A UK industry regulator has called for the law to be changed to require pornography sites to carry out age checks before granting access. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-26779639 So the ISP filters ant good enough?LOL!
I would say that 95%+ of what politicians do should be done without money. If a legislative solution can be made that does not require spending, then I'll take that over the expensive solution any day.
How exactly do you check age? No underage person is going to admit it, yet demanding access to personal documents or credit cards isn't going to work either.
They can't enforce anything like that. I'm sure most of us, at some point, were under 18 and wanted to get on to the website for our favourite game at the time if it were an 18+ game. They just ask you if you are or aren't, you obviously won't click no. If you do, all you do is click back and go forward and try again. It's not rocket science. It's good to see the politicians making good use of their time. NOT!
As I posted on The Register when this story broke:- "Fee! Fie! Foe! Fums! I can smell the Net of Mums!"
The most remarkable thing about the article is that it's the "adult" businesses that seem to be making the most sense, advocating the importance of parental involvement and influence. This is arguably more a reflection on the government's attitude to parenting than anything else.
Why would we need anything like an age check for adult sites when we have the ISP block-by-default network level filters ? Are they admitting the filter doesn't work and they need to go further.
I think we should prohibit the use of HTML and go back to the days of text-only Usenet. It's the only way to be sure. I know, I know, people can still read porn. But kids these days can't read anyway, so it all works out. Best thing is: with reading being a liability that risks exposing children to harmful knowledge, you can stop teaching them that skill and save a mint on primary school education. Next stop: eliminate critical thought. Ignorance is strength!
How do I double-plus-upvote this? Seriously, the porn filter failed just about every metric and I just can't see this legislation being anything other than a way to increase spending. I'm curious just how the powers-that-be intend to track the success of such a law.
Given how the EU cookie law turned out you'll just end up with a screen/popup saying - 'are you over 18/21? yes/no'... to which everyone will click 'yes'... or provide your DoB to continue... to which most people lie because they're underage or too lazy to fill it out properly... which is pretty much what most sites with age-restricted content, be it booze, games or nekkidness [or those i've come across at least] do anyway... So like the filters and whatnot, the ****wit who came out with it needs a good slap and to be told 'you're reinventing the wheel, these things are already there...'
There is a lot ot be said for textual porn. Having the action take place inside your head instead of on the screen makes it more real
Don't see how this works pay sites you need a cc and a free site wanting to confirm your identity...NO. So the isp block doesn't work? Confused.
Have you forgotten the days of BBS and ASCI porn. I say we go back to telling kids it will make them go blind, and they will grow hair on the palms of their hands.
The real question is, though: how many porn sites are based in the UK? UK legislation will only affect those sites actually based in the UK (of which I'm sure there aren't very many), so it's completely pointless - those outside the UK (the vast majority) won't be affected in the slightest. Just with Cameron telling Google that they should block child porn (something which they have been doing for some time, and completely ignoring the fact that most kiddie porn is likely to be on the "dark web"), it's just hot air and misdirection of the politicians wanting to be seen to "do something"...
To be fair, that is only in reaction to a hysterical public (with added whipping up by frenzied media) demanding ministers to do something! Because God forbid that parents take responsibility for their own kids' wellbeing.
How many people suffer from low self esteem and low self confidence again? Nope. Most people find it difficult to take responsibility though. Puts a new meaning to touching dirty places...