Opting in to allow porn

[RebeccaT]

Many people are complaining that in the UK Sky, Talk Talk and BT have now blocked porn. (UK media is going crazy over it!) They haven't blocked it. They have simply made this the default setting as will all ISPs by the end of the year.

You can OPT IN to view porn. You can even schedule when to allow and when to block. You can set up user accounts with personal settings.

So many knickers in so many twists over this.

 

[eclipse76]

The censorship per default is actually quite worrying.
It seems the UK government is cracking down on what they believe is "immoral". The problem is, it starts with porn, but what will be next.
And frankly, having friends who have experimented the O2 filter, there are a lot of false positives with such systems.

 

[mynameisbob84]

I think it's a pretty worrying trend and a very slippery slope. We're edging closer and closer to a nanny state in which all it takes is one person (or one person listening to enough ill-informed people) to misunderstand a particular sexual practice, or kink, or fetish, and boom! it's on the banned list. A world (even a virtual one) where a minority of puritanical fascists get to decide what potentially millions of adults may or may not consent to with regards to producing and consuming pornography is a sucky world indeed :twocents-02cents:

 

[Shaun__]

Many people are complaining that in the UK Sky, Talk Talk and BT have now blocked porn. (UK media is going crazy over it!) They haven't blocked it. They have simply made this the default setting as will all ISPs by the end of the year.

You can OPT IN to view porn. You can even schedule when to allow and when to block. You can set up user accounts with personal settings.

So many knickers in so many twists over this.

What if you do not want your partner to know you like looking at porn? When they call to get it back, and learn you already turned it back on, the cat will be out of the bag.

 

[weirdbr]

Many people are complaining that in the UK Sky, Talk Talk and BT have now blocked porn. (UK media is going crazy over it!) They haven't blocked it. They have simply made this the default setting as will all ISPs by the end of the year.

You can OPT IN to view porn. You can even schedule when to allow and when to block. You can set up user accounts with personal settings.

So many knickers in so many twists over this.

As Bob pointed out, it's a slippery slope - it started with this mandatory filtering (which was approved two+ years ago IIRC and only now is going live), now the recent prohibition of multiple acts from being filmed or sold in the UK even online.. And as eclipse76 points out it is a dangerous thing - the Australians have had a filter for a while and there's plenty of evidence of mis-management of the filters, including mass 'accidental' blocking of educational and professional websites that have nothing to do with adult content (for example, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/04/a ... ation-site ). Plus, the blacklists in Australia are secret with no public oversight, so there's no way to guarantee that this won't be used for political censorship (and I bet this is going to be exactly how the blacklist is managed in the UK).

 

[zippypinhead]

Yeah, it ain't good. If anything, more knickers should be more twisted.

 

[SaffronBurke]

I personally feel that the only time porn should be blocked is when a place of employment or a school is providing computers (you're not paid to watch porn, nor is it typically relevant to your education, but if you're at a college or university, you should be able to watch on your own computer if you want), or a parent setting content filters on their child's device. A government or service provider shouldn't have a say.

I've heard a time or two that this is supposed to somehow be a "for the children" thing, but that's quite silly in my mind. It's a parent's job to keep their children from seeing things they deem inappropriate, not everyone else's.

 

[Jupiter551]

I think it will likely serve as a testbed for other governments...hopefully people won't stand for it. I expect there will also be backlashes against ISPs.

 

[Jupiter551]

What if you do not want your partner to know you like looking at porn? When they call to get it back, and learn you already turned it back on, the cat will be out of the bag.

Eh, if you're hiding watching porn from a partner you need to stop hiding that, it's silly. Besides, in the above mentioned example person 2 could hardly say anything to person 1 since they obviously BOTH watch porn.

Seriously, it's kind of another issue but people who hide porn from their partners have a much deeper miscommunication going on.

 

[RebeccaT]

A government or service provider shouldn't have a say.

They are not stopping people from watching porn. Service providers are simply changing the default setting. People have always had the choice to opt in or out and still have that choice.

My original post was not meant to reignite the debate about censorship but to point out that filters can be set according to personal preferences.

 

[penfold_43]

Many people are complaining that in the UK Sky, Talk Talk and BT have now blocked porn. (UK media is going crazy over it!) They haven't blocked it. They have simply made this the default setting as will all ISPs by the end of the year.

Just so everyone knows, there is no legislation to this effect and no mandatory censorship other than specific court orders under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act granted requiring certain ISPs to block certain sites (e.g. BT Internet to block newz2bin or whatever it was called), just political pressure from government and the big ISPs buckle under it.

It is still possible to find ISPs in the UK that do not have content filtering, but they tend to be proper ISPs rather than companies trying to sell you sports TV channels.

now the recent prohibition of multiple acts from being filmed or sold in the UK even online.

No prohibition on filming, other than stuff that's illegal to do (and the whole "extreme porn" fiasco, but if you want to know about that, look at backlash), there is now a prohibition on selling a video online that would be refused a BBFC certificate - it was always illegal to sell uncertificated videos on a physical tape / DVD etc, but not online. I think it's absurd, given that the things that won't be granted certificates are going to remain available online outside the UK.

I do despair though of politicians and pressure groups and their desire to control everything, and the way they talk about the Internet in a way that they shows they have no understanding of it at all - I don't single out Cameron as all the other party leaders compete with him to show us how little they understand. It's all very depressing.

 

[Zoomer]

Many people are complaining that in the UK Sky, Talk Talk and BT have now blocked porn. (UK media is going crazy over it!) They haven't blocked it. They have simply made this the default setting as will all ISPs by the end of the year.

You can OPT IN to view porn. You can even schedule when to allow and when to block. You can set up user accounts with personal settings.

So many knickers in so many twists over this.

The problem is simply this - why should you have to opt in? Why should you have to state any preference at all?

You may think this is a wonderful idea and cannot understand why anyone cares. Or maybe you think that making a premium rate phone call to say "Please sir, can I have some more (porn)?" isn't a big deal so people should just get on with it.

The internet is supposed to be free of political interference. The issue isn't that you have to say "yes" to wanting porn, it's the fact that the Government is trying to say what you should, and shouldn't, be able to see (by default) on the internet - when the content in question isn't even illegal and therefore they should have zero jurisdiction to interfere with how you use it.

The "issue" is apparently children seeing porn on the internet and it's warping their little minds. So apparently the only solution to save the kids is to block (by default) porn for everyone - and make them ask to see it instead.

The filters were created for illegal content. Now they're being used to wrap us in warm cotton wool. What's next?

 

[Sevrin]

The internet is supposed to be free of political interference.

It never has been, and never will be.

 

[RebeccaT]

You may think this is a wonderful idea and cannot understand why anyone cares. Or maybe you think that making a premium rate phone call to say "Please sir, can I have some more (porn)?" ?

No need to make a 'phone call...you log into your account online and set it up the way you want it. This was all I wanted to say as I have had people ask me how they will be able opt in. Of course, if they're already "in" then they don't have to do anything.

My ISP has always allowed me to set different filters for different users, to allow access to preferred sites or to block specific sites, to have different settings at different times of the day. The default when I signed up was "allow everything". The only change now is that the default is "block pornography...click here to allow"

As I say, I really only wanted to let people know it can be customised, as has always been the case. But then I guess everyone on this forum would know that anyway...it's the guys who can't even copy and paste a video link that need this help!

EDIT: I'm beginning to wish I hadn't posted at all as there are already several threads regarding the rights and wrongs of it all and we seem to be getting back to that, so I do apologise for unintentionally bringing it up again.

 

[eclipse76]

I know I had read about this before:
https://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2013/08/30/opting-out/
She sums up my concern:

Though the majority seem to recognize this censorship for what it is, and some point out that it can’t even work as promised, I’ve already heard others asking how this is a big deal, since adults will be able to “opt out”. But that’s not every time they sign on to the internet; it’s only once, when service is established. In other words, the decision is kept permanently in the records of their ISPs…records government can have for the asking, and which prosecutors can trot out at “sex crime” trials as evidence of their “perversion”, and which police may be granted powers to study for the very type of witch hunt authorized by another section of the PM’s initiative. As for the concept of “family friendly wi-fi”…have you ever tried to use filtered internet service? Cameron and other censorship advocates like to pretend that so-called “porn filters” only do what their name implies, but that’s far from the case; they usually block any- and everything containing certain taboo words, which includes a great deal of medical and psychological information, GLBT and sex worker rights resources, and people, places and companies whose names contain banned syllables such as “sex” or “cunt”. At the Desiree conference last month I discovered that even my blog, which is not remotely pornographic but does discuss sexual topics, was blocked by the filter at a donut shop in Las Vegas. But at least I can guess why mine is caught in the net; some companies are blocked for no discernible reason, and getting themselves unblocked is incredibly difficult. And then there’s the slippery slope; I hope I’m not the only one who shudders at the phrase “illegal search terms”.

But as important as they are, censorship issues aren’t the only reasons to oppose this horrible nanny state expansion; as I’ve pointed out before, such schemes inherently infantilize women. Dr. Brooke Magnanti writes:

…many such discussions treat women exclusively as victims or potential victims, with no more control over their own lives than toddlers. With the endless ongoing campaigns to ban boobs in the Sun or ban whatever type of porn is being presented as a cause for panic this year, no one ever asks – what if we ban this, and attitudes towards women don’t improve? What then? Because there are plenty of places with considerably less sexual freedom and access to porn than here, and they are not exactly bastions of gender equality either…

 

[Zoomer]

I know I can opt "in" to view porn - my view is that I shouldn't have to. I should not be censored by default (exceptions being severely illegal content of course).

But to be a pedant...

They haven't blocked it. They have simply made this the default setting

Sounds like blocking to me

 

[Rose]

While I don't love Comcast most of the time, they don't have a default blocker on what I view, but they do allow me to set up blocks. I'd much rather deal with their craptastic customer service than default blocks any day.