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

So you do want something to be done. That's great! Do you have any ideas?

I think starting with minimising the chance of being presented with tons of porn when googling something innocuous is a great start and could help protect younger children who aren't looking for porn and whose parents haven't put anything in place (or who have but ISP has disabled it in background by accident). None of these protective systems are infallible but there must be ideas around reducing chance of 6 yo looking for animal pics to be presented with live action fucking.

'Sure, some parents won't care, so educate your children so they won't look when friends show them.'

But lots of people care about children in general, not just their own.

Or at least I thought they did until I read this thread :/

Also hahaha at not looking, come off it :D

MeAgainAgain

I've already given you my "idea", its time tested and proof against children looking at porn.

Other posters have posted the same thing.

Limit your child's time on the internet, supervise them and make sure that they can't view porn. No the issues, set up your own blocks but supervise your children.

Oh cool an individualist approach and kids with parents who are technologically inept, not arsed, or think there is protection in place and it has failed

Are collateral damage

Awesome answer thank you :)

So when you said you did care about children in general you meant

You didn't

That's fine and an attitude popular on this thread.

So yay for you. Don't even try wins the day :)

MeAgain

Unfortunately there are parents who are inept, not arsed etc.... However, school is there to educate about internet security and pick up those children not educated at home.
Those who do care will wait until their dc are mature enough to have unsupervised internet access.
You don't have to succumb to peer pressure as a parent.

"Don't even try wins the day"

I don't think that's the case.

People are trying very hard to inform and educate parents about what they need to to to keep their DC safe.

That's rather more useful than deploring the lack of tech solutions (which are currently not possible, by which I do mean technically impossible not 'possibke by the patriarchy aren't doing it),

It is not necessary for children under 13 to have any unsupervised access to the internet. I have three children, and I certainly don't want them accessing porn, but actually there's safe search settings, supervision and reasonable restriction to enable that.
Adults who occasionally want to access mild pornographic material but don't want to register, now can't. This will only serve to make porn worse and more nasty because it won't be catering to low key users anymore. On the other hand, kids will still be allowed unlimited access to internet because their parents have no spine. Great

Don't even try defiinitely wins the day.

I have talked about a defect in the content controls in a major ISP that mean x thousand families in the UK could have had it all switched off in the background, and they would have no idea

No-one has really engaged with that

I have suggested that if the major porn sites and main search engine (or 2? does anyone not use google? well I have duckduckgo but that's for TOR so non standard) ... if Google and the top 3 or 4 porn sites got together they could definitely restrict the amount of searches that return lots of porn on innocuous searches, that would be, doable I think.

eg browser history shows someone in family likes youporn, but, search is for hamster, not to return xhamster + other porn sites.

That is eminently doable.

In my opinion.

But apparently I am trying to ruin free speech, am a terrible parent and possibly a commie or something.

I find it really worrying that on a parenting site, all but about 2 posters have said, this is literally impossible nothing can be done, protect your kids and the others well whatever.

This bothers me as a person in society. TBH.

I care about kids other than mine.

Very few on the thread seem to share that.

This could explain why some other stuff around child protection went on for so long. The idea, well it's not my kid, so, well' who cares' is what I get from here.

MeAgainAgain

Instead of getting pissy and saying anyone that disagrees with you doesn't care.

How about you put an idea or two forward.

I would setting for you having just one credible idea that could be debated instead of you asking for ideas then whinging about the response.

I have put ideas forward

I have to believe some people aren;t bothering to actually read my posts

Lets hear yours

It's not "meh, who cares if kids see porn".

It's not "too difficult, don't even try".

And for many people it's not "parents should deal with it themselves, alone".

But in a lot of cases it is "we should do something, but something that will actually work, and preferably not mess things up for those who don't need/want the filtering".

Don't know precisely what that might be, not really my field. But I have a fair amount of faith that anything involving the government isn't going to be the right answer. Some kind of on-by-default filtering at the ISP level sounds like the most workable option - parents who know nothing get the filter automatically, people with the knowledge get to choose what's best with their kids, people without kids can just turn it off.

Sure, it wouldn't be perfect, stuff will always get through, but I suspect it'll get a lot closer to "good enough" than whatever Westminster dictates.

If the fact that current ISP level filtering goes wrong is an argument that why we need a government run system instead, then that demonstrates massively more faith in the competence involved in government IT projects than I'm even close to capable of.

MeAgainAgain

Lets hear yours

And you accuse others of not reading others posts.

But apparently I am trying to ruin free speech, am a terrible parent and possibly a commie or something

I'm not saying that.

I am pointing out that you are not putting forward any reason to show that the current proposal (as per thread title) will be any use at all.

Your solution (now) appears to be for the government to order companies such as google to create a capability that already exists - either by using search engines with a safe search capability, or by using a filter on the device.

Or is it something else that you want?

"Some kind of on-by-default filtering at the ISP level sounds like the most workable option - parents who know nothing get the filter automatically, people with the knowledge get to choose what's best with their kids, people without kids can just turn it off."

We had this with major ISP UK provider

Bug meant it was all off for months, totally open, but showing as working.

X thousand families could be exposed.

Company were quite cavalier.

So right now in UK X million parents could have content controls showing max but actually, not working at all.

This, as you can imagine, pissed me off.

Luckily we had other protection,

But, other families won't.

I searched hamster while it was down

That was how I realised.

That could be X thousand tots looking up hamster all over the country right now,
With parents having set content control.

These things are fallible.

The porn sites and search sites are massive corporates. Of course they can make it so that hamster brings back fluffy animals, and a click or 2 for porn.

I don't understand why I'm being told off tbh. Well, I do :) People...

As I said, if you think the fallability of ISP level solutions is an argument for government level ones, you have a lot more faith in the useless shower involved on that front than I do. I think it'd be even worse.

"Your solution (now) appears to be for the government to order companies such as google to create a capability that already exists - either by using search engines with a safe search capability, or by using a filter on the device. "

Erm, I think that's sort of all I've said.

And nothing to do with anyone ordering anyhting. UK govt is ??? erm irrelevant in this.

They are massive corporates. internet is man made system.

I was there at university when we first got online, I was a napster fiend (10 hours to download a song and hope they don't go offline!) I had a ZX spectrum, I have a physics degree loads of computer science friends including breaking mob phone tech and in xbox etc...

No I am not in search analytics

But this is a MAN MADE SYSTEM of course we can fucking control it

And put child safety a touch ahead of erections.

I have had a drink now :)

ALL I am saying

Is that it would be good if intital search results
On innocent terms
On the main search engines
Didn;t return reams of porn

The ones who are looking can look again with a term maybe incluidng, um, porn! or similar

And the little kids looking for cats or hamsters don;t get, well, what they get now.

WHY is this such a point of contention?

MeAgainAgain

What system do you want put in place to replace the one that failed?

There is no point in replacing it with the same system or the same type of system as they either get bugs, hacked or are easy to work around.

The porn sites and search sites are massive corporates. Of course they can make it so that hamster brings back fluffy animals, and a click or 2 for porn.

Porn sites do not own the search engines (which have parental controls on by default), nor do they own instagram or the other pictures sites that contain porn uploaded or taken by the public..

Search engines have parental control by default?

Interested.

Tell me more.

BBJ

Do you disagree with this

"Is that it would be good if intital search results
On innocent terms
On the main search engines
Didn;t return reams of porn"

Is that it would be good if intital search results
On innocent terms
On the main search engines
Didn;t return reams of porn

Did you misspell hamster? Because I've just googled it, with safe search OFF and my ISP let's me access whatever the hell I like and I'm several pages into the results and have yet to come across any porn, just lots of furry little rodents.

Yes I did mis-spell hamster!

And, woah.

I think little kids mis-spell stuff lots.

OK so we switched

Off the back of your post I typed "hanster"

porn results returned

not clicked yet

set up the new content controls 2 days ago (ISP switch)

Fair enough. Just asking is all.

MeAgainAgain

Why would I disagree?

But I too have googled hamster and got hamsters.

If you are not getting furry rodents maybe you should try and find out what is corrupting your search algorithm.

Pussy cat brought up pictures of cats, the owl and the pussy cat, and faster pussy cat kill kill.

But this is a MAN MADE SYSTEM of course we can fucking control it

But this is wrong for exactly the reason that you claim it can be controlled. Any controls you put on the internet is a sticking plaster.