Pornography to be blocked by internet service providers unless users opt in

[Koopalmier]

Where you live is there a policy were you must crush your childhood before 10 years old?

Seirously porn at nine stop playing with toys and the age of six?

I just find that wrong if your being seirous, no wonder some French are miserable and crouchy!

Edited October 11, 2011 by Koopalmier

[Velotix von Skruviktorrius]

Allllll the way down here and no-one's realised this is unenforceable anyway if the hyperbolic reports on the matter are true, because they sound pretty far-fetched actually.

Hooray for proxies.

And if it's a far more reasonable "hey parents, ISPs have their own in-built porn blocker services now like they should have done years ago so you don't have to use bloatware shit like SuperNanny" then that's just dandy. Although it makes it a bit awkward for... mummy and daddy's "off hours".

[Scar]

This is ridiculous.

There are a great number of methods you can use to block explicit content. If you're too fucking stupid to learn how to use them, then don't buy a fucking computer! It isn't the Governments job to be interfering with parenting, if the parents are too stupid to do anything themselves and require government intervention to do anything, then maybe they shouldn't be parents.

[Stacy]

well if you see a french kid playing with toys and being over 7, there's likely a problem with him.

or these toys are legos.

i'm not using caps because i'm laid back. I'm actually dead serious. Also, video games don't count as toys, right ? :V

[Lightspines]

The only one's that are bothered by this, are the one's that can't get laid.

[JezMM]

The only one's that are bothered by this, are the one's that can't get laid.

Well, you'd know.

That was just a zing, nothing personal. 8D

Edited October 11, 2011 by JezMM

[Koopalmier]

I don't know I just think what you're saying is wrong to me, children shouldn't be looking at porn until they body and hormones have reached a certain level. I find it immoral.

If they somehow fall on porn before their hormones start working, it's likely the parents can't even check what their kid's doing. :V

And 9-10 is the age where hormones start working, so meh.

The only one's that are bothered by this, are the one's that can't get laid.

You're saying this like if it was easy.

Also, my father looks at porn, your argument is invalid. :V

[Lightspines]

If they somehow fall on porn before their hormones start working, it's likely the parents can't even check what their kid's doing. :V

And 9-10 is the age where hormones start working, so meh.

You're saying this like if it was easy.

Also, my father looks at porn, your argument is invalid. :V

All comprehensive schools are filled with sluts and prostitutes.

Also, a lot of marriages don't have sex once they reach a certain stage, for many reasons. Your father is living a sex-deprived life, which is why he watches porn.

Disrespectful.

[Koopalmier]

All comprehensive schools are filled with sluts and prostitutes.

Also, a lot of marriages don't have sex once they reach a certain stage, for many reasons. Your father is living a sex-deprived life, which is why he watches porn.

Disrespectful.

There are many prostitues in schools but you've got to have no dignity to even dare asking them. :V

And my parents aren't married anymore, but my father.... kinda... um, goes to the whores ? every week-end.

why am I even saying it. alright, back on topic.

Yeah. That's the stupidest law ever. Parental control doesn't exist for nothing. Ugh.

Edited October 11, 2011 by Koopalmier

[Your Vest Friend]

Oh yes, because I'd be much safer letting my kids go to some pro-anorexia or hate-mongering or suicide-encouraging site. Even if porn isn't suitable for kids, it'd cause far less issue than these.

And meanwhile, the Government are using this as a scapegoat to cover up the fact that they aren't doing anything that REALLY should be dealt with.

You can tell I didn't vote for these assclowns to be in power. ¬¬

[Koopalmier]

I wonder, why is the government doing this anyway ? Is it to make themselves look good ?

[Your Vest Friend]

I wonder, why is the government doing this anyway ? Is it to make themselves look good ?

Exactly that. They want to say that they've done something important for our society and to be seen as upholding family values in the eyes of the public. Given our current economy, I'm not sure how well that would work, though.

[Emmett L. Brown]

On the one hand, it's completely natural to want to explore sexual material regardless of whether or not you're in a commited relationship. On the other hand, Koopalmier is seriously creeping me out. Seriously, if that's normal in France, then let me strike that country off the list of places I'd want to raise a child.

(For the record, I have French relatives, and I don't believe Koopalmier's claims)

[Old dead account]

Nothing for people to get off on at night. I can see an increase in sexual assault, harrasment.

[eXtaticus]

I think that this is an utterly disgraceful cop-out from the government, brought on by sheer paranoia, idiocy, scare tactics and authoritarianism; what I do on my computer in my bedroom on my internet connection in my spare time is absolutely no business of the state, much less that of some self-enamoured group of jumped-up Christian fundamentalists. Quite honestly, I think that by leaving children under eight open to the jaws of the unadulterated internet, parents are asking for trouble; if it weren't for the fact that most parents are lazy, non-vigilant and generally complaisant when it comes to watching their own kids' activities online, then measures like this would never even have been thought of, let alone actually implemented - and I find it wholly unfair and unjust that the follies of the few leads to the punishment of the masses.

Really, though, most standards of online protection only apply to children who are pre-puberty; I think that it's extremely important for children not be swaddled in cotton wool until the day they reach adulthood, and that it's important to most teens that they should be able and allowed to explore not just their boundaries and the world around them, but also themselves - and wrapping green belts around their minds by shielding them from any and all content that they'll inevitably encounter as adults anyway isn't a viable method getting them used to what adulthood is like, and preparing them for what they'll find in it.

Personally, I don't at all approve of this kind of Mary Whitehouse-esque thought-fascism, and I certainly don't think that I, the paying customer of a privately owned ISP, should be blocked from accessing free content on a network that I'm legally allowed to browse because some group of God-squad fanatics think that they know what's best for me and my peers - that I won't stand for. This is doubtlessly the first act in what we'll soon know as a long line of UK internet censorship laws, people - and I think that it's wholly disgraceful that the state thinks that they have the right to police our free speech and freedom of expression to such a wild extent.

[Cynical]

Oh, you're so adorable. I think you should be grateful to have grown up somewhere so sheltered and blanketed from the harshness of the real world that you actually think "normal people" exist.

Or rather, there is normality in what is average. And what is average is what you would consider freakish and abnormal. Because, you see, EVERY type of media in existence has been used for sex. Books? The phone? Television? Yes, yes, and oh my yes. Porn existed long before internet - porn has existed from the moment when a cave man decided to draw a sexy fat woman in a cave wall. Rule 34 was merely named by the internet community, but smutty magazines were sexualising wholesome entertainment long before the first IP adress. And, sadly, childhoods were being fucked up rather more harshly before the internet made common knowledge even more common.

So that's a 100% wrong rating. You get an achievement!

EDIT: Also, your username is now incredibly ironic.

... Long story short, My name is who I am.

I agree with your truthful information, but do I give a shit?

I believe we should purify this world.

How one dimensional kinda like a...... Nazi?

Seirously Cynical (AKA Reich SS) you think you are cool doing the opposite of everybody but instead it makes look an idiot.

It least think before you type out your "Cynical" views.

By the way COD: World At War wants its avatar back.

... Your views are jaded as well.

In fact, you keep calling me a Nazi, which isn't very nice. Especially the fact that I'm not a white supremacist.

And no I don't want to be one dimensional, but the fact that people watch porn kinda creeps me out. If it's secretive it's ok, but don't be touching me the next time you wank it. By the way, Porn is just so... Eugh. I know it's the human body, but there's certain limits. I believe sex is a beautiful thing, but porn just ruins the whole purpose of it.

Oh hey, My Little Pony called, they want their pony avatar back.

[LunarEdge]

How one dimensional kinda like a...... Nazi?

Seirously Cynical (AKA Reich SS) you think you are cool doing the opposite of everybody but instead it makes look an idiot.

I think everyone who is replying to his comment as negative and is taking offense to it need to wake up. Obviously it was a joke, not meant to be taking seriously and you guys are picking it apart and trying to make it seem like it's more than it is. Some of you guys here have a bad habit of doing this. Even if it wasn't intended as a joke he didn't point anyone out, just walk away lol this is how, for lack of a better word, shit starts

too add-on to the discussion at hand..

Even with a filter to block pornographic material, some people will find a way around the barrier anyway so I wouldn't worry too much. Unless you have a favorite site or w/e you like to go to, it's obviously going to be blocked, but I would imagine you can still get your fix just like everyone else in this world and their tabooed items. (assuming you didn't opt-in)

Edited October 12, 2011 by LunarEdge

[novelty]

The human being is funny at living its own life. goverments who want to block the natural thought of a human being only cause good when there is equality for every other human being. In this case, the goverment is blocking the view of a natural "taboo" act against the blank slates of the world: children. Even though I condone the viewership of pornography to minors due to our moral standards, the "locked gate" manifesto is getting old. For instance, many adult shops still exist today and they used to be pubescent boy magnets; but though the access of the internet kills the "You must be X age or older to come inside" physical block. It comes as no surprise that the UK would want to implement a similar "phyisical" nature against internet pornography...It is just that doing so attracts instead of deflects promiscuous people.

[Emmett L. Brown]

... Long story short, My name is who I am.

I agree with your truthful information, but do I give a shit?

I believe we should purify this world.

[Cynical]

Then you should change it to "Naive" or possibly "Stubborn".

If you agree I'm right, then you should give a shit, because having our arguments proven wrong is how we develop our views. Sure, I'm teasing you, but to be honest there's no shame in being wrong as long as you learn from it.

As for "purifying the world"? Creepy talk.

Actually I was making fun of Hitler with; "Purify this world."

I like quoting things for some reason.

I'll tell a bit more of myself. I've learned from a lot of people and since Eve did pick out an apple and ate it, I'm allowed to know Good and/ or Evil.

The bad part about this, I know both very well. I may say good things, but then I have this tendency to say evil things.

I have the best both worlds, is what my teachers tell me.

So don't take it the wrong way, but I can be a bit evil sometimes. It may sound "stupid" but It's my humanly nature to be extremely selfish and greedy.

Edited October 12, 2011 by Cynical

[SHAX Hedgefox]

This reminds me something that was going to happen in my country, where the government was going to block pornography with a country-wide firewall.

Still, that is insane. Why would they even do something like that? "Opt in?" Seriously?

Edited October 12, 2011 by SHAX Hedgefox

[-Mark-]

You know, just thinking about it, this seems more like something China would do, given their government's history of trying to control what people can and can't access online.

[Stacy]

I think everyone who is replying to his comment as negative and is taking offense to it need to wake up. Obviously it was a joke, not meant to be taking seriously and you guys are picking it apart and trying to make it seem like it's more than it is. Some of you guys here have a bad habit of doing this. Even if it wasn't intended as a joke he didn't point anyone out, just walk away lol this is how, for lack of a better word, shit starts

Its not a joke Lunar and even if it is I am not laughing.

I for one are sick of his stupid 'angsty-facist' posts.

'Purify the World'?

Of what?

Humanity?

You know, just thinking about it, this seems more like something China would do, given their government's history of trying to control what people can and can't access online.

Yeah our government also want Internet providers to block Torrent Sites even though that would cause more trouble than its worth also their are other ways of downloading illegally online.

Why can the government just leave this to the Internet providers to decide?

After all they can lose customers over stuff like this.

The internet Porn sites will just keep changing their IP adresses and what not to get over this, after all porn is big business.

[Red Cap]

what I do on my computer in my bedroom on my internet connection in my spare time is absolutely no business of the state, much less that of some self-enamoured group of jumped-up Christian fundamentalists.

Personally, I don't at all approve of this kind of Mary Whitehouse-esque thought-fascism, and I certainly don't think that I, the paying customer of a privately owned ISP, should be blocked from accessing free content on a network that I'm legally allowed to browse because some group of God-squad fanatics think that they know what's best for me and my peers

Do you have a problem with Christians or something? Not saying that I agree with this, as people can do whatever the hell they want, but it seems like every time one of these kinds of things come up that can even slightly be racked up to certain Christians being all "HERP-DERP I'MMA SHUV DIS 'ERE BIBLE DOWN YER THROAT" you blame it on them, even down to simple things like the removal of Rouge's fangs. Not trying to be offensive here, and I don't know if I missed anything that would confirm that it was those types of people pushing this through (Personally, I'd chalk it up to people with morals), it's merely an observation.

Anyways, I think this is possibly the dumbest thing I've seen in a long time but maybe it'll actually help some parents out in the end.

Edited October 12, 2011 by RedCap-BlueSpikes

[Solkia]

Do you have a problem with Christians or something? Not saying that I agree with this, as people can do whatever the hell they want, but it seems like every time one of these kinds of things come up that can even slightly be racked up to certain Christians being all "HERP-DERP I'MMA SHUV DIS 'ERE BIBLE DOWN YER THROAT" you blame it on them, even down to simple things like Rouge's fangs. Not trying to be offensive here, and I'm not sure I missed anything that would confirm that it was those types of people pushing this through (Personally, I'd chalk it up to people with morals), it's merely an observation.

Anyways, I think this is possibly the dumbest thing I've seen in a long time but maybe it'll actually help some parents out in the end.

Like most religions, the only people who get noticed by the public are the extremists, so society puts a bunch of stereotypes on things they know little about.

Honestly, if you let you kids on the internet in the first place, well, i'll just stop there before I offend someone.