'Big Four' ISPs forced to block P0rn unless users 'opt in'

BenMcr · 11-10-2011, 08:14

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/20...vice-providers

Quote:

Subscribers to four of the UK's biggest internet service providers will have to "opt in" if they want to view sexually explicit websites, as part of government-sponsored curbs on online pornography.

Amazing how the Tories don't want to be responsible for planning regulation, or the NHS, or sorting out tax evasion, but find time to force adults to declare they want to watch porn on the internet?

admars · 11-10-2011, 08:28

BBC reports it differently

Quote:

Internet providers offer parents bar on porn

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15252128

Quote:

Four leading web providers are to offer customers the option to block adult content at the point of subscription, the BBC understands.

BenMcr · 11-10-2011, 08:33

As long as it is 'opt in' rather than 'opt out' I haven't got a problem with it.

Odd that the BBC and Guardian are saying different things

kwikbreaks · 11-10-2011, 11:29

I heard opt-in but that was on the Today program on Radio 4. Apparently BT already offer it as an option anyway so it isn't really anything new.

In my experience these "adult material" blockers are a PITA and block far more than porn and won't block all of that anyway. I have a Vodafone mobile data SIM and that was blocking all sorts of stuff (including one of my own websites) until I paid them Â£1 (which proves you have CC so proves you are 18) to lift the block.

Any kiddywink past a double figure age will soon enough search and find that proxies bypass all this junk anyway so it is just about completely pointless.

If you want to protect your poor babies from porn keep an eye on what they do online and don't expect technology to do that job for you - it will fail for sure.

Scurra · 11-10-2011, 12:37

Although since apparently I am not allowed to watch certain "On Demand" on the tv without entering a PIN, then this policy doesn't seem like much of an imposition.

Well unless you think that your customer base are a bunch of ignorant children who can't think for themselves and need someone to tell them what is appropriate and what is not, of course. Alas, this is the world we apparently now live in. So this move doesn't surprise me in the least.

Skie · 11-10-2011, 20:08

Well this should be fun.

Queue the recording industry whining in 6 months about how their material should be protected by this system. And then any other industry jumping on the bandwagon. Thanks Tories, I'm sure your chums in big business will give you plenty of board level positions when your glittering political careers come to a scandal filled end.

Matth · 11-10-2011, 23:51

Quote:

The Conservative MP Claire Perry, who's been leading a Commons inquiry into online child protection, said she welcomed the moves.
But she said she was concerned it was only for new customers and would not be introduced until 2012.

Sounds like it's not yet the measure that CP is pushing for.

Filtering has overheads, filtering has costs, filtering has mis-blocking.
It should be a business decision to offer or not offer a "family friendly" service, though there does need to be more user education on the subject.

Personally, I would advise anyone that does not specifically require protection, to "opt in to porn", in order to opt OUT of unneccessary filtering that will inevitably screw up!

Tezcatlipoca · 12-10-2011, 00:18

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...rn-filter-isps

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Guardian

Claims that David Cameron has forced a new "porn filter" on UK internet content have been disavowed by internet service providers, which said that the vast majority of customers will see "absolutely no difference" to their web content.

Confusion arose after it was suggested that a new "filtered feed" system will be applied to everyone using internet connections provided by the biggest four ISPs – BT, TalkTalk, Virgin and Sky, which between them have 17.6 million of the 19.2 million broadband customers in the UK.

It was claimed that the prime minister would unveil the measures on Tuesday as he hosted a No 10 meeting with the Mothers' Union, which earlier this year produced a raft of proposals to shield children from sexualised imagery.

But ISPs moved quickly to insist that the provisions will only apply to people taking out completely new contracts, who will be offered the choice of a connection with "parental controls", or one without. "Customers will have to choose one or the other, but we won't be making either one the default," said a source at one of the ISPs. A spokesperson for TalkTalk said: "This is called 'active choice' rather than an opt-in or opt-out." People who change to a different tier of connection within the same service will not be obliged to change the setting. BT said that new customers will be offered a package of parental control systems, provided by the security company McAfee.

(snip)

danielf · 12-10-2011, 00:30

[oblong item inserted into cheek]

Opting out of pr0n. Pffffft. The idea...

[/oblong item inserted into cheek]

12-10-2011, 15:48

I believe virgin already do a similar thing with their phones ,my sons phone had it on but it blocked Facebook as well

v0id · 12-10-2011, 15:53

Any site where there's user generated content, (ie. message boards) could also be considered 'porn sites', where moderation teams are not monitoring 24/7.

Anonymouse · 12-10-2011, 16:34

I read somewhere that such filters block sexual health sites as well, i.e. STI clinics and advice sites. Worse than useless! Why can't they for once fixate on important things rather than treating us all as babies? I am way over 18 and do not need any government telling me what I can and cannot view online!

Also, I just discovered that the filters that public libraries use are no better because they're inconsistent. To explain: I tried looking up Sasha Grey and Alexis Texas on Wikipedia; Sasha's entry was blocked...but not Alexis'. Yet both are porn stars. So what's that about?!

Sirius · 12-10-2011, 17:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Odd that the BBC and Guardian are saying different things

Different sides of an agenda me thinks

danielf · 12-10-2011, 17:13

In fairness, this is not about the government telling people what they can and can't view online. It's about making it a bit easier for people to restrict what their children can view if they wish to do so. Surely that's not a bad thing?

Provided it is active choice or opt-in rather than opt-out that is.

Gary L · 12-10-2011, 17:48

I heard that it's opt in if you want your porn blocked. opt out to get your porn would be illegal.