Surely...
...they can implement this using AI and Blockchain...
The UK government could use facial recognition to verify the age of Brits online "so long as there is an appropriate concern for privacy," junior minister for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Matt Warman said. The minister was responding to an urgent Parliamentary question directed to Culture Secretary Nicky Morgan about the …
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
Not really, I just don't want all these companies to have every single piece of information about my life so they can sell me cat food even though I don't own a cat. There's also the fact that at some point some governments are going to look at the Chinese model and think it's a good idea, at least you'll be safe as you already share everything, I just hope you have never criticised the government.
"Are you able to demonstrate that you are sexually mature enough to consent to the viewing of pornographic context?"
"What does it look like to you?"
"Looks like I should get out of the way and let you have access to porn"
However there is a potential discrimination aspect to this verification mechanism, as not many laptops are equipped with moisture sensors that can be read by a web page.
""Are you able to demonstrate that you are sexually mature enough to consent to the viewing of pornographic context?""
The UK legal definition of "children" is under 18. IIRC male sexual maturity occurs for most before 16 - and for most the significant secondary sexual characteristics are in place long before 18.
Most women would also appear sexually mature long before 18.
it has been going on for so long...
And there are a number of US States actively banning facial recognition...
Shows how out of touch everyone in Westminster is. (nothing new there then...)
Next they will be wanting to add an hour so that the clock will really strike 13.
Obligatory XKCD Tory, Bin Bag, Oranges link.
And an appropriate icon as well - thanks El Reg!!!
I assumed some sort of machine learning age-estimation thing was meant, rather than the "Aha! You are Jo Bloggs" kind.
(not really sure that'd be easy to reliably train, though, especially if you wanted under/over a specific age)
I mean I don't know about you - but I wouldn't be at all surprised, if the Government pretended it was AI and no-one ever saw the pictures, while paying a team of hundreds billions of pounds a year to sit and manually approve the requests in real-time.
Lying and spending obscene amounts of money on it - sounds very UK Government to me.
The same way checkout operators in shops can tell exactly what age you are by looking at your face and never have to ask for ID with a 3 year margin of error and still ask this... not 20 year old... for ID when buying non alcoholic beer? An automated version of that?
I foresee a return of precocious 16 year olds sporting beards...
"it would be silly to suggest that that is money wasted. It is money invested in protecting our children, and we will continue to do that."
Surely if it's an investment, then you have something to show for it? As far as I can tell the only concrete result from that £2.2M (apart from trebles all round tin the boardroom of course), is the knowledge that an age verification system is a deeply flawed idea.
However they still seem to want to set up such a system so it seems the one concrete result is useless.
Surely if it's an investment, then you have something to show for it?
You might think that, but I'm afraid I couldn't possibly comment.
IIRC Gordon Brown was always talking about "investment" when "spending" would have been more appropriate; alternatively he would always boast about "inward investment" when what he really meant was that another bit of British business had been bought by a new foreign owner.
Ah. This is obviously some strange usage of the word “investment” that I wasn’t previously aware of, as Arthur Dent didn't quite say.
QUOTE:
"Commercial Sexual Exploitation
Purpose of the group
We understand CSE to be a function of gender inequality, and a form of gender-based violence. We work to the Scottish Government’s National Violence Against Women and Girls Approach, Equally Safe, and their definition of Violence Against Women, which includes prostitution, pornography, trafficking, lap-dancing, stripping, pole-dancing and table-dancing as forms of commercial sexual exploitation. We believe that these activities have been shown to be harmful for individuals involved and can have a negative impact on the position of all women through the objectification of women’s bodies.
We promote the pursuit of legislation which prevents and challenges demand for commercial sexual exploitation."
taken from: https://www.parliament.scot/msps/commercial-sexual-exploitation.aspx
You were saying about it being shite?
Worse still the nats invited various virulently anti-sex groups to draft legislation (Nordic Model Now for one) while locking out and ignoring various sex positive feminist groups and workers collectives for those working in stripping, porn etc, many of who argue that the work suits them, the money allows them to live independent lives without welfare etc, that they are not exploited, that they (horror) enjoy the work
So not just puritan porn ban but also blaming women who choose to work as strippers, porn stars etc for "harming other women", which I believe the colloquial term is "slut shaming"
Just waiting for the myriad of excuses to start emerging.....or the strawperson arguments to justify mass censorship, mandating puritan behaviour codes through use of state power to criminalise the masses or use the threat of criminal charges and "sex offender" branding to brow beat the populace into compliance, not much different from Iran is it?
Already had a SNP cllr of the ultra puritan "common weal" bent roll out the following line "I know you wouldn't be happy if it was your wife, sister, daughter, you would never allow it" she went purple when I quite calmly told her that "I trust any of them to use their own judgement and to make their own life choices, they have my support in whatever they choose to do with their life and if they ever need help or need to talk I'm there for them", she then went off on an apopleptic rant starting with "they are normalising misogyny and sexual violence and harming other women and MUST be stopped" by that time I had started to simply walk away so I didn't catch the rest.
As you may have noticed, I sent you an email in your account.
That means I have full access to your device and accounts. I've been watching you through the face recognition software on the s3x sites you have been visiting.
Send $699 in BTC or I post the videos to your social media.
.... calling it now, those are the next generation of emails, though they may even spoof westminster emails instead.
Check your spam folder mate, you'll find lots and lots of emails on this subject, claiming to have taken over your webcam whilst you were taming the trouser snake. Older folks who need to take the blue pill to augment their reality may fall victim to such a scam, especially if their favourite websites require verification from TPTB.
In other words, it's a stupid idea, though not as stupid as thinking I have a webcam pointed at my trouser snake.
While mostly I get those -
I've also had several that tell me they are from people whose job it is - is to kill people. They then tell me they really don't want to do the job, so I could pay them not to kill me instead, otherwise they will have no choice - because it's their job after all.
They are dark....
I won't lie the first one I got, took me quite some time to decide it was fake.
"[...] someone may come up with a plan to collect farts as "biometric" data"
Done already. Using dogs to detect bowel cancer.
Also the presence of hydrogen cyanide in a person's breath can indicate an infection.
Wasn't there previous work on facial recognition that couldn't tell the difference between monkeys and people, so how accurate will this be ?
What stops someone holding up a picture in front of the camera - that always works
What about people who do not have webcams ?
What about those who consume the content with the lights off ?
Will there be a requirement to keep the video feed active whilst, er. consuming the services
As video processing takes time, will there be a need to upload the pictures - can't see an issue with a big mugshot database, it could be called the book of faces ...
Strikes me that someone may be going off half-cocked on their ideas again ..
"The monkey's consent or that someone's?"
That brings up visions of Wicked Willie cartoons where he disagrees with his owner. NSFW
You can use the self check out till at the supermarket. It already has a screen, a speaker, and software to prompt for an age check if you're buying adult drinks or cutlery - it automatically summons a shop worker to help you complete your transaction. Some of them also have a, well, I hope not a web cam...
As video processing takes time, will there be a need to upload the pictures - can't see an issue with a big mugshot database, it could be called the book of faces ...
I think they are using 'facial recognition' as a catch-all term for biometric identification that includes processing an image of a person to conduct the identification.
I say this because it won't be your face that they'll be using for the photo-identification for porn sites...
""I honestly believe that by doing this more slowly we will make a better impact overall.""
The slower the better from where I'm sitting.
On the other hand, and trying to be reasonable, I do accept that there is a problem when very young children can, and do, access pornography - particularly the non-vanilla 'genres'. It's not just a matter of better parenting because you can't be sure that your child's friends' parents are as good as you and they all have their own different devices, different skill levels and different degrees of ambition/curiosity/rebellion.
This could very well be a three pipe problem so, yes, take your time.
A good start is age appropriate sex education. Areas of the USA and UK are still well behind where many of our European neighbours were in the 1970s.
UK naturists give a good example. Other people complain that their kids are - or would be - shocked to see a naked person. Of course they are only wanting them banned "for the sake of the children". Usually naturist family swims at public pools allow children to wear a swimming costume. When newcomers do that - it is only a few minutes before their kids have abandoned their costumes to be like their new pool peers. Kids treat nudity as their natural state - until punishment and shaming impose the social conditioning.
So, what happens if you don't like Bukake
Maybe you start off merely being asked questions alluding to 'pearl necklaces' and such, kind of like Leisure Suit Larry.
A move in the right direction, but just being able to verify facials is a little narrow, maybe ass rimming and such.
Cosmeticians are going to think they've got an advantage.
Why automate it, run a webcam service with 2-way video morning workouts
She stopped what she was doing, climbed off the rumpled sheets of the tacky pink circular bed, advanced on the camera, and delivered a stern matronly admonishment.
"6079 Smith W.
You're not trying, Pull harder, man.!!!"
sounds to me a lot like 'release the kraken'
"[...] or to the would-be onanist?"
After a long term relationship broke up - a gay friend used Grindr to reconnect to a social life. He was shocked how many under-18s wanted someone of an age to be their father or grandfather. He met one or two for a coffee - in order to give them some friendly advice on the dangers they were running.
Hugh Hefner. RIP. 91
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Hefner
Peter Stringfellow. RIP. 78
Who needs porn when you can watch this clusterf*ck?
I look forward to the inevitable news that this facial recognition system keeps watching after you are verified and the government has accidentally created a vast repository of self pleasure. Including lots of people under 18 years of age. Maybe the home office could arrest itself.
I can't help wondering if this is just a vaguely plausible excuse for kicking this further down the road
When May or her advisors came up with age verification it sounded like an answer to a question the electorate were asking about protecting people online. As soon as any actual research was done amongst the electorate, it was discovered to be political suicide to implement.
Rather than kill it and say money was wasted, they keep looking at "alternatives", gradually extending the time for each review until you cease being government.
Then under labour Harriet Harperson, Jess Phillips, Stella Creasy, Caroline Lucas, Mhairi Black (and the rest of the YESNP loons) will demand some far more intrusive scheme or just a complete outlawing of pornography as its "misogynistic" (despite the comment from Lord Bracadale in his review that there is no cleardefinition of misogyny even amongst those pushing for it to be a crime) "exposes other women to bias and harassment" "facilitates people trafficking and immoral behaviour" etc etc etc....
so it would be silly to suggest that that is money wasted. It is money invested in protecting our children, and we will continue to do that."
It might be silly to admit the money is wasted (or any responsibility, it seems), but not to conclude the money has been wasted, as indeed it seems to have been.
unfortunately, the money goes to some overpaid think-tank.
What you're talking about amounts to '$5 dollars to go to the cinema for a couple of hours'.
The facial recognition project will cost orders of magnitude to try to put in place before it, too is abandoned with a junior minister thrown in to drop the news.
Take a gander at this: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/facial-recognition-uk-police-wales-london-legal-challenge-human-rights-a8924296.html
*
"London's Metropolitan Police is facing a separate legal challenge over its own facial recognition trial, which has seen members of the public misidentified as criminals in 96 per cent of scans."
*
Facial recognition delivers false positives 96% of the time......SO HOW CAN IT BE PROPOSED AS A WAY OF DETERMINING AGE????
*
Well....we're dealing with politicians here, and Tory politicians to boot -- their motto is always: Don't confuse me with the facts!!!
vicar's daughter replaced by careless shagmop.
Surely a conservative MP should have noticed that. Also suspect realisation that "we're taking away your porn" is not a massive vote winner, even if all tories have to pretend that it is in public.
I realise our government is entirely made up of technologically inept morons inventing ludicrous policies based on nothing but their misguided beliefs of what is achievable but how is it that there appears to be no halfway competent backroom staff steering them?
Even a few minutes consideration of this idea would surely highlight massive technical hurdles (alongside the ludicrousness of suggesting people effectively upload selfies to porn sites of themselves getting down to business). How, for example, are they proposing to address the question of hardware trust? Ie, any facial recognition system based on cameras that can be controlled by the end user is surely destined for failure. Even where the camera itself can’t simply be spoofed (ie a virtual device playing non-stop footage of the fuckwit who came up with this policy), most systems require specialised hardware to avoid simple subversion by holding up a 2D image / video. Are they proposing porn can only be watched on a device equipped with such a camera already? Or will government issued ones be available on request?
And I wasn’t even going to mention VPNs (or good old fashioned piracy).
Hi, I infected your computer when you visited a site recently. I have been logging the sites that you visit (and we all know which sites they are, don't we, nudge, nudge, wink, wink) and I have also hacked your webcam. I have made a split screen video showing you from your webcam and the videos you have been watching. I also have you Facial ID data from when you logged in. But don't worry, I'm not going to blackmail you. I already used your Facial ID to buy a few bitcoins using your bank account.
Thanks, and have a nice wank!
Am I missing something here? Is the norrmal process, when looking for a little action with Mrs Palm and her lovely daughters, to first set up a webcam and a lighting rig?
Will those of a less narcissistic bent, who don't have a webcam focused on their face 24/7 be excluded from this brave new world of government assisted wanking?
Since a many Daily Fail/Excess/Right wing/Brexit loonies round my way seem to believe they have the ability to assess the age of a Syrian refugee from a grainy newspaper photo, maybe we should outsource the work to them.
As long as they are strapped to a couple of wires capable of delivering a couple of 100 volts if they fail in there task when thrown some test subjects
Now why do I foresee some kid using a portable USB webcam pointed at a picture to the side to fool the facial recognition? I don't see a way the idiot lawmakers can actually force this. Maybe a better option is to get better parents and have them learn how to do actual parenting. If you don't want your kids to see porno, then teach them.
That would never be hacked by miscreants, would it?
"- I only looked at pictures and - "
"And beat one off on camera? That's what they got, yeah? Your hot little face, blurred fist, dick burping f_cking spunk everywhere?
"Your mum's gonna love that on Facebook, Twitter, Insta-f_cking-whatever.
"And her friends.
"All eyes on you, giving it that.
"Toss in the c_nts at work, calling you Spurty McGoo.
"Laughing at your come face, making it their desktop wallpaper"