Sidrick

[PeeWee]

Well then the mission should be to educate parents/users rather than impose restrictions across the board.

 

I have no faith in educating certain parents if I am honest, I wish it was the case but it simply is not the answer that's for sure.

There are even more serious cases of bad parenting that needs attending too that no matter how we try or wish it won't work.

I still don't understand how you feel this is imposed when you have a simple option out?

This is the easiest and clearly best option to restrict children s access now, not after attempting to educate.

Educating people has been tried and failed.

 

(Stu's comment sums a lot up)

Edited July 23, 2013 by PeeWee

[trickydicky]

I fully agree with Sidrick here in that this is a bad idea.

It seems like the basis of PeeWee/Stu's argument is that parents are allowed to be ignorant when bringing up THEIR child and expect the government to lock down anything adult related by default?

With my time spent working in a phone shop there were plenty of people coming in and asking to have content lock removed while looking sheepish.

We also had the option to turn it on/off and the time of connection.

 

With regards to the internet, when a contract is resigned/ISP changed - THAT should be when there is a yes/no asked to the customer to have it blocked or not.

There should not be a blanket put down that blocks everyone unless you opt out.

For example, if EE suddenly turned content lock on for all it's users but gave them the option to take it off with a visit to a store/phone call they would still be furious.

 

We cannot let people be ignorant enough to let the government start taking control of these things - tell the parents how it is. If they want to stop their child looking at porn then phone their ISP and get it locked. Like they would with their child's phone (presuming they didn't at the time of connection/activation).

 

 

Or maybe us scots just love porn...?

[PeeWee]

How do you suggest we educate such parents and feel happy that they are being protective?

This is more about ensuring child safety, not relying on parents to feel responsible (we already know there are unreliable responsible parents).

I would be more happy knowing children were safe, I wouldn't ever be happy thinking "hmmm I'm glad the parents have been educated, I'm sure all the kids are now safe"

 

Reality check needed.

I will repeat, you have the option as an adult to have it switched on, and this will not require a visit in person to the provider,

Edited July 23, 2013 by PeeWee

[Stu]

trickydicky, I think you missed my point.

 

I'm not arguing that the content shouldn't be controlled, i'm just suggesting it should be done upstream.

 

Compare it again to the cigarettes example. The control of access to cigs was done by the govt. and then the retailers have to uphold that. In this case, the retailer would not be the ISP, it would be the website itself.

[scottybo]

porn never corroded my brain growing up....and neither did violent video games

 

but i do think that parental filters and such are a good idea. i do agree with sid tho thatif parents dont want their kids to see it then ig should be up to them to put the filters in place

[Stu]

porn never corroded my brain growing up....and neither did violent video games

 

but i do think that parental filters and such are a good idea. i do agree with sid tho thatif parents dont want their kids to see it then ig should be up to them to put the filters in place

 

When did you grow up though? If at all yet? Just kidding.

 

The internet didn't exist when I was growing up and would give a toss about porn (pun intended). The most as kids you would find would be some old dirty wank mags buried over the woods or something. And none of that was particularly disgusting material, just your average suck'n'Fcuk stuff.

[trickydicky]

How do you suggest we educate such parents and feel happy that they are being protective?

This is more about ensuring child safety, not relying on parents to feel responsible (we already know there are unreliable responsible parents).

I would be more happy knowing children were safe, I wouldn't ever be happy thinking "hmmm I'm glad the parents have been educated, I'm sure all the kids are now safe"

 

Reality check needed.

I will repeat, you have the option as an adult to have it switched on, and this will not require a visit in person to the provider,

 

This is where I'm going to ruffle a few hairs.

What the/your problem is, is that the safety of children beyond their parents is a priority. I'm all for keeping children safe (locking up paedophiles's etc) but it is the parent's job to bring the child up as that will determine what type of person that child will be. If you have parents who don't bother to learn how the internet works (they don't even need to learn, just phone the ISP to have porn site blocked) then they will most likely raise children who are just as ignorant as them. Then when they have kids, they will have the same issues with sensitive information hitting a child's ears/eyes.

I'm aware that today's children will have a far greater knowledge of the internet than their parents (will the government take a u-turn on this then? I doubt it) but there will be other issues relating to this cropping up next generation.

 

The mission here is to create awareness of the internet and such lurking dangers to PARENTS.

Then give them the option to switch on this mega porn blocker (which will be some task by the way, glad I don't work for an ISP).

 

Do you think the government will stop trying to introduce these measures on the basis of "safety" ?

When the government makes another limitation to our freedom under the "it will keep children safe" bribe will you embrace that too?

Sorry, children under 16 can't walk on a pavement by themselves, it could be a direct danger to their safety. Therefore all children need to be accompanied 24/7.

Can you imagine the outcry?

 

 

trickydicky, I think you missed my point.

 

I'm not arguing that the content shouldn't be controlled, i'm just suggesting it should be done upstream.

 

Compare it again to the cigarettes example. The control of access to cigs was done by the govt. and then the retailers have to uphold that. In this case, the retailer would not be the ISP, it would be the website itself.

 

Fair enough, although I can't use your example as they are very different. Cigarettes are a health risk where porn is not, although you might go blind (!).

[PeeWee]

We have been trying to "educate" parents for years, it isn't working, what part of that is not clear???

 

I am also concerned you class my concern for child safety is how you put it "a problem"

Yes I do feel that is a higher priority over having to simply accept the ability to watch porn.

 

As for future regulating issues on things that don't exist yet? How can I possibly comment if I will agree/disagree with something not even thought about?

 

As a porn user how will this actually affect you or anyone else, honestly???

[trickydicky]

We have been trying to "educate" parents for years, it isn't working, what part of that is not clear???

 

I am also concerned you class my concern for child safety is how you put it "a problem"

Yes I do feel that is a higher priority over having to simply accept the ability to watch porn.

 

As for future regulating issues on things that don't exist yet? How can I possibly comment if I will agree/disagree with something not even thought about?

 

As a porn user how will this actually affect you or anyone else, honestly???

 

Have we? I haven't seen any TV/Radio adverts about protecting children from the internet.

Nice try on twisting my words, but you are trying to generally class the safety over every child in the UK over the importance of proper parenting through ignorance.

Sure I want every child to be safe too, but I also want this to be their parent's concern, not ours. They are not our child? Why should we pass restrictions that take away the parent element of parenting?

Do you want parenting to be easier? So you don't have to have much impact on your child's life because there are blanket restrictions that do it for you?

 

OK - I understand your comments on future regulations, but this is where we are headed.

It affects me only slightly as I will have to phone my ISP to get the lock taken off. That's not my issue.

The issue I'm having is that the government are imposing a restriction on something everyday (such as internet) and a hiding under the "look this is safe for you child" mask!

Surely you can see this?

 

Does the word freedom mean anything to you?

[shawdreamer]

forgive me for maybe seeming a bit ignorant here but why throttle the isp and place a restriction on everyone regardless of who they may be?

 

sure I get the whole side sayin "yes yes porn should be kept from our children's sight" and that's all very amicable but....... there are ways for a responsible parent to "protect" their children from such things themselves without the government piling in with their heavy booted "its god enough for one its good enough for all" attitude, all they ever achieve by doing that is to raise public animosity as they see another right taken away.... whether they personally use that right is a mute point, its still a right they should have the choice to use or not.

 

and to all you "protect our children" fanatics...... I'm a father too, I'm a parent too and I personally think the government have no cause to be sticking their noses into what and how the general public want to go about their lives aslong as its legal (which porn is btw.....well maybe not that "donkey derby bonanza" a mate showed me once..... that rubbish was just wrong).

 

If your a a self proclaimed "responsible parent"....stick bloody Net Intelligence on your kids computer and let it merrily block anything that may even remotely have a chance at being pornographic, I'm a self confessed computer novice and even I can do it, I've used it for years now and can say with certainty it does exactly what you want it to do.

 

AND

 

if your kids smart enough to bypass it (so not simple without the account password....seriously I had to format a laptop once cos I forgot the password) then I say they deserve to watch some Mature 40+ Granny DP'ing

[PeeWee]

We have been trying to "educate" parents for years, it isn't working, what part of that is not clear???

 

I am also concerned you class my concern for child safety is how you put it "a problem"

Yes I do feel that is a higher priority over having to simply accept the ability to watch porn.

 

As for future regulating issues on things that don't exist yet? How can I possibly comment if I will agree/disagree with something not even thought about?

 

As a porn user how will this actually affect you or anyone else, honestly???

 

Have we? I haven't seen any TV/Radio adverts about protecting children from the internet.

Nice try on twisting my words, but you are trying to generally class the safety over every child in the UK over the importance of proper parenting through ignorance.

Sure I want every child to be safe too, but I also want this to be their parent's concern, not ours. They are not our child? Why should we pass restrictions that take away the parent element of parenting?

Do you want parenting to be easier? So you don't have to have much impact on your child's life because there are blanket restrictions that do it for you?

 

OK - I understand your comments on future regulations, but this is where we are headed.

It affects me only slightly as I will have to phone my ISP to get the lock taken off. That's not my issue.

The issue I'm having is that the government are imposing a restriction on something everyday (such as internet) and a hiding under the "look this is safe for you child" mask!

Surely you can see this?

 

Does the word freedom mean anything to you?

 

Tricky, I was in no way trying to twist your words & believe me I am understanding your point perfectly.

What I am trying to point out is that no amount of tv/radio ads will make an impact on true bad parents (do you honestly think it's possible)?

 

Parenting well should always be high up there but unfortunately we live in a time where a tv ad will be ignored or snuffed at but won't get the attention required to make a big difference.

I think it would work a little way but nowhere near enough.

 

I am all for freedom of choice yes and I feel this blocking will still happily give me this choice.

 

Not sure how we would "not have so much impact on our childs life" as the very same impact is not being taken away, simply that those who choose to ignore the dangers won't have a choice.

 

No one will be "restricted" as such, just given the choice to switch it back on if required.

 

By the way yes we have had safety internet advice around for years and also plenty of software to cope with blocking content, as an IT support I rarely see it put in place though nor am I asked to set any up from "responsible" parents.

[Craig855S]

What I want to know is, if you phone your ISP today and say you want "porn" blocked, what will it block? will it block just porn sites? (and how does it know which ones are or arent, there are so many sites these days that dont have "click here if youre not over 18" like they used to.)

 

and if it just blocks sites with the word porn or sex or whatever in them Imma get pissed off if i cant take part in an evo conversation or look at a BBC news article relating to "sex" or "porn" or stuff like that if the filter is just based on keywords...

[shawdreamer]

What I want to know is, if you phone your ISP today and say you want "porn" blocked, what will it block? will it block just porn sites? (and how does it know which ones are or arent, there are so many sites these days that dont have "click here if youre not over 18" like they used to.)

 

and if it just blocks sites with the word porn or sex or whatever in them Imma get pissed off if i cant take part in an evo conversation or look at a BBC news article relating to "sex" or "porn" or stuff like that if the filter is just based on keywords...

 

true enogh, that Net Intelligence I mentioned can be a right pain the richter when your trying to look on youtube. missus had a couple of her facebook buddy pages (which to me is a bonus....that joke of a site and its sheep just annoy me) blocked by it too, dunno what criteria its uses to identify threat sites but I cant use it on my own as its really strict.

 

EDIT:

 

hold on I just thought on........ if it does do the whole "sex" "porn" or similar blocking.......... no fecker will be able to access forum pages I comment on!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.......... I FECKIN HEARD THAT MUFFLED CHEER YOU TW4TS!

[trickydicky]

We have been trying to "educate" parents for years, it isn't working, what part of that is not clear???

 

I am also concerned you class my concern for child safety is how you put it "a problem"

Yes I do feel that is a higher priority over having to simply accept the ability to watch porn.

 

As for future regulating issues on things that don't exist yet? How can I possibly comment if I will agree/disagree with something not even thought about?

 

As a porn user how will this actually affect you or anyone else, honestly???

 

Have we? I haven't seen any TV/Radio adverts about protecting children from the internet.

Nice try on twisting my words, but you are trying to generally class the safety over every child in the UK over the importance of proper parenting through ignorance.

Sure I want every child to be safe too, but I also want this to be their parent's concern, not ours. They are not our child? Why should we pass restrictions that take away the parent element of parenting?

Do you want parenting to be easier? So you don't have to have much impact on your child's life because there are blanket restrictions that do it for you?

 

OK - I understand your comments on future regulations, but this is where we are headed.

It affects me only slightly as I will have to phone my ISP to get the lock taken off. That's not my issue.

The issue I'm having is that the government are imposing a restriction on something everyday (such as internet) and a hiding under the "look this is safe for you child" mask!

Surely you can see this?

 

Does the word freedom mean anything to you?

 

Tricky, I was in no way trying to twist your words & believe me I am understanding your point perfectly.

What I am trying to point out is that no amount of tv/radio ads will make an impact on true bad parents (do you honestly think it's possible)?

 

Parenting well should always be high up there but unfortunately we live in a time where a tv ad will be ignored or snuffed at but won't get the attention required to make a big difference.

I think it would work a little way but nowhere near enough.

 

I am all for freedom of choice yes and I feel this blocking will still happily give me this choice.

 

Not sure how we would "not have so much impact on our childs life" as the very same impact is not being taken away, simply that those who choose to ignore the dangers won't have a choice.

 

No one will be "restricted" as such, just given the choice to switch it back on if required.

 

By the way yes we have had safety internet advice around for years and also plenty of software to cope with blocking content, as an IT support I rarely see it put in place though nor am I asked to set any up from "responsible" parents.

 

I just don't see why they'll block it by default. It should be opt-in rather than opt-out.

I also think that it would help somewhat, especially to those parents who want to make sure they know what they are dealing with through decent advertisments.

It doesn't seem right that it'll be blocked by default so parent's don't have to think about it. The more they don't, the more children/teenagers will be given control of the settings and be easily able to change it themselves online if allowed.

[Craig855S]

We have been trying to "educate" parents for years, it isn't working, what part of that is not clear???

 

I am also concerned you class my concern for child safety is how you put it "a problem"

Yes I do feel that is a higher priority over having to simply accept the ability to watch porn.

 

As for future regulating issues on things that don't exist yet? How can I possibly comment if I will agree/disagree with something not even thought about?

 

As a porn user how will this actually affect you or anyone else, honestly???

 

Have we? I haven't seen any TV/Radio adverts about protecting children from the internet.

Nice try on twisting my words, but you are trying to generally class the safety over every child in the UK over the importance of proper parenting through ignorance.

Sure I want every child to be safe too, but I also want this to be their parent's concern, not ours. They are not our child? Why should we pass restrictions that take away the parent element of parenting?

Do you want parenting to be easier? So you don't have to have much impact on your child's life because there are blanket restrictions that do it for you?

 

OK - I understand your comments on future regulations, but this is where we are headed.

It affects me only slightly as I will have to phone my ISP to get the lock taken off. That's not my issue.

The issue I'm having is that the government are imposing a restriction on something everyday (such as internet) and a hiding under the "look this is safe for you child" mask!

Surely you can see this?

 

Does the word freedom mean anything to you?

 

Tricky, I was in no way trying to twist your words & believe me I am understanding your point perfectly.

What I am trying to point out is that no amount of tv/radio ads will make an impact on true bad parents (do you honestly think it's possible)?

 

Parenting well should always be high up there but unfortunately we live in a time where a tv ad will be ignored or snuffed at but won't get the attention required to make a big difference.

I think it would work a little way but nowhere near enough.

 

I am all for freedom of choice yes and I feel this blocking will still happily give me this choice.

 

Not sure how we would "not have so much impact on our childs life" as the very same impact is not being taken away, simply that those who choose to ignore the dangers won't have a choice.

 

No one will be "restricted" as such, just given the choice to switch it back on if required.

 

By the way yes we have had safety internet advice around for years and also plenty of software to cope with blocking content, as an IT support I rarely see it put in place though nor am I asked to set any up from "responsible" parents.

 

I just don't see why they'll block it by default. It should be opt-in rather than opt-out.

I also think that it would help somewhat, especially to those parents who want to make sure they know what they are dealing with through decent advertisments.

It doesn't seem right that it'll be blocked by default so parent's don't have to think about it. The more they don't, the more children/teenagers will be given control of the settings and be easily able to change it themselves online if allowed.

 

 

What is the reason behind bringing this legislation in anyway? Is it "to protect kids from seeing porn" or "to protect kids from sex offenders who all to easily can access violent and abusive content which includes kids?" because im sure once you tell your ISP you want the block taken off you'll be able to get hold of the childporn again?

 

I think they should just hang every fcuker caught with childporn, and especially hang the person who owns the server which hosts those sites