgan :hi:

[ScottLand]

5. Hey it's about time GOD took over the net.

How do I opt in pre-emptively?

[Heywood J]

7. Always nice when public policy is being legislated straight from

the agenda of a "Christian charity". Everything in society should be sanitized "for the sake of the children", while the same parents turn a blind eye as the kids turn into chavs.

[T_i_B]

9. Who'll be compiling this list of banned sites?

I mean, it'll be useful for businesses to know who to sue when their sites get incorrectly blocked for being porn.

[dipsydoodle]

12. McAfee and others

from the look of things. Guardian has subsequently clarified the real situation. http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/oct/11/david-cameron-porn-filter-isps

Only affects new contracts anyway and is the sole choice of the person paying for the contract. You may also have noted that some of this was nothing to do with porn anyway - it was to with aggressive advertising on children's sites. Mind you an ad blocker would cope with most of that.

[dipsydoodle]

11. David Cameron's 'porn filter' will make no difference, say ISPs

Claims that David Cameron has forced a new "porn filter" on UK internet content have been disavowed by internet service providers, which said that the vast majority of customers will see "absolutely no difference" to their web content.

Confusion arose after it was suggested that a new "filtered feed" system will be applied to everyone using internet connections provided by the biggest four ISPs – BT, TalkTalk, Virgin and Sky, which between them have 17.6 million of the 19.2 million broadband customers in the UK.

It was claimed that the prime minister would unveil the measures on Tuesday as he hosted a No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

But ISPs moved quickly to insist that the provisions will only apply to people taking out completely new contracts, who will be offered the choice of a connection with "parental controls", or one without. "Customers will have to choose one or the other, but we won't be making either one the default," said a source at one of the ISPs. A spokesperson for TalkTalk said: "This is called 'active choice' rather than an opt-in or opt-out." People who change to a different tier of connection within the same service will not be obliged to change the setting. BT said that new customers will be offered a package of parental control systems, provided by the security company McAfee.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/oct/11/david-cameron-porn-filter-isps

[Kablooie]

16. By "opting in" they must mean "click on a link" because you can't fully block adult sites.

[Kablooie]

17. By "opting in" they must mean "click on a link" because you can't fully block adult sites.

[JCMach1]

18. They will be building a great wall of UK...

The same kind of censorship filter...

You sure you want to let the government set that up? What might they use it for in-future?

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

19. Hadrian's Firewall?

To separate the empire from the huns, vandals, and naked wode-dyed savages doing unspeakable things with their naughty bits.

:hi:

[JCMach1]

20. I like it! Great name!

[brooklynite]

21. So, no more ROMEO AND JULIET?

All that icky underage romance...

[dipsydoodle]

22. Quite aside from Janet and John

play with each other. :rofl:

I think that would be Alice and Jerry in the US.

[joeglow3]

34. Yeah. They are more worried about that than the Church of Fudge

:sarcasm:

[guitar man]

24. Do they still have nekkid women in the the newspaper over there

The page 3 girls? :shrug:

[Nihil]

26. Yeah ... that will impact the Sun readership numbers!

("reader" being a polite euphemism!)

:rofl:

[LetTimmySmoke]

33. So what's really going to happen is this:

This complaint system is to be used mainly by professional "decency" activists spamming in form letters against shows with social/political messages they don't like. Funded by right wing organizations like News Corp and the Koch Brothers.