Lxxx Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 The argument he is using is people's little cherubs watching porn on the internet. Why is it the states responsibility to look after these children? why can't the parents monitor what they are watching? You can pretty much guarantee in a years time some government lacky will leave a USB stick on a train and the names of the people who opt in will be named in the Daily mail as perverts. This is just the start of it they will then try and block online gambling etc. Fact is this material is legal so what right does the government have trying to stop people watching it? Paedophiles don't go on google and type in what they want, even if they did blocking it would do nothing, there were paedos in the 70's long before the internet arrived. David Cameron needs to stop listening to the mumsnet crowd and focus on real problems. He's not listening to any crowd, apart from his inner cabinet who can't wait to take away the liberties their own children will lament when they are older. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amadeus Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Some dude on reddit nailed it: http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1irsvg/all_19m_homes_connected_to_the_internet_to_be/cb7s1bs Nothing to do with morals or protecting children. If it was after that, it would be the responsibility of the parents that little Johnny doesn't have access to the laptop, not the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lonan3 Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Some dude on reddit nailed it: http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1irsvg/all_19m_homes_connected_to_the_internet_to_be/cb7s1bs Nothing to do with morals or protecting children. If it was after that, it would be the responsibility of the parents that little Johnny doesn't have access to the laptop, not the government. I like the idea of calling it the 'china envy' Law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
When Skies Are Grey Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 “Supreme Court says pornography is anything without artistic merit that causes sexual thoughts; that's their definition, essentially. No artistic merit, causes sexual thoughts. Hmm. . . . Sounds like . . . every commercial on television, doesn't it?” Bill Hicks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Ironic how the biggest wanker in the UK wants to block online porn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Bawden Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Some dude on reddit nailed it: http://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/comments/1irsvg/all_19m_homes_connected_to_the_internet_to_be/cb7s1bs Nothing to do with morals or protecting children. If it was after that, it would be the responsibility of the parents that little Johnny doesn't have access to the laptop, not the government. After reading that, this only reinforces my view that you have an opt out option whereby YOU determine whether porn enters your home or not rather than the Gestapo deciding for you and then taking a mile after being given an inch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
When Skies Are Grey Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 taking a mile after being given an inch. Phnaar Phnaar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piebaps Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 IOM angle here http://www.energyfm.net/cms/news_story_271886.html<br /><br />Seems Cameron's proclaimation is a hollow soundbite with insufficient substance to warrant a response. How long before one of our lot start something similar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 IOM angle here http://www.energyfm.net/cms/news_story_271886.html<br /><br />Seems Cameron's proclaimation is a hollow soundbite with insufficient substance to warrant a response. How long before one of our lot start something similar. I wonder if manxforums will contain 'inappropriate content' and will no longer be able to be viewed. Geoff Corkish will be salivating at the prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Trumps Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 It'a bit tragic that CM & his gang fear the web, rather than embracing it He should be chasing Google to build an innovation centre here - they seem to be doing so in both England & Ireland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScotsAlan Posted July 24, 2013 Author Share Posted July 24, 2013 It's the timing of this that worries me most... it coincides with the Royal birth. Reckon Cameron is hoping all his voters are too busy having street parties to notice that their freedom is being taken away and all that. I am so looking forward to the next image of the Tory MP, with his demure wife at his side, as he says sorry for being caught with a call girl. Oh. I forgot. The News of the World is no more. We have super injunctions. The press are to be regulated.... Privicy laws etc because someone took a photo of Royal tits. Looks like a five year plan to me. Honestly, the typical Chinese person has more personal freedom than the typical UK inhabitant (I mean UK, not Isle of Man). I really hope the Manx Government make a stand against this and don't just accept it as Manx law too. You listening Geoff? You have a chance to redeem yourself by becoming a hero of the interweb..... I heard they do courses at the college :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 It's the timing of this that worries me most... it coincides with the Royal birth. Reckon Cameron is hoping all his voters are too busy having street parties to notice that their freedom is being taken away and all that. I am so looking forward to the next image of the Tory MP, with his demure wife at his side, as he says sorry for being caught with a call girl. Oh. I forgot. The News of the World is no more. We have super injunctions. The press are to be regulated.... Privicy laws etc because someone took a photo of Royal tits. Looks like a five year plan to me. Honestly, the typical Chinese person has more personal freedom than the typical UK inhabitant (I mean UK, not Isle of Man). I really hope the Manx Government make a stand against this and don't just accept it as Manx law too. You listening Geoff? You have a chance to redeem yourself by becoming a hero of the interweb..... I heard they do courses at the college :-) Spot on. Bury the real news amongst all the fawning stories across the mainstream media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Cockish Posted July 24, 2013 Share Posted July 24, 2013 You listening Geoff? You have a chance to redeem yourself by becoming a hero of the interweb..... I heard they do courses at the college :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slinkydevil Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 Cameron's proposed filters extend to more than just pornhttp://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-07/27/pornwallhttps://www.openrightsgroup.org/blog/2013/sleepwalking-into-censorshipAs well as pornography, users may automatically be opted in to blocks on:"violent material""extremist related content""anorexia and eating disorder websites""suicide related websites""alcohol""smoking".But the list doesn't stop there. It even extends to blocking: "web forums" and "esoteric material", whatever that is. "Web blocking circumvention tools" is also included, of course.The Open Rights Group's Jim Killock says: "What's clear here is that David Cameron wants people to sleepwalk into censorship. We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind 'nudge theory' and 'choice architecture' that is popular with Cameron." He adds: "The implication is that filtering is good, or at least harmless, for anyone, whether adult or child. Of course, this is not true; there's not just the question of false positives for web users, but the affect on a network economy of excluding a proportion of a legitimate website's audience." Looks like trouble ahead, 'esoteric material' could cover anything really! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endovelicus Posted July 28, 2013 Share Posted July 28, 2013 The biggest wanker in the UK wants to stop people looking at porn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.