To think porn should not be easily accessible to children?

[Iggypoppie]

Apologies if there is already a thread? But I'm so pleased that a check and balance is being proposed re making porn only accessible to over 18s.
Bizarrely, On politics live today a young woman was laughing about how absurd the idea was, while an older conservative dude was for it. Strange times we live in.

www.google.com/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/porn-websites-to-check-uk-users-ages-as-law-passes-11604331

Yes I do Glacinda.

I am talking more widely.

The govt do have a habit of coming out with "just switch it off" type ideas that are not workable.

The government did not protect me from ripped up jazz mags in the woods in 1970’s.....

FFS, this is down to parenting

"There is no reason that something couldn't be done with major search engines + main providers that would stop a massive amount of accidental "stumbling across
How? "

Easy.

main porn sites are well known.
do something to make it a bit tricker (but not impossible) to access them via mainstream search engines

The search engines work on hits etc blah
But obviously can be made to behave in certain ways

eg If someone searches Pussy, give them Cats unless XXX criteria is fulfilled.

No I am not going to solve the whole world porn issues

BUT I find it really depressing that women on MN of all places are saying YOU MUST DO THIS or you are not allowed to say FFS at the ease with which many many kids in the UK will be presented with porn when they are simply trying to look for pics of cats for their granny or something.

It is NOT OK to say Yeah too hard just leave it, it's up to the parents and the ones who won't or can't well their kids are some kind of collateral damage in pursuit of "free speech".

the main search engines and main porn sites are all massive corporates

of course they could do something if they wished

And also the callousness of 'oh the parents have to do it it's 100%on them'. When everyone knows that lots of parents are naive /technologically inept/ can't be bothered etc

Why is asking someone to parent being callous?

The first port of call should be the parents, why shouldn't it.

Porn isn't restricted to 'porn sites'

That is why this initiative is wrong, and will do nothing to prevent stumbling. That's Internet 101

main porn sites are well known.
do something to make it a bit tricker

And what about the many many many non main ones? Which will be the type that have dodgy pop ups and ads

BUT I find it really depressing that women on MN of all places are saying YOU MUST DO THIS or you are not allowed to say FFS at the ease with which many many kids in the UK will be
I work as a software developer and lived in China which has an absolute shit tonne of money thrown at the firewall which is incredibly easy to get around. I don't think its depressing to be like the most workable practical and best way is for parents to do the Internet safety checks, because it is the best way. A parent can clamp down far better then the state can.

I am aware of that Gacinda

However the major porn sites have the most footfall, so come high up search engine results, and also get suggested when names similar to their appear. Because, weight of traffic.

It's not all or nothing.

If the major porn sites and the major search engines got together they could reduce a large amount of the accidental stuff, which is more likely to be small children.

The idea that British parents are just NO to even thinking about these ideas is depressing TBH.

"the most workable practical and best way is for parents to do the Internet safety checks, "

This simply will not work.

It is a cop out.

And what sort of "internet safety checks" are you referring to anyway? That's not a term I've heard before. Usually it's around gettign protection software / having devices in family room etc. Not seen anything advising parents to carry out internet safety checks, maybe it's just your turn of phrase.

Do you mean testing that software they have purchases is working on a reg basis?

But see from yor post actually you think that stuff is ineffective.

So, no protection of that nature and carry out internet safety checks.

Can you expand on that?

"you are not allowed to say FFS at the ease with which many many kids in the UK will be presented with porn when they are simply trying to look for pics of cats for their granny or something."

Agree with BoneyBackJefferson

Parents need to parent, and the installation of one of the reputable (and free FFS) content blockers on the device will pretty much eliminate inappropriate results.

And the kids with parents who can't or won;'t?

Collateral damage?

No point in even thinking if anythign can be done?

This simply will not work
It's more workable then a checkbox or something saying I'm over 18 on Google. Which kids would just click.

And what sort of "internet safety checks" are you referring to anyway?
All the things you listed after.

Kids will just get a VPN and access it that

A VPN requires a little setup, and leaves behind fingerprints that may attract attention (‘oi! Why does it say VPN next to the WiFi symbol?’) but a proxy server is basically just another url that can be mailed around.

My mainstream ISP switched off my content control, I had no idea, it showed up as ON in the settings.

It was off for months, I had no idea.

Luckily I had secondary protection on all devices.

Many parents with younger children will trust the ISP content blockers, why wouldn't they?

I have asked them to tell me what they are doing to see how many others affected, they never get back.

This is one of main UK ISP companies.

So content blockers not enough AND large company does not seem to care that their blockers are shonky.

Anyway.

I really dislike this attitude that kids with shit or even just not very on the ball parents are AOK collateral damage.

MeAgainAgain
And the kids with parents who can't or won;'t?

Collateral damage?

No point in even thinking if anythign can be done?

There is thinking of additional blocks that can be put in place and there is given someone a free pass when it comes to not looking after their own children.

"Kids will just get a VPN and access it that"

Not if they're 8!

The pushback here really surprised me.

yes older kids will go looking for porn.

the apathy about younger kids who will get it in their faces when looking for innocent stuff is mind boggling

I suppose, we have got a lot more individualist as a society. And that's that.

"given someone a free pass when it comes to not looking after their own children."

?????

The people who get damaged are the kids.

So this is like, the sins of the parent (not knowing how to set it up, not being arsed) shall be visited upon the child.

Well who knew it was time for the old testament to do the rounds again. V progressive.

The main objections that I've read regarding this issue is that it actually has very little to do with blocking access to pornography for children. Most people are concerned that it's a way to introduce mechanisms to censor the internet or even worse to track people's personal sexual foibles as possible ammunition against dissenting voices. I have no particular interest in pornography but this really is a small step towards authoritarianism.

So, no protection of that nature and carry out internet safety checks

State wide protections rarely work. There's lots of kid friendly software you can install that keeps kids safer (not completely). That would not and could not work statewide. Which is why it's better for parents to be in control.

Free school meals are a "free pass"
Free transport to school is a "free pass"
Checks for people working with kids are as "free pass"

etc etc

You can take that quite a long way really.

The idea that not wanting to have little kids exposed to porn is a "free pass" for their parents is genuinely bonkers.

I mean yes of course all parents would like it if their kids weren't going to be exposed to porn while still in primary school. That's hardly a generous luxury is it?

Out of curiosity, I just googled "pussy cat" and got results about cats, and a fairly innocuous Dutch pop band.

I'm not disbelieving you, but that example does not lead me directly to porn.

MeAgainAgain

The people who get damaged are the kids.

And whose first in line to prevent that???????????? (see we can all do excessive question marks)

So this is like, the sins of the parent (not knowing how to set it up, not being arsed) shall be visited upon the child.

No, Its parents should be doing their jobs, yes there should be a back up, yes there should be training.

But CBA to do it, or I don't know how to do it is no excuse for lazy parenting.

There is no end of software out there that is simple and easy to use.

But hey lets not talk about giving your child a state of the art phone "its just for safety reasons" that can access the internet through mobile networks. Lets talk about state wide systems that are so simple to get around its ludicrous.

ofshoes

however

the issues around children accessing this content are valid - we know it happens a lot and we know there are consequences

the "free speech" types around this (and I have read quite a few) really do seem to be only really interested in making sure their porn isn't just slightly more tricky to get at. they try to cloak it in a big moral thing but it's not.

There is no need for hardcore porn to be as utterly ubiquitous normalised etc as it is. No need for everyone to say OH well that's the way it is what can you do?

I am left with the feeling that people just don't care.

MeAgainAgain
Free school meals are a "free pass"
Free transport to school is a "free pass"
Checks for people working with kids are as "free pass"

They are a back up. and your analogy for DBS checks doesn't work.

Allowing your children to access porn in the home is bad parenting.
Giving your child a smart phone and not putting blocks on it it bad parenting

Complaining that the internet won't protect your children is massively stupid.