There's a fundamental issue with this - the age group this is targeting will have no issues circumventing the wall. Add that to the fact they're at school/college, so info on how will spread incredibly quickly.
My little brother (13) would already have no issue getting around this
XBOX Live - Sheep Sardine | Origin - MrRockliffe | Steam - MrRockliffe |
Add me
If anyone thinks this is about preventing minors from accessing porn i think they're being very naive, with the greatest respect, there's already a plethora of ways to prevent minors from accessing porn, not only is there plenty of software that does the job but there's also the ISP level filters that the government legislated for a few years ago.
Agreed - like I said it must be about snooping. And that is essentially invasion of privacy. If they don't want people doing it, make it illegal. If it is legal then leave people alone. It's the start of a slippery slope to areas where most people would care far more, but they're sneaking it in under the guise of "protecting children". And en-masse people just apathetically let it slide.Originally Posted by Corky34
I think they have the snooping pretty much covered already, it seems more a case of being seen to be doing something, a moralistic statement of sorts. When the newspapers feign anger at minors viewing porn or anything related to that the government can claim they've done 'something'.
I wonder how long it will be before the database gets hacked and peoples bank and CC details start turning up all over the place, or even funnier an MP being held to ransom.
Indeed. It's the classic Politician's Fallacy first described by Yes Minister:
1. Something must be done.
2. This is something.
3. Therefore we must do it.
That was exactly what I was going to say, why as an adult bill payer should I have to ask the government to crack one off? ... You know if I did things like that!
What's next permission to read political news in case you vote the wrong way?
yes. And then Chinese style vetting of who gets what social status and personal freedoms based on their web history.
How long before we see a law that to get approved for, I don't know, adoption/DBS checks for voluntary youth worker/generic government or local council position you have to disclose history/give them access to it? I reckon it will be within the next parliament. Would even put money on it, but I'd feel bad depriving people of money in that manner. Speaking of which: Gambling is as, if not more, harmful and yet that is allowed to be advertised all hours of the day on standard TV. Go figure!
Last edited by ik9000; 15-01-2019 at 02:07 PM.
Isn't the company that's running the age verification system the same one that owns Pornhub, etc?
No danger of hacks there...
The UK is already planning that apparently, i say apparently as I don't think any sites have been classed as being "Vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs"...at least not yet.
Note the key word "including", rather than something indicating an exhaustive list like 'namely'. They may as well have added ', but not limited to,'. Which begs the question, who's defining "British values"? Vagueness and arbitrariness in law is the enemy of liberty. Besides, I don't see them going after Islamist and neo-Marxist/Communist sites and social media, both of which abhor British values. They'd rather be going after comedians making off-colour jokes, and people making noise about mass immigration and its impact on society. So you have selective enforcement to make matters worse. So much for their defence of rule of law, individual liberty and democracy.
Bingo. British values have never been defined and constantly evolve. Slave trading was very acceptable in the 16th century but not in the 19th. Women having a vote very popular today, scandalous in victorian times. Women wearing bikinis fine today, outrage in 1800s and pretty much any time before then.
Next that religious tolerance will be "only people who don't say anything that says that somebody else might be wrong" ie enforcing religious freedom so long as that religion is multi-cultural "all religions are the same" BS that is the arrogance of political correctness. Itself blatantly intolerant and dismissive of peoples' beliefs but the irony is lost on them.
Then there's "UK copyright laws". You just have to look towards the US to see how that will play out! Enjoy ripping those CDs and making Disc free iso files while you can folks! New music, band covers - they'll be blocked soon no doubt. Music tab sites? Dead.
It's murky and rubbish and another example of my comment earlier that the people in parliament don't seem to demonstrate a good ability to create sensible policies, nevermind laws, at the moment. We crawl towards state interference of the internet and it will go underreported and hardly noticed by the masses.
The part that makes me laugh is the "Vocal or active opposition to - beliefs", does that mean if I setup a website that vocally or actively oppose the belief that unicorns are not real that i may find my site on the block list.
are you serious? do you even have kids?
As long as there is porn, people will find a way around any verification system.
I say God Speed to Parliament as it would mean they'll have to block every man,woman and child from Twitter as there's porn on there too.
God Speed Parliament. You're going to have to block every man, woman and child from Twitter as there's porn on there as well.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote