Anyone else think a massive invasion of privacy is a lot worse than letting 14 year olds do what there gonna do anyway? Oh no sex... My mum and dad never did that in their day!!!
Printable View
Anyone else think a massive invasion of privacy is a lot worse than letting 14 year olds do what there gonna do anyway? Oh no sex... My mum and dad never did that in their day!!!
We've not got much privacy left in the UK. Between having the most CCTV cameras in Europe, perhaps even the world, the investigatory powers act (aka:the snoopers' charter) keeping track of every website we visit, bulk collection of our communication data (emails, mobile phone locations, texts), hacking into our devices and the removal of encryption, privacy has been eroded to such an extent they may as well place cameras and mics in our homes.
Another £10 tax by the government nannies, taking personal freedom and choice, for a few scarmongering numpties in politicis and interest groups! No thanks, will VPN to Holland, they still believe if freedom of choice and being an adult capbale of making decisions!
But you don't need that ID online, so the sites can't store it and sniffers can't sniff it (I mean, even if you have a keylogger installed, that won't get your credit card or passport number). So it's safer. Doesn't make the entire porn license a great idea, but if you put it against the idea of typing identifying information whenever you want to access a site, I think it's better.
And really, I'd rather that kids get porn IDs illegally than try to get access to credit card or passport numbers.
Oi, quiet, fool. You'll give them ideas. ;) :D Cameras in our homs, indeed. Mind you, some people are enthusiastically doing it for them, already. Opt-in cameras.
Though I have to say, much of that privacy loss is opt-in.
Don't want them tracking mobile phone location? Don't buy a smartphone. Don't want them tracking even cell tower location, don't use a cell phone .... or use one that doesn't track back to you, and never EVER turn it on at home. Oh, and buy one with a user-replaceable (and therefore removable) battery. ;)
Don't want texts read? Don't use .... well, you get the picture.
Of course, most (vast majority, probably) just put up with the loss of privacy either for the convenience, or because they haven't thought about it, or just don't care.
CCTV cameras are harder to avoid. But you can minimise how much they see.
This is probably closer to the truth, essentially all they'll end up doing by this is making more kids go down the route of sexting each other using snapchat (or whatever it is the kids do / use nowadays), with more implications and downsides than browsing rubbish on the internet.
Probably not a very well thought out policy, nothing new there then.
Ahh, I remember the days of top shelf jazz mags. Where boobies were considered harmful to younguns eyes.
Now the youths can buy a £10 Pornhub access, next to the Debenhams and Argos gift cards. You couldn't make this stuff up :)
Still, turn off Strict Search on Chrome and hey-presto, pr0n -a-plenty :P All for free (@Smudger told me how do do this, honest)
Tumblr has also become a fetid porn underground, you can find nearly anything on there...
Will tumblr need an age restricted pass on it? (Other than it needing to be torched to the ground anyway)
This comes around as they have a sensitive mode which kicks in on most photographic tumblrs, but using google, you can use Amp to bypass it!
Well, we're going on minimal-detail rumours in one newspaper about that, but even that suggests that passes will only be on sale to those that can verify their age first, apparently by producing ID like passport, driving licence, etc. So it's not (reportedly) as easy as junior raiding his/her piggybank for £10 in 20p coins and heading for WH Smiths.
Of course, as always, the devil is in the detail. How will the verification system work? What ID? What hardware might shops need?
And "kids" have never, ever been known to buy fake ID off the net (or whatever) to get into clubs and newsagents, I'm sure, would never consider selling underage people booze, fags .... or passes. No, couodn't happen. Surely? ;)
Well, how many of us older folk saw it in our youth, not via purchase routes, but because mate of mate's dad left some in the loft, and mate of mate got hold of it and brought it round to the saturday megadrive fest? Just as with physical mags, it'll be careless stewardship of the code by more apathetic parents that will allow the dutiful circulation of knowledge with the wider audience. And that's before anyone learns about proxies, VPNs or the like. I'm not against the aim to protect minors, but as ever, this could well end up a pointless exercise, and probably a costly one at that. Time will tell, but I'd be amazed if this was the catch-all that some champion it to be.
Agreed. But my point was that we don't really know what this "buy a pass in a newsagent" involves.
Will it work? Like most things tech-related, the tech community are two steps (or more) ahead .... and kids are two steps ahead of the tech community. So, no, probably not.
That said, there's a qualitative, and certainly quantitative, difference between what "kids" might find sneaking a peek in a mag they found (in a hedge or otherwise) and what's available to anyone with a internet device and marginally more savvy than "ask Google". Or, so I'm told. :)
Sadly there definitely is some weird, nasty, (and very graphic) stuff out there. Hence I do think it's right to try and shield children, and frankly clueless adults too, from it. There is a condition amongst therapists called the "porn death spiral", not literal death, but rather progressive desensitisation and therefore the need for more and more extreme content to get the same dopamine thrill. People can end up literally unable to get it up and be excited by normal activities in the bedroom with real people. Quite tragic.