Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

recent decision by MNHQ

508 replies

NetworkGuy · 02/02/2011 23:33

Please, MNHQ, do have a read of this thread and consult your Tech people so they can give you the answers as to whether your support for this campaign and the Minister's plans are worth going on with.

I would hope you not only reverse your position but assuming you get sufficient technical reasoning in 'Plain English', that you go public and explain how unworkable the proposal is likely to be. I feel sure journalists at Computer Weekly and Computing will be able to provide confirmation that filtering is a hiding to nothing and can be very costly because of the millions of GB of data flowing through the bigger ISP networks.

For anyone baffled, and wondering if I'm a nut case, this concerns a proposal to get ISPs to "filter out" all porn, unless a customer "opts in". For numerous technical reasons the idea is never likely to achieve filtering without blocking access to legitimate sites or not blocking access to better than say 95% reliable, thus making it a costly exercise in futility, while parental vigilance and filtering software at the home would still be essential for peace of mind.

(Incidentally the wording of the campaign page implies the parents need to ask, at the same time as someone wanting not to have censored content needs to ask - it is one or other, but not both that would need to contact ISP. )

OP posts:
Original poster
NetworkGuy · 03/02/2011 13:20

the one (software package) for Windows 7

brought in
MS has brought out the one for Win 7

OP posts:
lessnarkypuffin · 03/02/2011 13:20

Cyber bullying worries me a lot more than porn. Facebook, You Tube and video phones combine to create huge potential for harm. There's no way to uninvent them.

Original poster
NetworkGuy · 03/02/2011 13:21

Don't know if XBox allows you to browse.

Talking to DC about what is/is not acceptable is still higher up the list, though, surely !

OP posts:
goldenticket · 03/02/2011 13:22

They both worry me lessnarkypuffin Sad

What do I need to do with an Itouch? That can access the internet, right? Can I block sites on it/apply parental controls etc?

BaroqueAroundTheClock · 03/02/2011 13:22

yes - I have the one for Windows 7 (on my laptop_ - but I can't put download the same one for my PC - as it's XP. (presume we're talking about the Windows Live FAmily thing here?? Blush)

lessnarkypuffin · 03/02/2011 13:23

You need to pay for 'x-box live' to connect to the internet Goldenticket. Usually an annual payment.

goldenticket · 03/02/2011 13:23

Oh NetworkGuy, give me some credit here! Angry

goldenticket · 03/02/2011 13:24

Yes, it's got Xbox Live. Lordy.

lessnarkypuffin · 03/02/2011 13:25

This should help with the Itouch.

Original poster
NetworkGuy · 03/02/2011 13:27

lessnarkypuffin - an alternative called Cyber Buddies for 7-12 would be one safer place, to start with, and the BBC has a 3-part radio series about cyber bullying - partly to increase parental awareness - but it has been on at daft times.

Weekday 11:30 for 3 weeks, 18 months ago, while schools open and parents working... 15 months ago when Parliament in recess for summer, so on at 23:30 for three consecutive nights, again not best time for teens and parents to hear.

Recently I heard repeats on R4 at 1am on the world service, again unlikely to be heard. And let's face it, R4 won't reach 50++% of families even if they had been putting this on at 10:30 on a Saturday morning when some better chance of hearing it.

Awareness and support for DC if they are being bullied is only option I think, for now. Some parents remove the phone or access to the victim which is a second "kick in the teeth" and I would prefer bullying to be treated with an ASBO and loss of access by the perpetrators.

OP posts:
goldenticket · 03/02/2011 13:28

Oh that's brilliant puffin, thank you Smile

lessnarkypuffin · 03/02/2011 13:29

This is for Xbox360. You might have a different one.

Original poster
NetworkGuy · 03/02/2011 13:33

Kaloki - I hope you could consider adding links to such tools as the ones lessnarkypuffin has provided... on your blog page

OP posts:
lessnarkypuffin · 03/02/2011 13:34

Luckily it's not come to that for us NetworkGuy. Fingers crossed.

lessnarkypuffin · 03/02/2011 13:36

We don't have Live but I have just discovered the limit length of game funtion.

Grin Evil cackle

Original poster
NetworkGuy · 03/02/2011 13:40

With a lot bit of luck, MNHQ are being given the technical flaws in the suggestion by their Tech friends and will come back some time to discuss...

I'm busy this afternoon (just saw the time) but will no doubt catch up with all this much later!

OP posts:
MNHQ
RebeccaMumsnet · 03/02/2011 13:46

Just a quick post to let you know that we have seen this and will be back later with our thoughts.

BaroqueAroundTheClock · 03/02/2011 13:46

I still want a solution for Live to work on both my computers

goldenticket · 03/02/2011 13:49

lessnarkypuffin (love the name!) thank you once again.

lessnarkypuffin · 03/02/2011 13:56

You're welcome and thank you.

Snorbs · 03/02/2011 15:04

I don't know why Microsoft didn't bother doing a version of Family Safety Centre for XP. What I suspect is that rather than continue to provide useful features for an obsolete operating system, Microsoft decided to restrict it to Vista and Win7 as a means of persuading people to upgrade from XP. Which rather sucks but is sadly typical Microsoft business practise.

I've heard that K9 is pretty good and it's free. It uses the same technology as Bluecoat's ISP-level filtering but as it's on the PC rather than at the ISP it's a lot more flexible in allowing you to set what you want to allow/disallow and to whom.

BaroqueAroundTheClock · 03/02/2011 15:32

So that snorbs - if I ever have the money to "upgrade" from XP - it will be a brand spanking computer as well.........and probably a Mac as well Grin

MNHQ
KateMumsnet · 03/02/2011 15:33

Thanks very much for your comments, and sorry it?s taken us a little while to respond.

Our over-arching aim is to address the concerns that Mumsnetters have repeatedly expressed about the ease with which children can access pornographic material on the internet, intentionally or otherwise. In trying to do that we will, of course, take on board the comments posted here.

What we can say is that other experts we've consulted on this do seem to think that filtering is a feasible option, and that a combination of continually-improving filtering techniques would provide a much more accurate filter than was previously possible (so no blocking "chicken breast recipes", for example).

It?s worth bearing in mind that while no system is infallible, such technology is already in use for filtering out images of child abuse, and as some posters have pointed out, it?s also the default setting for some mobile providers.

It's true there are still technical challenges to be overcome, and that there will always be scope for a determined child to circumvent a network filter, but we think this would be an effective way to prevent children from inadvertently stumbling across pornographic material, or accessing it via a casual search.

If a default filter option turns out to be unachievable, then of course we'll rethink. We?re having ongoing conversations with campaign groups, policy bods and others on this issue, and we're attending a roundtable with the ISPs next week. We'll have a better idea then what the industry perceive the challenges to be, and whether they are proposing effective alternatives.

We?ll keep you updated, and of course do please continue to let us know what you think.

Snorbs · 03/02/2011 15:53

"What we can say is that other experts we've consulted on this do seem to think that filtering is a feasible option"

Would you care to name any names?

KalokiMallow · 03/02/2011 16:57

So has this campaign been decided based on MN user views, or just MNHQ views?

And could these experts come on and answer the points we've put forward?