To think we should block porn as they do in France...

[jobhunter7]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10349501/Major-porn-sites-BLOCKED-France-unless-ensure-users-18.html

And people saying age verification is easy to circumvent. Yes it can be, just as it is easy to get fake ID to buy alcohol. But we have also put laws in place that give heavy fines to those selling alcohol to underage people, or buy it on their behalf. Alcohol is now much harder to get hold of

It's not the same. As posted earlier, this is online supply of age-restricted material where checks at point of delivery (as there wouid be forbalvp ohol purchase) are simply not possible. You are not comparing both like with like.

Solutions need to be found. This is important stuff

There already is a solution which is more effective than what the French propose. It's not 'too difficuit' to use device-based blockers. And to supervise DC and educate them.

I know this means parents have to act (and educate themselves too, perhaps, into hiowblockers of various types work and what their limitations are!0, and importantly what tech solutions can and cannot offer)

I am arguing for better protection of DC than thus half-baked French measure which offers only the pretence of worthwhile protection.

I know what I advocate isn't perfect either, but it's way, way better than the French proposal. And available to us all right now.

It is not down to parents not acting that children have access to porn.
It's because it's freely available on the Internet with no safeguards in place.
It's harder for children to access subscription service sports than porn. Porn which depicts women being brutalised as "pleasure".
It speaks volumes to me that film makers and sports providers manage to hinder people getting their content for free, yet it's "too hard" to stop children getting porn.

I really don't understand what the problem is with requiring a credit card/phone contract to demonstrate someone is over 18.

The USA is the shop next door who will sell you anything - until they stop it France and everyone else is whistling in the wind

Yes

One problem is that the French proposal covers only 5 sites, which are large and well known so that ant blacker wouid exclude itb(and hundreds more)

If your DC can access sites of that nature, then yes I think parents are failing. Because even the mist basic blocker wouid prevent access at least as well as the French proposal, and do a lot more besides.

I'm beginning to wonder why people are so doggedly espousing the inferior option. Are they the ones who want DC exposed to the sort of porn sites not covered by the French proposal? The sites that would be blocked by using blockers? (which of course is not all porn, just more of it)

I am totally on board with this. Porn should be opt in with your personal details at the very least.

It speaks volumes to me that film makers and sports providers manage to hinder people getting their content for free, yet it's "too hard" to stop children getting porn.

They are two sides of the same coin. It’s all about money and mainly down to the USA.

This would be a vote winner for me I hope it happens.

It’s all about money

Agree - there are many, many free porn sites. So no subscription or credit card required. Also porn is not just tidily on 'porn sites'

Putting age verification onto just 5 well-known sites (all of which wouid be blocked by any blocker anyhow) is going to make no real difference. Apart from lulling people into omne false sense of security that it's an actual safeguard

Do film makers and sports producers manage to hinder people getting their content for free? They might attempt to, it’s not necessarily successful, is it?

Looks like we're going the same way here.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-60293057

I just hope parents don't think this is some kind of effective porn blocker

It was dropped in 2019 because it doesn't work - still doesn't, but it a gesture that won't go away.

If you want your DC protected - then educate, supervise and use device based content blockers.

@Soubriquet

"How can they put in verification that can’t be cheated by teens?"

It should be the same verification as the post office I.D service, which a lot of people have for tax, licenses, DWP etc.

The research is there to show how damaging it is. Violence against women and girls isn't getting any better, so there's good reason to change things, just as they did with smoking and gambling. If the will is there, it can be done.

I've spent a lot of time today trying to sort out settings on our devices. Why do I have to pay for online security to protect my children from seeing/accessing various things I don't want them to? Doesn't make sense- any adult wanting to access porn should have to register /pay, not the other way round.
It bothers me too that the adult sites are even listed on the TV guide as you're scrolling through, sandwiched in between all the rest.

Totally agree Crabapple
It’s cynical as fuck and governments just let it happen- flood the market with your damaging crap, then force those with the money and motivation to avoid it to pay for the privilege. WTF?

There should be a ban on kids accessing porn sites (as in France) AND all the blocking and avoiding software should be free to everyone who wants it, paid for by the state, out of taxing the porn producers and broadcasters.
The government should also be providing exit and safeguarding programmes for those involved in and affected by the industry in exactly the same way.
What happened to that government principle of fairness that the polluter pays?
Why are the government allowing female exploitation to be so damaging and so lucrative?

There are some excellent free packages

Google will return many offerings (and reviews)

Here's just one example

www.opendns.com/home-internet-security/

France has not banned DC accessing porn. They are proposing age verification on just 5 we'll-known sites, all of which would be blocked anyway by any halfway decent content blocker.

No government controls the internet. No government 'allowed' it anything

(Unless you live in somewhere like North Korea)

It speaks volumes to me that film makers and sports providers manage to hinder people getting their content for free, yet it's "too hard" to stop children getting porn.

You're not comparing like with like. Film producers with big budgets and sports rights holders who've paid billions for exclusivity have a vested interest in blocking illegal streams because it eats into their profits. It's worth them spending a large proportion of their profits on enforcement because otherwise everyone would stream for free and there would be no profits at all.

The overwhelming majority of porn is very low budget. The majority of revenue comes from advertising revenue, so there is no incentive to block users, in fact the very opposite.

A lot of porn sites are amateur and run by enthusiasts and not for profit at all. There's a huge amount of user-generated content out there that people create at home and load to the internet for free.

What you're really comparing is a big budget film being difficult to download versus finding a way to download a cat video I've uploaded to YouTube. There's no way I would be able to prevent you downloading a copy with the myriad of free tools available (I recommend 4K Vidoe Downloader), and nothing to stop you uploading wherever you please. I could sue you and try to get it taken down, but I don't have the money to do that, nor do I really care.

Yes