Online Porn to be blocked in the UK

[Razmos]

That's what optional means.

He asked whether the blocking is optional. it isn't. Being UNBLOCKED is optional. because as it says, failure to respond means it will automatically be blocked, and all new internet users will be blocked too.

Being blocked is now the default setting.

[FrozNlite]

That's what optional means.

Dude you're trying to generalize an argument that's about the specific differences between types of options. Opt-in programs for situations like these are idiotic and reprehensible as they limit personal freedoms and require additional effort to merely regain them, when it should be the other way around - as Razmos has stressed.

God this whole thing is just so stupid and illogical. Excellent counterarguments:

- "But the worst of all possible worlds is one in which the prime minister announces he has solved the problem when he's only pretending to have brushed it under the carpet."
- Everything Razmos said about applying a band-aid solution like this to a festering wound that requires the time and efficacy of sweeping comprehensive sex education reform and open discourse of sex and sexuality to treat
- Bouncing off this first bullet: that people will STILL ACCESS IT some way or another, and as such it exists in some mystic, exclusive state that increases people's desire to obtain it
- Enables parents to be lazy and oblivious, as they don't have to actively ensure parental firewalls/blocks if they don't want something
- Lets the government decide what's "morally acceptable" for its population. Again, this is qualified with the "everything within reason" tag, but still

And on and on.

[hadriel]

I think a better sex education should be a higher priority than this... this filter is but a symptomatic relief. You want to actually treat the root of the problem.

On the unrelated note, the Duke, Duchess and Prince of Cambridge... I'm glad they didn't visit Cambridge too often. It clogs up the roads.

Hadriel

[Loose]

Not. everyone gets blocked, you have to opt in to be unblocked.

Let me rephrase that.

Can I choose to have porn blocked or unblocked? Do I have a choice here?

[hadriel]

Let me rephrase that.

Can I choose to have porn blocked or unblocked? Do I have a choice here?

Yes.

Hadriel

[VerrKol]

I think it's a waste of time and money to try and block it.
I think that it will encourage underage people to circumvent the restrictions in increasingly inventive ways which will make them more susceptible to computer infection.

I do not think this is a civil rights problem since the customer makes the decision by opting out if they desire.

[IllegallySane]

The only ones who'll accept this are those super celibate families. Every other family who have *cough* active parents *cough* will have them disabled post-haste. They really should have made it the other way around, opting in for a family filter. This is going to needlessly annoy many people.

Also, you really made the title misleading. This isn't something to get your jimmies rustled over, to be honest. I'd be "ugh, really?' *calls to disable family filter* Done. Although my paranoid side tells me this will be a way for them to collect data. *tinfoil hat*

[Lozmaster]

But it doesn't affect everyone. It affects those who b'itch about restrictions, sure, but anyone who it doesn't actually applies to just turns it off and the ones it does apply to have one less thing to worry about.

It's a Slippery slope. Even ignoring the fact that it's completely impossible to block all "pornographic" images in the first place, once we start letting them decide what we can and cannot see, who knows what they'll decide the children need to be protected from next? Or for how long until they decide to remove the option of turning the filter off "to protect the children".

[SaptaZapta]

Relevant

The religious parties tried to pass this same sort of law in Israel.
Their idea was to shame people into leaving the block on, because who'd be willing to call their ISP and admit to being a filthy depraved pervert who actually wants to watch obscene content on the internet?

It didn't pass and I'm glad. I don't trust whatever software they put there to actually block all the bad stuff and only the bad stuff. Let me be the judge of what my children and I can do on the 'net.

[Rick]

I don't see any positives to over-zealous and prudish mothers being able to block their teenagers from viewing pornography. I think pornography gives teenagers (especially boys) an avenue to satisfy their curiosity about the ins and outs (pun not intended) of sex without actually going out and doing it themselves and possibly ending up with a mistake that will haunt them the rest of their lives. I wish society would stop being so god damned afraid of sex and everything that goes with it.

[DeanNim]

all porn sites are blocked here where i live.... pft england is no where as prude as asia as a whole. its ok tho, VPN extensions work wonders.

[Razmos]

I don't see any positives to over-zealous and prudish mothers being able to block their teenagers from viewing pornography. I think pornography gives teenagers (especially boys) an avenue to satisfy their curiosity about the ins and outs (pun not intended) of sex without actually going out and doing it themselves and possibly ending up with a mistake that will haunt them the rest of their lives. I wish society would stop being so god damned afraid of sex and everything that goes with it.

Exactly, tech-savvy kids, blocks on adult content and a poor sex education system is far more dangerous than any of the stuff they are trying to prevent. Misinformation or no information at all will lead to kids not understanding what sex is, or they won't be equipped to deal with it when it happens.

I learnt what sex was by discovering it myself online and through conversations with my other friends who were discovering the same things. Making normal sex even more of a taboo subject will lead kids to accidentally discovering sex which ISN'T normal, like rape-porn as mentioned in the article. It just pushes kids into an even deeper part of the internet to learn how to bypass restrictions.

Blanketed restrictions is not an effective replacement for good parenting, and never should be. All this does is give parents the ability to NOT have to talk about sex, leaving kids even more uninformed about how, why, and the dangers of sex.

[Niernen]

What is the UK cumming to?

[KhainiWest]

What is the UK cumming to?

Theres a website that actually has an answer to that question, that I unfortunately can't post

[Flonne]

all porn sites are blocked here where i live.... pft england is no where as prude as asia as a whole. its ok tho, VPN extensions work wonders.

"My country sucks, so every country should suck". Right?

It's a step in the wrong direction, and the next step is them not asking before putting the filter on.

[Niernen]

Theres a website that actually has an answer to that question, that I unfortunately can't post

but can you pm it?

[hadriel]

"My country sucks, so every country should suck". Right?

It's a step in the wrong direction, and the next step is them not asking before putting the filter on.

I'm not sure whether having an optional filter for porn qualifies a country to be labelled as "it sucks", even if it's one that is an in-unless-opted-out. Where we come from, you have no choice - now that pretty much qualifies that label.

By right, and by left, nobody should know if you have the filter or not... unless someone steps into your house to actually test your searches [assuming that someone knows the difference!]. The social stigma thing is... somewhat less valid in this respect.

Hadriel

[Yuel]

Ehh if people really wanted too all they could do is use a really good proxy if they have pornography disabled.

[Evolite]

So if you wanna watch porn, you have to ask the whatever people to disable the filter? AWKWARD

[Moonlapse]

- Lets the government decide what's "morally acceptable" for its population. Again, this is qualified with the "everything within reason" tag, but still

Amen bro.

@Razmos Do British conservatives support "limited government" like American conservatives, because that would be quite hypocritical for a party against "government intrusion" and the "nanny state".