News Government proposes mandatory age checks for adult sites

So when Mr Cameron said 'this Tory is not a nanny' i guess that was only concerning alcohol.

Also isn't this an admission that the block-by-default filters aren't working? I mean if they were why would we need mandatory age checks for adult sites.

 

Whatever the government say they are going to do to enforce this, they won't stop resourceful teenagers finding ways to circumvent the checks, without getting caught, then telling all their friends what to do.

 

That depends on your definition of working being realistic and not tainted by, with respect, your fairly-well-known-on-this-forum political bias. The government's expectations of the initiative in the first place would likely have been to see a reduction in minors accessing adult material, not complete elimination.

Campaigns to stop people smoking - or drink driving - would be considered to be "working" if fewer people are now doing these things than before the campaigns took place. By your logic, people are still smoking - so there was no point trying in the first place?

 

If I were an enterprising Russian or citizen of some extradition free non-eu country I would be busying myself setting up a free, non malware, porn proxy directly marketed at UK citizens which bypasses geolocation based age verification and which injects my own set of ads in place of the porn site's ads. Seems like it would be a few easy bucks.

 

Seems relevant:- http://dilbert.com/strip/1996-01-24

 

Gareth, did you blur your LinkedIn profile pick for the story image?

 

Wow nice ad hominem there, my comment has nothing to do with a fairly-well-known-on-this-forum political bias, i wouldn't care who proposed such an idea because (IMHO) it's a bad idea, but don't let subjectivity get in the way of a good ol' chance to attack someone.

If i was, as you say, being tainted by my apparently fairly-well-known-on-this-forum political bias then why would i ask if this an admission that the block-by-default filters aren't working when it's supported by both the main parties?

And why would i be critical of the block-by-default filters when it was championed by politicians from both sides
?

Smoking is illegal for under 18's and drink driving is illegal full stop, they're not exactly in the same ball park as parents allowing their children to access something without supervision or unfettered that only adults can subscribe too.

 

You don't need all of that yet. If I read the article correctly, the government is asking that porn sites have mandatory age checks (not sure how they'll do that anyway - obviously the "are you really 18?" question is a joke, and credit cards aren't a guarantee of age, just that you've got somebody's card in front of you). The trouble is, what if you set your company outside the UK and have all your servers based outside the UK? The government has no way of forcing you to comply (other than getting ISPs to block your address, in which case your proxy idea would work).

As usual, it's just a bunch of government hot air to appease the DM readers without any real understanding of the technical issues involved. It's a bit like when they called Google in to ask them to block child porn - ignorant of the fact that (a) Google does that anyway; and (b) most child porn is on the dark net which isn't crawled by Google.

 

As Filbbebot and possibly some others have said, this may be a way for government officials to pretend they are doing something good for children. I hope that is not the case.

It was also mentioned that a credit card is not proof of age - if a minor grabs his/her dad's or mom's credit card.

There are other issues, such as quote, "block extremist political content". What does that mean? If it is content that teaches people how to destroy property and/or kill civilians then that is good. I suppose they mean organizations such as Islamic terrorist training, but do not have the guts to mention terrorists.

For simple identification purposes the government could issue a card for anyone that holds another form of identification other than a credit card, however, sites such as talked about here want your money and a simple passive I.D. will not be wanted.

Every good OS should have blocking software built in and lock-out ability by parents for any X or R rated content, including games. Unfortunately the internet is full of malware and a good anti-virus and internet security software are needed, and they are not fully protective, although block a great deal. The internet is great, we just need to spend real money for protection. Even harmless looking sites or links can be unwanted, or worse, dangerous.

May be the government should spend money, with oversight, to help 3rd party companies create better internet security suites. The government would be spending money in any event.

 

Here is a totally insane radical idea.

Why don't parents keep an eye on what the kids are logging onto. Yeah I know insane !

These parents either wanted a child and so were prepared to protect them and give them a safe start in life, or they decided to rut one night and now have to do deal with consequences.

So either actually be a parent or wear a ******* condom in the first place.

Just a thought like.

 

The way I see it if that law ever goes ahead then the porn companies will either comply in order to serve porn to the UK or won't comply and get blocked by Cameron's firewall. Either way, a safe proxy which seamlessly restores the normal porn browsing experience would be very popular in my opinion.

 

Why educate when you can legislate.

 

Wouldn't it be easier to pass legislation to fine parents of children who are found looking at something they shouldn't be. I imagine that would get parents more engaged.

Is there any actual research on the effect porn has on people's mental state? (apart from arousal of course) All of this giving out about this and that and ban this or that but what implications does it actually have.

 

People don't want personal responsibility. They want their rights, but without the responsibilities that go alongside those rights.

...

I doubt that this will work. Or rather, work as intended. I suspect that along with porn sites, a lot of websites that are critical of the current/future government will also "accidentally" find themselves in the blocklist...

...and anyone who wants around said blocklist won't find it terribly hard, unless ISPs start blocking things like VPNs, proxies and TOR. If ISPs start blocking VPNs, I imagine a lot of remote-workers and their companies will be complaining loudly...