View Poll Results: Should ISPs make you opt-in to adult material?
Yes, think of the children!
18
20.45%
No, it's down to parents to raise their children, not ISPs - this is not China.
70
79.55%
Voters: 88. You may not vote on this poll
Cameron's Porn Opt-in
25 July 2013, 08:16 AM
#61
25 July 2013, 08:20 AM
#62
Scooby Regular
https://www.scoobynet.com/showpost.p...8&postcount=22
And I agree with the comment above, that people are confused by two recent announcement by this government, one on images of child abuse and the other on pornography
People are conflating the two
25 July 2013, 08:28 AM
#63
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I posted on this subject a few months ago
https://www.scoobynet.com/showpost.p...8&postcount=22
And I agree with the comment above, that people are confused by two recent announcement by this government, one on images of child abuse and the other on pornography
People are conflating the two
https://www.scoobynet.com/showpost.p...8&postcount=22
And I agree with the comment above, that people are confused by two recent announcement by this government, one on images of child abuse and the other on pornography
People are conflating the two
People are definitely getting confused about what this is about, but that is, of coruse, Cameron's intention. The view he wants people to have is that if you are against this you must in some way not want paedophles dealt with and the nation's chikdren protected. When in reality it's about controlling the populous some more! Reinforcing the nanny state!
The more I think about this the more angry about it I get about it!
Last edited by f1_fan; 25 July 2013 at 10:45 AM.
25 July 2013, 10:11 AM
#64
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a dunderhead action by Cameron.
Wait to see rise in sexual crime and more twisted behaviours. Fantasy will be preceded with reality. That's if you get to see real stats; not the Government-gagged ones (no pun intended).
Wait to see rise in sexual crime and more twisted behaviours. Fantasy will be preceded with reality. That's if you get to see real stats; not the Government-gagged ones (no pun intended).
25 July 2013, 07:22 PM
#67
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a) Deceit: trying to get the public to buy into an ineffectual, frankly impotent response, to an issue (and not even the most important one) that is most effectively dealt with in the context of the family home
b) Inveigle: Jumping on the "morals" bandwagon to sell said impotent policy, against the backdrop of funding cuts to agencies responsible for cracking down on the really sinister side of internet ****
c) Obfuscate: Conflating two totally separate issues such that in the process of an (ir)rational debate if one doesn't subscribe to their fundamentally flawed approach to the less significant problem, one can be accused of interfering with the attempts to rid the web of the more sinister **** menace!
Oh, and basically the want you to admit you like www.bigjugs.org
The Daily Mail will be all over it meanwhile anyone with an ounce of web experience, common sense and their priorities in the right place will be scratching their heads saying: "how does this help exactly?"
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 25 July 2013 at 07:28 PM.
25 July 2013, 07:55 PM
#68
Scooby Regular
26 July 2013, 12:08 AM
#69
If kids want to watch ****, they'll find a way around this, just in the same way they find a way to get cigarettes and alcohol, even (illegal)drugs. Having laws, or implementing systems in the hope of solving all problems clearly doesn't work and to be honest, I think the more something is demonised, the more appealing it becomes to the young.
Ignoring any moral argument, I don't think kids watching **** leads them to become some sick pervert any more than watching films or playing certain video games turns them into violent killers. I think that argument is very convenient when bad kids do bad things because it's easier blame a game/film/**** than accept it was either in them in their nature, or they have never been taught right from wrong/reality from fantasy or a combination of both. Sorry for the slight tangent.
If parents genuinely think the right thing to do, is prevent access to ****, then frankly I think it up to them to do that themselves. I don' think a blanket policy or reaction is right as it just yet again moves away from personal responsibility.
26 July 2013, 12:54 AM
#70
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is where I am, I really don't understand how this will help, and help what exactly.
If kids want to watch ****, they'll find a way around this, just in the same way they find a way to get cigarettes and alcohol, even (illegal)drugs. Having laws, or implementing systems in the hope of solving all problems clearly doesn't work and to be honest, I think the more something is demonised, the more appealing it becomes to the young.
Ignoring any moral argument, I don't think kids watching **** leads them to become some sick pervert any more than watching films or playing certain video games turns them into violent killers. I think that argument is very convenient when bad kids do bad things because it's easier blame a game/film/**** than accept it was either in them in their nature, or they have never been taught right from wrong/reality from fantasy or a combination of both. Sorry for the slight tangent.
If parents genuinely think the right thing to do, is prevent access to ****, then frankly I think it up to them to do that themselves. I don' think a blanket policy or reaction is right as it just yet again moves away from personal responsibility.
26 July 2013, 08:14 AM
#71
Scooby Regular
I have 5 children, ranging from 16 to 7
I use opendns
It is simple, configurable, free and requires no client setup at all - in fact every Internet capable device that uses my Internet connection is protected, so this includes all my children's friends devices too
I also do not let any of my children use Internet capable devices in their bedrooms aprt from my eldest 16 year old daughter
Not because I don't trust them really', it is more about protecting them from seeing things they should not see yet, by accident more than anything (we do not allow TV in bedrooms either) in fact my daughter is so sensible she clears it with her mother and me before she posts pictures on her Facebook page that she is unsure of
This sort of stuff is simply the job of the parent
I use opendns
It is simple, configurable, free and requires no client setup at all - in fact every Internet capable device that uses my Internet connection is protected, so this includes all my children's friends devices too
I also do not let any of my children use Internet capable devices in their bedrooms aprt from my eldest 16 year old daughter
Not because I don't trust them really', it is more about protecting them from seeing things they should not see yet, by accident more than anything (we do not allow TV in bedrooms either) in fact my daughter is so sensible she clears it with her mother and me before she posts pictures on her Facebook page that she is unsure of
This sort of stuff is simply the job of the parent
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 26 July 2013 at 08:19 AM.
26 July 2013, 09:00 AM
#72
Scooby Regular
I have 5 children, ranging from 16 to 7
I use opendns
It is simple, configurable, free and requires no client setup at all - in fact every Internet capable device that uses my Internet connection is protected, so this includes all my children's friends devices too
I also do not let any of my children use Internet capable devices in their bedrooms aprt from my eldest 16 year old daughter
Not because I don't trust them really', it is more about protecting them from seeing things they should not see yet, by accident more than anything (we do not allow TV in bedrooms either) in fact my daughter is so sensible she clears it with her mother and me before she posts pictures on her Facebook page that she is unsure of
This sort of stuff is simply the job of the parent
I use opendns
It is simple, configurable, free and requires no client setup at all - in fact every Internet capable device that uses my Internet connection is protected, so this includes all my children's friends devices too
I also do not let any of my children use Internet capable devices in their bedrooms aprt from my eldest 16 year old daughter
Not because I don't trust them really', it is more about protecting them from seeing things they should not see yet, by accident more than anything (we do not allow TV in bedrooms either) in fact my daughter is so sensible she clears it with her mother and me before she posts pictures on her Facebook page that she is unsure of
This sort of stuff is simply the job of the parent
26 July 2013, 09:17 AM
#73
Regarding my poll options, apparently I was wrong - this IS China!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23452097
Huawei implements the filter Cameron is so keen on.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23452097
Huawei implements the filter Cameron is so keen on.
26 July 2013, 09:43 AM
#74
Scooby Regular
and check this little gem
"Customers who do not want filtering still have their traffic routed through the system, but matches to Huawei's database are dismissed rather than acted upon"
"Customers who do not want filtering still have their traffic routed through the system, but matches to Huawei's database are dismissed rather than acted upon"
26 July 2013, 09:58 AM
#75
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This whole **** filter thing is about snooping and controlling the population, nothing else The way Cameron is deliberately making a link between opting in and not wanting to tackle child **** is devisive and frankly utterly disgusting.
Cameron is a dictator and not fit to be our elected PM... oh yeah hang on he wasn't elected was he! To all those who voted for this joke of a politician I hope you can now see how stupid that decision was!
26 July 2013, 10:10 AM
#76
Scooby Regular
that argument is so facile and not really worthy of serious intellectual discussion
as I am sure the parents of the murdered Stephen Lawrence will attest too – as they were subject to “lawful” surveillance by the authorities
as I am sure the parents of the murdered Stephen Lawrence will attest too – as they were subject to “lawful” surveillance by the authorities
26 July 2013, 12:00 PM
#79
Scooby Regular
26 July 2013, 04:03 PM
#80
04 August 2013, 09:27 AM
#82
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is some common sense amongst Cameron's advisors after all
Advisor brands PM's **** filters plan 'ridiculous'
Mind you after that little outburst Cameron will probably sack him!
What a total idiot our PM is!
Advisor brands PM's **** filters plan 'ridiculous'
Mind you after that little outburst Cameron will probably sack him!
What a total idiot our PM is!
05 August 2013, 03:43 PM
#83
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is anyone really that surprised though? Hague stood up in parliament a few weeks ago and on the subject of the authorities monitorintg the public's emails, phone calls etc. basically said 'If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear'.
This whole **** filter thing is about snooping and controlling the population, nothing else The way Cameron is deliberately making a link between opting in and not wanting to tackle child **** is devisive and frankly utterly disgusting.
Cameron is a dictator and not fit to be our elected PM... oh yeah hang on he wasn't elected was he! To all those who voted for this joke of a politician I hope you can now see how stupid that decision was!
This whole **** filter thing is about snooping and controlling the population, nothing else The way Cameron is deliberately making a link between opting in and not wanting to tackle child **** is devisive and frankly utterly disgusting.
Cameron is a dictator and not fit to be our elected PM... oh yeah hang on he wasn't elected was he! To all those who voted for this joke of a politician I hope you can now see how stupid that decision was!
Les
05 August 2013, 03:50 PM
#84
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Makes me wish we had Maggie back and that is an incredible thing for me to say! At least she did what she believed was right not what she thought might keep her elected. That and she actually did things!
07 August 2013, 05:15 PM
#88
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Scunthorpe" that one got ast the swear filter then! (-;
My kids 4 & 8 both have laptops in their bed rooms all online but my wife as an IT manager has only given them access to a few trusted sites the second they try to go off piste the machine asks for a pass word, very easy to set up and they can surf with no worries about any dodgy sites in our house we feel kids need to be computer literate asap.
This whole issue reminds me of walking around Amsterdam, kids everywhere walking past sex shops with 6ft *****'s in the window and weed fumes wafting out of cafe's the parents know what is there but control their childs access by not letting them go into a sex shop or try a funny *** from a cafe.
For me it's another form of government control plain and simple and a blatant erosion of choice!
*******!
My kids 4 & 8 both have laptops in their bed rooms all online but my wife as an IT manager has only given them access to a few trusted sites the second they try to go off piste the machine asks for a pass word, very easy to set up and they can surf with no worries about any dodgy sites in our house we feel kids need to be computer literate asap.
This whole issue reminds me of walking around Amsterdam, kids everywhere walking past sex shops with 6ft *****'s in the window and weed fumes wafting out of cafe's the parents know what is there but control their childs access by not letting them go into a sex shop or try a funny *** from a cafe.
For me it's another form of government control plain and simple and a blatant erosion of choice!
*******!
Last edited by Adam@SC; 07 August 2013 at 05:23 PM.
07 August 2013, 05:23 PM
#89
Scooby Regular
yeah, that's been added to the allowed list 
Ya did a quick edit after your 'test'. It didn't get past the swear filter, it's not a swear word, lol.
Yeah I'm in total agreement though, security is easy to set up nowadays if people bothered to check out how to do it.
******* got through though!
Ya did a quick edit after your 'test'. It didn't get past the swear filter, it's not a swear word, lol.
Yeah I'm in total agreement though, security is easy to set up nowadays if people bothered to check out how to do it.
******* got through though!
Last edited by Torquemada; 07 August 2013 at 05:27 PM. Reason: why not :)