[Sydaycymn]

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography.

The measures will be unveiled on Tuesday as David Cameron hosts No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, a Christian charity. At the government's request the group's chief executive, Reg Bailey, led a review in tandem with Department of Education staff into the commercialisation and sexualisation of children. The Bailey report earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

article
Is it me, or does this seem incredibly stupid? Is this really going to change anything?
Kids will swap thumbdrives, use file sharing, emails etc. Couldn't the kids just use proxy servers to bi-pass this?
The UK is going to have future generations of tech geniuses with this new brain fart.

It sets a dangerous precedent too. What happens to the people that "Opt-in" when some fundy hacks into the log files and publishes there names for everyone to see?

I thought parents could already block questionable content with filters, software and user priviledges.


Why do fundy christians cry about not being respected while imposing their beliefs on everyone?

This might be interesting to watch if there is a lot of blowback.

[mr.nemo]

Actually, it may work reasonably well. Not everyone is a tech genius. Using a combination of DNS, IP and content filtering, it likely will make it a lot more difficult to access porn. It won't make it unobtainable, never mind that there is so much already out there, it's too little too late. But it may curb casual use.

I don't have anything against online porn myself, and I loathe the fundamentalists as well, but there is a lot of bad sh!t that comes along with online porn. Porn sites are havens for malware, such as hijackers and dialers. Moreover, networks that host them often host "home" sites for malware and spam ops as porn ISPs are almost always very-gray-hat if not black-hat operations. And a lot of them host kiddie porn to boot. Again, the shady ISPs don't care what the phuck their customers do, as long as the checks keep coming. Blacklisting them as general security precaution is prudent and well overdue.

[Sydaycymn]

If anything, it should be the other way around. If people wish to have their content filtered, they should be the ones opting in for the filtering. It also makes me wonder if the filters will be cumbersome, say you want to look into breast cancer and some of the content is blocked. My main beef is the idea that the government with the help of isp's are cataloging people's habits. I agree about the bad stuff on those sites, but I still think the kids will just outwit this. They've done it with napster, torrents and stuff like rapidshare. Back in my day, kids used to trade floppy disks with porn on it. Kids usually have more free time than adults and if they are driven, they will become tech geniuses.

So it might make it might curb the access, but it won't really stop it.

[ptmQqoxw]

I predict a sad, dark day for many husbands.

[Sydaycymn]

I predict a sad, dark day for many husbands.

lol. true. I also predict some of those husbands seeking gratification elsewhere.

[Junrlaeh]

lol. true. I also predict some of those husbands seeking gratification elsewhere.

Perhaps it's time for a British Mummers Charter?

[cindygirl]

Back in my day, kids used to trade floppy disks with porn on it. Kids usually have more free time than adults and if they are driven, they will become tech geniuses.

That is a benefit. If the kids want to look at porn they will have to learn some valuable tech skills.