News Cameron pushes on porn-filtering programme

[theshadow2001]

Originally Posted by Lance

His parents could be blamed, but I don't think that's really fair as to be honest ...

His parents are to blame, frankly. They should be monitoring his laptop, whitelisting websites and so on (the poster questioning the need for a 9 year old to have a laptop also has a fair point). Of course, the way things are going it looks like it will be your government who are to blame soon.

The parents of people currently aged 18 to 30 could possibly be the last generation where the kids have the upper hand on technology for the most part. Measures like this may become unnecessary.

[steveo_mcg]

Originally Posted by ShinyAli

True, but there will always be some parents/step parents/ legal guardians that are irresponsible and just can't be bothered or just don't care enough, I come from a background where if the internet had been available when I was a kid I could have done what I wanted on it.

In that situation; do you not think this is pissing into the wind? If "carers" can't be bothered monitoring web use there are probably bigger problems coming the kids way, no?

Originally Posted by ShinyAli

I think there are just too many variables in parenting and home life for children to be able to cover every possible scenario of them accessing unsuitable material, you might be able to lock down the home PC but what about net access on phones, pads, tablets, consoles, I don't think many parents will be able to keep up with it all, you could deny your children these devices but there will always be a friend of theirs that has something to access the net on.

Its not about covering every base, that is impossible, its about setting boundaries. With some hypothetical ideal kids filtering wouldn't be necessary they'd have been taught not to use certain sites but obviously this is unrealistic.

Securing the home network is the least any one should do, content filtering is simple enough at point of access and if one isn't tech savvy enough to set up a proxy then the ISP can be asked to activate the filter.

I've no problem with opt-in filters, they're a reasonably effective and responsible tool. Opt-out on the basis of "won't some one think of the children" is ineffective knee jerk nonsense which just passes parental responsibility to the government or ISP.

[fdbh96]

I don't think this it is a viable plan at all. In order to teach my parents how to do such stuff would take a long time to do and something they probably wouldn't waste so much time doing anyway.

[lysaer]

Originally Posted by Lance

I actually think this is a very good idea.

I once was on the laptop of someone I was babysitting (about 6 years ago) and I found tons on porn sites in the history of his computer. This was a 9 year old kid, he should not be considering in that way sex at that age, its just not good for you. This is not a joke and I honestly found it quite distressing.

His parents could be blamed, but I don't think that's really fair as to be honest I NEVER would have expected someone that age to need to be protected, because this should not even be on their radar.

The lines between oppression and protection are fine and dangerous to walk, but sometimes the opt in is better than the opt out, as long as there is an option.

Maybe the husband used it so as not to get caught by the wife.

But should you really if been going through someone else's history?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2

[Corky42]

Originally Posted by [PUNK

crompers]Tin foil hats ahoy. Seriously mate, its not that bad. When was the last time a film was actually properly banned?

If you really believe the media you consume isn't censored you have a bad case of denial, The only reason things are not banned now days is because people know what will get banned so don't waste there money making things that will never see the light of day.

[Lance]

Originally Posted by lysaer

Maybe the husband used it so as not to get caught by the wife.

But should you really if been going through someone else's history?

Sent from my GMC Vandura

I went to go to "hotmail" and found "hot cheerleaders" in the drop menu, so investigated.

5 years ago this problem was still under the surface so parents we're quite as aware of the dangers becoming more common and I did think that for a long time but the more I think about it, the less I think it was the parents.

[Nexxo]

Originally Posted by Lance

I actually think this is a very good idea.

I once was on the laptop of someone I was babysitting (about 6 years ago) and I found tons on porn sites in the history of his computer. This was a 9 year old kid, he should not be considering in that way sex at that age, its just not good for you. This is not a joke and I honestly found it quite distressing.

His parents could be blamed, but I don't think that's really fair as to be honest I NEVER would have expected someone that age to need to be protected, because this should not even be on their radar.

That's a bit naive. Ever hear nine-year old boys talk on the playground? Just because they don't understand it, does not mean they are not fascinated by it, in a gross-out sort of way.

And who says it was the nine-year old that done it? Might have been daddy borrowing his laptop. Either way, nine-year-olds shouldn't have their own laptop yet.

Originally Posted by steveo_mcg

The guys who were young when the internet was Hampster Dance...

Ah, the memories.

Originally Posted by blacko

i wonder if Dave has ran this past his wife?

because we all know she must do a few googles to look at other men because he's a boring f*rt.

Agreed. His wife is too hot for him.

[[PUNK] crompers]

Originally Posted by Corky42

If you really believe the media you consume isn't censored you have a bad case of denial, The only reason things are not banned now days is because people know what will get banned so don't waste there money making things that will never see the light of day.

Haha, been watching a few 9/11 documentaries have we?

I believe that news corporations tell us things based on their own political agenda and also what fits into their story arch at that particular time (part of the reason I often watch Russia Today for a second opinion).

But I don't believe "they" control all the media we consume. In fact I find that when people start talking about "they" they are usually spouting reactionary BS regurgitated from a few online writers or documentaries made by teenagers.

You may think I'm in denial, I think you are naive and slightly childish

[Corky42]

Originally Posted by [PUNK

crompers]I believe that news corporations tell us things based on their own political agenda and also what fits into their story arch at that particular time (part of the reason I often watch Russia Today for a second opinion).

Who did you say had the tin foil hat ? even the news has to censor what they air they cant air nudity or explicit scenes, well not where i live.

Originally Posted by [PUNK

crompers]But I don't believe "they" control all the media we consume. In fact I find that when people start talking about "they" they are usually spouting reactionary BS regurgitated from a few online writers or documentaries made by teenagers.

You may think I'm in denial, I think you are naive and slightly childish

I never mentioned "they"!
Censorship has a history going back to before Christ was born, Calling someone naive and slightly childish isn't a very clever thing to do when you show those traits your self by how little you know on the subject your talking about.

[[PUNK] crompers]

Originally Posted by Corky42

Who did you say had the tin foil hat ? even the news has to censor what they air they cant air nudity or explicit scenes, well not where i live.



I never mentioned "they"!
Censorship has a history going back to before Christ was born, Calling someone naive and slightly childish isn't a very clever thing to do when you show those traits your self by how little you know on the subject your talking about.

Back to before christ was born eh? Where did you read that one? I think most people were probably more worried about eating than censorship to be honest mate. In fact I don't think the concept existed.

You seem very sure christ was born though. Surely the new testament is the best example around of how to control people through text in history. Right up to Henry VIII re-writing it because he wanted a divorce; controlling the media so to speak.

And yes they can't show explicit scenes on the news, GOOD POINT.

Also you will make more sense when you learn some punctuation.

[Corky42]

Originally Posted by [PUNK] crompers

Back to before christ was born eh? Where did you read that one? I think most people were probably more worried about eating than censorship to be honest mate. In fact I don't think the concept existed.

You seem very sure christ was born though. Surely the new testament is the best example around of how to control people through text in history. Right up to Henry VIII re-writing it because he wanted a divorce; controlling the media so to speak.

And yes they can't show explicit scenes on the news, GOOD POINT.

Also you will make more sense when you learn some punctuation.

Before Christ is a well know time frame (in case they don't teach this in school now days),
399 BC (Before Christ) perhaps the most famous case of censorship in ancient times is that of Socrates, sentenced to drink poison for his corruption of youth and his acknowledgement of unorthodox divinities

And rolling out the old punctuation argument just goes to show your grasping at straws, very sad indeed.

[RichCreedy]

when I was 9-10 home computers were something only ever seen in films. mum and dad had a book similar to the karma sutra, which I read, and thought meh, I didn't start having sex until I was 18, so is early access to sex material as bad as people make out? I think if its a taboo it's more likely to cause intrigue, and experimentation, if it's talked about openly, it's less likely to be experimented with.

[Anfield]

filtering the web will work just as well as the safety caps on bottles, old people will be the only ones stopped from anything.

[tuk]

silly, unworkable idea ...like kids don't already know how to proxy surf.

real life family:
Mum is the BB account holder.
22yr old son living at home: "Mum, can you call Sky & ask them to turn on the porn"

[Lance]

Originally Posted by Anfield

filtering the web will work just as well as the safety caps on bottles, old people will be the only ones stopped from anything.

At least there will be less old man related wrist injuries in the home then.

[Shirty]

If I didn't already know how to prevent my child from using a proxy, I'd damn well learn.

There's nothing I can do about what she sees at school or at a friend's house, but I'll do my damnedest to make sure that she can't access inappropriate material at home. She won't have an unrestricted web enabled mobile device until she's in her teens, and there will be one internet-connected PC she can access in a public part of the house until I deem it appropriate for her to have her own.

I was in my early teens in the early days of the web, and I saw things at a formative age that my parents couldn't even imagine today. The internet in the early 90s was a lot less policed than it is nowadays, and even a simple Lycos/Excite search often seemed to uncover sites that were clearly filled with illegal content. Things are a lot better now as most of that sort of stuff is buried deep within the dark side of the net, but it pays to take responsibility as a parent.

Many people either don't have kids or deliberately bury their heads in the sand blaming technical incompetence, but that's no excuse in my opinion.

[fdbh96]

Originally Posted by Shirty

If I didn't already know how to prevent my child from using a proxy, I'd damn well learn.

There's nothing I can do about what she sees at school or at a friend's house, but I'll do my damnedest to make sure that she can't access inappropriate material at home. She won't have an unrestricted web enabled mobile device until she's in her teens, and there will be one internet-connected PC she can access in a public part of the house until I deem it appropriate for her to have her own.

I was in my early teens in the early days of the web, and I saw things at a formative age that my parents couldn't even imagine today. The internet in the early 90s was a lot less policed than it is nowadays, and even a simple Lycos/Excite search often seemed to uncover sites that were clearly filled with illegal content. Things are a lot better now as most of that sort of stuff is buried deep within the dark side of the net, but it pays to take responsibility as a parent.

Many people either don't have kids or deliberately bury their heads in the sand blaming technical incompetence, but that's no excuse in my opinion.

I think the thing is personal choice, it should be the parents decision to decide what the child can and cannot see, not david cameron or any other mp.

[[PUNK] crompers]

Originally Posted by Corky42

Before Christ is a well know time frame (in case they don't teach this in school now days),
399 BC (Before Christ) perhaps the most famous case of censorship in ancient times is that of Socrates, sentenced to drink poison for his corruption of youth and his acknowledgement of unorthodox divinities

And rolling out the old punctuation argument just goes to show your grasping at straws, very sad indeed.

Haha okie dokie Stephen Fry, couldnt wait to roll that one out eh. I'd argue thats a very tenuous link to censorship to be honest, at least in the context of the conversation. Interesting factoid though, well done.

Its not sad though friend, the ability to express yourself in written form does require punctuation. You seem to be a reasonably intelligent if slightly misguided chap so why make yourself look silly with childish mistakes?

[Nexxo]

Let's keep it civil, guys. No name calling, no picking on people's grammar.

[tuk]

Originally Posted by fdbh96

I think the thing is personal choice, it should be the parents decision to decide what the child can and cannot see, not david cameron or any other mp.

^this^