UK Plans to Block All Internet Porn

this just in, college students continue to riot because the government denied access to porn. :eek:
 
might as well block the whole internet.......

since the ONLY purpose for the internet is to surf porn.
 
This could be a fantastic idea.

Why?

National productivity will soar. All those folks "working from home" will actually have to do some work. It will get us out of the recession quicker than anyone else.


Seriously, I must admit I don't have too much of an issue. Its opt in so its still there if you want it. Its not being banned, just trying to take it off the shelf with the kids magazines and moving it back to the top shelf like in the old days.

You just have to be MAN enough to admit you want porn. I bet many here wouldn't dare.:D
 
Not happening..
This is just carrying on from the whole ISP policing saga that they wanted, trying to get ISPs to police the network, which they were not happy about.

I would put my salary on this being bullshit.

Oh and never link The Sun, it's not really a news source...
 
Azhar said:
I can see business IT people rejoicing at this but I can understand the fundamental issue with free speech violation, but at least you can opt-in if you don't want anything to be blocked.
Click to expand...

Why the IT people comment. Forgive me if I'm interpreting your post wrong but if an IT department wants to block employees from watching animated octopus tentacle porn wouldn't they just set up some or web filtering solution?

By the way I have no experience with animated octopus tentacle porn. I was merely using it as an example.
 
bloodhawke83 said:
this just in, college students continue to riot because the government denied access to porn. :eek:
Click to expand...

Those students are going to turn more violent than attacking the royal family if they block all porn access :eek:
 
On a more serious note, this really pisses me off. Not because of the whole porn thing (...;)), but because the fact is the internet should be open for everyone to use. Reading the Sun article, a "cinema-style" rating system? It's the fucking internet, not a cinema. I'm not saying that illegal content shouldn't be filtered, as it should. However, this is the responsibility of the parents, not the ISP. Every parent in the UK knows about the software out there available to control what their child can and can't access, if they don't use it, that's their problem, if they don't care...that's their problem.

Yeah, they're trying to give internet access to every child by 2015 or whenever it is. By that time, they'll be limited to fucking pointless "learning" resources and nothing else...we as consumers spend way too much money for the crap service nearly all of us get in this country, and now they're trying to restrict what we can see...
 
Can't edit my last post, but on another note, this hasn't appeared on the BBC website as far as I can see. So the chances are that it's probably not so true, voiding my irritation completely...
 
Uncle said:
Lets just get the XXX domain going and parents can regulate the net to protect their kids. Whats the hold up, the Porn Industry, "But we need to be able to get into the minds of the impressionable kids at an early age to get them hooked on SEX, or we won't make any money on the toys and films.
Click to expand...

How is that different from every other company out there. You have to hook them while they are young.
 
Uncle said:
Whats the hold up, the Porn Industry, "But we need to be able to get into the minds of the impressionable kids at an early age to get them hooked on SEX, or we won't make any money on the toys and films.
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah, get rid of porn, that will slow down "teen sex", because we all know teenagers with raging hormones aren't horny or anything. Clearly the problem is porn, and not the biology of us being hard wired to reproduce at what is now considered a young age.

Besides, even if someone was "addicted" to giving other people orgasms, is that really so bad? With all the other truly horrible shit going on in the world I'd think the last of our concerns is someone having too many orgasms, lol.

I think George Carlin said it best (paraphrasing here): Why is it always that people who are against fun sex are people that you wouldn't want to f**k in the first place?
 
Remember to also get the phone company to block any calls to the local whorehouse, or sex shop.

Make the taxi drivers refuse to drive people to the local knocking shop unless they "opt-in".

Make the local newsagent filter their top shelf magazines....


As mentioned above, The Sun is not and never has been a news paper. It is just "Tits and Sport". So there just needs to be a bit of education for you American's that any rag like The Sun, Mirror, Star, Sport, Daily Mail, etc should be laughed at in the same way the National Enquirer is. Or Fox News.
 
Commander FAT said:
Why the IT people comment. Forgive me if I'm interpreting your post wrong but if an IT department wants to block employees from watching animated octopus tentacle porn wouldn't they just set up some or web filtering solution?

By the way I have no experience with animated octopus tentacle porn. I was merely using it as an example.
Click to expand...

No filter is perfect. A higher level block is usually done by enterprise level software which a lot of smaller business cannot afford. This would make it easier for a lot of IT department who's given a tight budget by their less tech savvy bosses.
 
LuminaryJanitor said:
They're only taking it from children... Does anyone really have a problem with that?
Click to expand...

They want to take it from everyone. Then you have to request to have it back.

This is trying to ban it by public embarrassment.

The whole thing is based on a lie anyways. "Now it has become a mental health issue because we now know the damage it is causing."

If filtering is needed, it should be done on the computers that children are using, not at the ISP level by Big Brother.
 
LuminaryJanitor said:
They're only taking it from children... Does anyone really have a problem with that?
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that old chestnut? It always starts there,but it never ends. Why make it an opt in program where you'd have to revel your identity? Besides,there's already a group whose job is to supervise what children see - they're called parents.
 
MrGuvernment said:
opt- in, people like privacy they don't want it noted somewhere they opted in for the porn channels, once that is done then what, will they be monitoring these people who "opted in" for porn to see if they are more likely to commit some sexual crime or some crap.
Click to expand...

Hahah, this sounds entirely too much like the plot in Lock Stock:

Listen to this one: you open a company called the "Arse Tickler's Faggots Fan Club". You take out an advert in the back page of some gay mag, advertising the latest in arse-intruding dildos. You sell it with, I dunno, "does what no other dildo can do until now", "the latest and greatest in sexual technology", "guaranteed results or your money back", all that bollocks. Now these dils cost twenty-five quid a pop – that's a snip for the amount of pleasure they're gonna give the recipients. But they send their cheques to the other company name, nothing offensive, er, "Bobbie's Bits" or something, for twenty-five quid. You take that twenty-five quid, you stick it in the bank until it clears. Now, this is the smart bit – you send back the cheque for twenty-five pound from the other company name, "Arse Tickler's Faggots Fan Club", saying we're sorry, we couldn't get the supplies from America because they ran out of stock. Now you see how many people cash that cheque – not a single soul, because who wants their bank manager to know they tickle arse when they're not paying cheques?
 
lamboman said:
Can't edit my last post, but on another note, this hasn't appeared on the BBC website as far as I can see. So the chances are that it's probably not so true, voiding my irritation completely...
Click to expand...


a good bit of porn has the same effect :p
 
And this is why the .xxx domain is necessary.

Don't want porn? Block that domain.

Want porn? You know where to go.

Simple.
 
Spidey329 said:
Exactly. It'd be far more feasible on a logistical sense to just have it so you hand over your kid at birth and take a voucher which you can redeem for said child 18 years later.
Click to expand...

Who would want an 18 year old back if you had managed to give them away once already...Well, besides a porn producer obviously.
 
SamuraiInBlack said:
And this is why the .xxx domain is necessary. Don't want porn? Block that domain. Simple.
Click to expand...
Except it isn't simple at all. Who decides what is porn and what is not? You? Who would provide enforcement of these policies? How do we get every country on Earth to adhere to these same policies?

There is nothing "simple" about enforcing the .xxx domain name. In reality, the correct term is "impossible". It would be impossible to enforce.
 
SamuraiInBlack said:
And this is why the .xxx domain is necessary.

Don't want porn? Block that domain.

Want porn? You know where to go.

Simple.
Click to expand...

So would Amazon.com have to have a .xxx domain, it does sell porn and erotica? What about Wikipedia, some of the pages are very explicit. What about torrent sites? Uncensored forums?

By which religious or arbitrary standard would it be decided what porn is? Showing a woman's naked face might be considered pornographic to some Muslims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top