Easter is approaching – and British pr0n watchers still don't know how long before age-gates come into force Porn-watchers and providers are being kept in the dark over when age checks for access to online smut will come into force, as the government remains schtum about the already delayed roll-out. The reforms, which will require visitors to adult websites to prove they are over 18 before they can gain access, were originally due …
If i can pass the credit checks and age checks required to get an internet connection, then i must be over 18. Then just make it clear i'm responsible for deciding what various people watch on my connection.
it'll make things much simpler, and remind parents that they are responsible for their kids viewing habits, not the government.
But not a landline. The OP is talking about landlines.
Mobile providers disable access to adult sites unless you prove your age by having a credit card. Hence I have no access to such sites on my phone as I cant be assed to give them my details (considering last time I did it they charged £2 to my card and failed to remove the blocks).
Not just 'adult' sites. I couldn't access a cocktail recipe* site because it was age restricted. I went into the telecom shop and they removed the restriction while I waited. (I think it was Vodafone.)
*Not that I drink cocktails. I was asking for a friend who has 'exotic' tastes.
This is true. Of course us thirty-somethings would have assumed we would have a generation who understood everything about computers now - we grew up on the micros and early PCs, a time when you couldn't use a computer without an intimate knowledge of the internal workings. If you wanted something done, you'd likely have to throw together a little software yourself. We didn't anticipate the way in which software usability would advance to the point that anyone could operate it without the slightest idea of how anything actually works - and most people are perfectly happy with that. They want to use computers to achieve a goal, not as a goal in themselves.
"But with a PAYG SIM I can fire up a VPN/use a proxy and say goodbye to provider's restrictions. C'mon, teens nowadays do these things like breathing."
Go into any school IT technicians room, especially at lunchtime, and there's a constant stream of kids coming in who have forgotten their passwords, lost files, accidentally deleted files, had their passwords stolen buy other kids and any number of other "schoolboy error" they need help with. They know how to swipe their touch screens and use their apps, but you vastly overestimate the technical ability and common sense of school children. If it doesn't "just work", most of them will give up and move onto something that does "just work".
In the land of the unclued, the kid who can get access to porn will have something of a money-making proposition on his hands. Indeed a chap I knew years ago started out upon a long entrepreneurial career renting out printing porn to his classmates, and even learned independently about the wisdom of charging both a deposit and a rental fee (in case of any unwanted deposits).
Teenagers are effectively hard-wired to seek out the company of whichever sex takes their fancy, and in the absence of willing partners, images thereof will do nicely. Teenagers are also not fully mentally mature and are not at all above breaking a few laws for rewards like this, so I would wager that many a playground porn empire will be born this way, and also that Opera Mobile will see a quite staggering increase in market share.
"Anyone who is in possession of a £10 note can exchange it for a PAYG SIM with internet access"
Any PAYG SIM I've had blocked access to "Adult" content until unlocked through an age verification process. Gambling is one of those blocked categories, never could understand why anyone would want porn on such a small screen.
it'll make things much simpler, and remind parents that they are responsible for their kids viewing habits, not the government.
A novel idea... make parents take responsibility for the actions of their children. However, we're way beyond that as most parents haven't a clue where their kids are at any given time, much less what they are doing.
The world has changed since I was young lad and not for the better.
Heck the USAins have "Its 9 o clock do YOU know where YOUR children are?"
Roll that out on uk telly and it might focus a few minds, though for many of the chavvier parents they would end up hitting the telly and yelling about "whats this shite" "who cares" "no my job"
Here's a simple system: introduce a new top level domain for adult content, make it free to register, and put global-endorsed legislation in place that all adult content* must be hosted in that TLD. Then anyone who wants to block adult content... can.
* content defined as elements of a page with adult content in it, not the page itself. (Thus existing domains are unaffected.) Some thought needed for cross-domain policies.
That was actually considered maybe twelve years ago, with .xxx. It got very political, in the US, with a lot of concerns that ICANN was being pressured by the Department of Commerce on behalf of the federal government. It didn't succeed.
The porn industry opposed it: They were concerned it would create an 'internet ghetto' where their content would be walled off and widely blocked by default.
The religious right, who were very powerful back then (This being during Bush II's term), opposed it - because they thought having a government-endorsed place on the internet for porn would legitimize it. They wanted to ban it completely, not create a new place specially for it. Also they were concerned that even if .xxx were made, sites would have no reason to close their old domains down and lose the established traffic.
The only group that actually supported it was the registrar who was spending a lot of money lobbying for the approval of .xxx, as they hoped to make a great deal more selling domains.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
I heard that several mind geek sites have recently displayed an age verification banner instead of the requested onanistic media when accessed via a web proxy if the Euro server is selected but not when another region server is selected. Sometimes it works fine via the Euro server, my source tells me..
.. to sites much further down the search engine rankings if BFFC will be mainly tackling the "most popular" sites
Those few teens keen to find content without tor, tunneling, VPN use etc (which could look rather incriminating if their parents check their electronic devices) will be quite capable of using serach engines to find sites nestling in the backwaters of the internet.
These rules are never going to work. Considering that kids will still be able to do a images or video search on Google and come back with tons of smut without needing any age checks shows how ineffective it will be. Kids will always find ways of getting hold of porn. When I was a kid we used to steal magazine and videos from our parents, uncles, older brothers collections and pass them around at school. And once around 12 or 13 we found a load of magazines thrown in the bin around the back of the local shops.
What this new law will probably achieve is to close down some UK based independent sites who will find that their new subscribers numbers drop through the floor after these checks are brought in as customers are put off signing up.
This post has been deleted by its author
Pron watches will be loathe to fight back, unlike FarceBook, so obviously lets go for bare boobs and ignore Jihadi videos and Russian propaganda.
In fact, lets ban everything, and make the whole country sit down for compulsory "Watch with Big Mother" government approved propaganda every evening.
Repeat failures to comply will be classified as terrorist acts and the people so labelled will be shot at dawn - if we can afford the bullets.
Well, we've seen it with Brexit and now we're seeing it again; our politicians are basically not capable of the job for which they were elected, which is to serve the electorate which elected them.
Free VPN software is widely available, and some of it is even free of Chinese malware and snooping. Usenet isn't yet being filtered, and numerous other technologies also look set to bypass the porn ban. Really all this is doing is teaching a new generation that the government is not their friend, but is instead an obstructive but exceptionally stupid agency that generally tries and fails to get in their way.
Furthermore they are being taught that laws only matter if you get caught; if you can circumvent them then they do not actually matter. This is basically a really, really idiotic thing to teach a new generation, since they are quite likely to generalise this in future and do their best to dodge taxes in future (especially if the future holds a succession of pseudo-Marxist nitwit Prime Ministers).
Yes, the legislation is useless for curbing porn, but it will give the government some useful tools for backdoor action. In unrelated cases, of course. Much like when anti-terrorism legislation was used to sequester the assets of Icelandic banks after the financial crisis, banks that had been approved by the UK regulator.
Well, we've seen it with Brexit and now we're seeing it again; our politicians are basically not capable of the job for which they were elected, which is to serve the electorate which elected them
Since the public keep voting the same failures back in, term after term on the basis of the same broken promises, businessy suits and PR programmed gestures and speeches, it seems the electorate are basically not capable of looking after themselves either.
Which is a great catch all excuse for invasive government. "You voted us in every time you got the option, so clearly you need watching for your own good".
Great, now I've depressed myself...
>Since the public keep voting the same failures back in, term after term on the basis of the same broken promises, businessy suits and PR programmed gestures and speeches, it seems the electorate are basically not capable of looking after themselves either.
Until we get a "None of the above" option that forces a rerun with different candidates, we are stuck voting for those selected by the parties or willing/rich enough to pay the deposit themselves. In many cases, it is a case of "least bad" rather than actual good.
"Until we get a "None of the above" option that forces a rerun with different candidates, we are stuck voting for those selected by the parties or willing/rich enough to pay the deposit themselves. In many cases, it is a case of "least bad" rather than actual good."
And after five or six reruns, where each rerun results in a drop in voter turnout, you eliminate the moderates and end up with each parties respective idiot.
While we often condemn politicians for their absurd views, don't doubt that there is worse out there. As demonstrated by local government politics.
Two referenda ago, the British public voted by an overwhelming and unarguable majority (i.e. one significantly greater than the last referendum) to keep the current voting system.
Only a third of the voting public wanted something else, so 'None of the above' is pointless. The public wants 'strong parties' and least worst choices, they do not want consensus politics and minority parties.
The public wants 'strong parties' and least worst choices, they do not want consensus politics and minority parties.
You've fallen into the referendum interpretation trap. I know several people voted in that referendum to keep the status quo but only because they didn't want a halfway system. Still, it had the advantage of being a clear policy choice.
No one reallly knows why people vote the way they do, often not even the people themselves.
Sure, but that's not the way that politics or most of life works. You reach your destination through intermediate steps and halfway systems.
Either way it was a strong vote for the status quo, and that's what we continue to get.
The public wants 'strong parties' and least worst choices, they do not want consensus politics and minority parties.
The 'strong parties' seem to be fracturing into a series of 'worst choices', with not much sign of even consensus.
It turns out 'consensus' was something our MPs needed to learn how to do.
"In many cases, it is a case of "least bad" rather than actual good."
Happened to see Live at the Apollo last night with comedian Geoff Norcott comparing the situation where we have to choose between the least bad of two crap parties as like being waterboarded, but with the choice of still or sparkling water.
... not to mention simulated in games, but god forbid they should see some tits or arse! You ever get the feeling that some serious priority shifting is required amongst politicians?
Even without a government desperate for votes from lunatic fringe extremists or just that way inclined, can't have government teaching it's young citizens to be pacifists or the idea that love is better than war.
plus, think of the impact on the NHS for cases of blindness and hairy palms....
In case you hadn't noticed, children are not allowed to buy many of those games either. And the sites are usually blocked as soon as someone notices them, not just for kids but for everyone.
Porn is different because a lot of people *do* want it let through.
Once again...
THE EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS IS THE NOT ONLY ORGANISATION CONCERNED WITH CITIZEN WELFARE
A landmark ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union deemed indiscriminate data retention illegal, forcing the UK government to set out a series of tweaks to the controversial Investigatory Powers Act.
After the year long anti Facebook (and all other social media platforms) rant by Damian Collins from his perch as head of the HoC DCMS committee, it was only a matter of time before, in response, the DCMS organisation morphed into the Department of Censorship, Manipulation and Silencing.
As the government keeps deciding it doesn't like more and more things people want to say, watch or do, it was only a matter of time before they moved yet further down the road of trying to stop people doing them.
Prime Minister: "...so in summary: Brexit is a perpetual clusterfuck, it's likely we shall be annihilated in the next elections, cabinet discipline is almost non-existent, we're crafting policy with a man we have regularly denounced as a Marxist, and we face the prospect of Boris being in charge of it all within months. We need to get ourselves out of this hole, as soon as possible, and a bold, popular, new policy is what will do it - suggestions?"
Advisor 1: "Wanking licences!"
Adviser 2: "Make people buy them at the local corner shop!"
PM: "Get these men on the honours list - immediately!"
There are studies for pretty much everything.
I think the problem with a diet of professional porn, without any kind of sex education or critical interpretation, is that it conditions expectations: that a man can stay hard for 10, 20, 30 minutes or longer regardless of stimulation and that women will gleefully accept any size dick in any orifice without lubrication or foreplay.
Adolescents at the start of their sex lives are very impressionable and sensitive and could be scarred by failing to live up to their own or their partner's expectations. Still, you don't solve this by trying to clamp down on porn, but by creating a better environment to discover, ask questions and bust myths.
I was suggesting that if we had really good sex education for adolescents, perhaps the porn industry might experience a degree of shrinkage.
I don't see why sex education videos should not be erotic. In fact there is a case that they should be, because otherwise they are not telling the whole truth about relationships.
I was suggesting that if we had really good sex education for adolescents, perhaps the porn industry might experience a degree of shrinkage.
Don't see why, a lot of STEM people love Sci-Fi, no matter how unrealistic....
There's a difference in knowing how things really work, and enjoying a fantasy.
(the people who like to complain and pick out the flaws will ennoy it too).
This post has been deleted by its author
Just download Opera browser with the built in VPN. I'm an adult in western Europe, however, when a lot of news outlets in the US drop the "this content is not available in your region, due to GDPR or reason x, y or z. I use the Opera VPN, it doesn't always work, say about 30% of the time, but for the 70% it's exactly what is needed...
"Prime Minister, we must be seen to be doing something, this is something, therefore we are doing it".
Whenever a government department announce that they are "taking the time to get this right", you instinctively know they are going to get it catastrophically wrong.
Again.
The whole idea is so full of holes it cant be anything other than a just a titanic failure, that's what happens when you let society look out for the kids rather than take some bloody parental responsibility and check what your kids are up to on the net once in a while.
Quote "and has someone not been caught already?"
Only a minister's husband putting the pr0n channel on the parlimentary expenses tab....
Anyway
Coming soon... buy the complete hacked list of ageIDs and whos surfed what...... and how much they'll pay you to stop you publishing it....
Yeah. I can see those working quite well.
....a long long time ago in a land not so far away....
A pron hoster decided it would be an excellent wheeze to verify people by capturing their credit card number just to prove they were over 18.... unfortunately....
1. They were too stupid to understand your average teen was quite capable of acquiring number, expiry date and CVV off their Dad's card and it was a doddle, and assuming they didn't actually go for signing up no-one knew.... (this doesn't even go as far as signing up and saying if you spot it I will tell Mum it must be you)
2. They were stupid enough to retain all these card details even though they never charged anything meaning they still had breaches without making a penny
What goes around comes around vicar
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
