UK seriously considering opt in policy for online pornography.

[drater]

www.dailydot.com/news/uk-internet-opt-in-porn/

Am I the only one who thinks this is ridiculous? I hate the way that public figures are trying to make out that the Internet should be child safe. It's an adult place, with adult content, and if you want your kids to venture into it, you make them safe by using Netnanny or similar tools or by, and here's a radical idea, supervising them. You wouldn't (or shouldn't) go shopping in an adult store and expect to take your kid in there with you and have them cover everything so little timmy doesn't see some tittays, so don't let your kid meander round the Internet without some form of supervision.

Shouldn't it be a parents job to survey their children's internet use rather than a nanny government limiting it for everyone?

How do we safeguard kids who are not protected?

How would our freedom be infringed. Wouldn't we just opt-in?

If it stirs up groups who are nuts, shouldn't we let the law deal with them?

holds head in hands

I give up.

I really do.

bangs head on the wall

More drama!

Question: How do you stop kids watching 18 DVDs at home when they aren't properly supervised?

Answer: You can't.

There are limits to everything.

More drama? No just frustrated when I've already answered that...

How do we safeguard kids who are not protected?

You mean other people's kids whose parents can't be bothered to protect them? The sort of parents who will probably opt in anyway? Haven't a clue - what would you suggest? Maybe we should make it illegal for anybody to opt in if they have minors in the house.

Well if all kids aren't protected that's not good enough - therefore I'm in favour of opt-ins.

And if freedom gets infringed - that's a price I'm OK with.

Over and out.

Well if all kids aren't protected that's not good enough - therefore I'm in favour of opt-ins.

Ok.... that makes perfect sense, especially given what POPG just posted!
I'm utterly baffled.

I think an opt in is a very good idea, and it needs to apply to all devices that can access the Internet - pcs, laptops, phones, tablets, ipods and games consoles etc. Consoles like the play station would be easy ones to forget about but probably the most important because they are most likely to be used by young people and also less likely to be checked by parents, also parents are likely to understand how to put parental controls on them, or might not even realise that they can be used to go search the net.

I agree that porn is damaging to lots of people not just children.

Sarahplane
"Consoles like the play station would be easy ones to forget about"
mentioned upthread somewhere.

Animation
"Well if all kids aren't protected that's not good enough - therefore I'm in favour of opt-ins.
And if freedom gets infringed - that's a price I'm OK with."

In May 1933, the Nazi party decreed that any book, ?which acts subversively on our future or strikes at the root of German thought, the German home and the driving forces of our people...? was to be burnt.

What price freedom?

DH just said, if he was a kid he'd borrow his neighbours insecure network where they had opted in...

He also just said, that if it was that easy to filter/block porn why haven't hotels done it yet so they can charge for it, as there is a financial incentive there...

Animation
"Well if all kids aren't protected that's not good enough - therefore I'm in favour of opt-ins.
And if freedom gets infringed - that's a price I'm OK with."

In May 1933, the Nazi party decreed that any book, ?which acts subversively on our future or strikes at the root of German thought, the German home and the driving forces of our people...? was to be burnt.

What price freedom?

I do believe you've invoked Godwins Law!!

And yes, I think I can live with that - if kids are better safeguarded.

Accept that you picked a debate where Godwin's Law is very very pertinent and it should be brought up.

Except*

Animation
"I do believe you've invoked Godwins Law!!"

OMG

would you like to offer a counter point.
or
Would you prefer a comparison to dunblane?
by which hand guns where prohibited yet gun crime continued to rise until 2006/7

It's easy to get side-tracked into wishy washy pseudo-libertarian arguments, but boil it down to the essentials;
Who would benefit from this?
Who would be damaged by it?
SIMPLES!

kweggie

You've missed another point
Is this possible?

Who would benefit from this?
Nobody - the whole concept is flawed

Who would be damaged by it?
The child of any parent who thinks it's OK to rely on a flawed system that dos not offer the protection the Daily Mail likes to pretend it might.

BBJ- is what possible?

kweggie
in this case the complete censorship/blocking of porn on the internet.

"I want to travel by unicorn!"
"They don't exist"
"Someday there might be technology available to create one!"
"Um.. well, yes.. possibly.."
"So I want one now!"
"But the technology doesn't actually exist right now"
"It should do"
"Well.. yes, maybe.."
"So get me a unicorn!"
"We can't."
"But you should."
"How?"
"I don't know, there should be experts working on it"
"There probably are"
"See? So my unicorn is possible!"
"No.. it's potentially possible, not actually possible"
"You are just being negative"
"No, I'm being factual"
"You hate unicorns!"
"What?"
"Unicorn hater!"
"..uh..."
"You aren't even trying to help!"
"I.. uh.. buh.. "
"Where's your solution?"
"My solution? You want the bloody unicorn, I'm happy with all the many other methods of transport"
"No, I refuse to even try other methods. A unicorn is the only solution!"
"But they don't exist. You can't will them into existence"
"Excuses excuses"
"It's not an excuse, it's reality. Look, you can have a horse. They do exactly the same thing but without costing loads in research and implementation"
"No. Unicorn."
"Why not a horse?"
"A unicorn just sounds better"
"But creating a unicorn could be massively flawed, the horse has evolved to where it is now. It's does the job more than adequately"
"A unicorn might be better"
"It might. But we don't know this for certain."
"See, I was right. You said yourself it has some advantages"
"It has a lot of disadvantages. Oh and it's still not possible right now. In fact it may never be possible"
"You are so negative! Wont you think of the children??"

You know what, we should just let Esther Rantzen sell the stupid people their unicorn.

Everyone who understands t'internets has explained why we can't make them a unicorn, & we're arguing pointlessly with...noise.