Online Safety Bill Etc

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Nonsense. The parents are responsible for ensuring young children do not have access to these sites.

The older kids will get around this anyway, and subject themselves to even worse material. Many of us on here warned of this long ago.

Even if its only 1% effective, what's your objection? PCs can be set up not to download install software. Older kids yes, they'll get round it. OAPs might struggle though ...
Some protection, even if its flawed, is better than none.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Nonsense. The parents are responsible for ensuring young children do not have access to these sites.

The older kids will get around this anyway, and subject themselves to even worse material. Many of us on here warned of this long ago.

This legislation won't affect children with responsible parents as inappropriate websites won't be accessible anyway, it's those that aren't or can't be responsible that it
aims to protect.

---------- Post added at 19:39 ---------- Previous post was at 19:33 ----------

Originally Posted by Mr K

Even if its only 1% effective, what's your objection? PCs can be set up not to download install software. Older kids yes, they'll get round it. OAPs might struggle though ...
Some protection, even if its flawed, is better than none.

Indeed and Ofcom have always recognised this.

Guido Fawkes has said that he thinks that the Government will/could ban VPN's to stop those circumventing the new law, but they have issued a statement saying that they aren't going to do this.

Farage has said that Reform would repeal at least this part of the Act, so the technology secretary asked if this meant that he supported those that target children.

In response he has said that he wants an apology for it being said that he supports online predators, when it wasn't said that he did.

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by Chris

As of this evening, 5 of the top 10 are still VPNs.

https://appfigures.com/top-apps/imes...om/top-overall

Number 5 is Yoti, a digital ID app. But Proton VPN has knocked ChatGPT off the top spot.

Opera browser (with VPN) is in at number 16.

Guess I am being really stupid, just went on this , can't see any

---------- Post added at 19:43 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

This legislation won't affect children with responsible parents as inappropriate websites won't be accessible anyway, it's those that aren't or can't be responsible that it
aims to protect.

---------- Post added at 19:39 ---------- Previous post was at 19:33 ----------



Indeed and Ofcom have always recognised this.

Guido Fawkes has said that he thinks that the Government will/could ban VPN's to stop those circumventing the new law, but they have issued a statement saying that they aren't going to do this.

Farage has said that Reform would repeal at least this part of the Act, so the technology secretary asked if this meant that he supported those that predate on children.

In response he has said that he wants an apology for it being said that he supports online predators, when it wasn't said that he did.

As the norm for this government of fools, a knee jerk reaction. He should follow Trump and sue

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by Itshim

As the norm for this government of fools, a knee jerk reaction. He should follow Trump and sue

Yes, seems the latest populist cause. Give us our daily porn fix.

[jem]

"Farage has said that Reform would repeal at least this part of the Act, so the technology secretary asked if this meant that he supported those that predate on children.”

Ah, so anyone who opposes this Act for whatever reason is automatically a supporter of child abuse, yes? This from a ‘technology secretary’ - I assume we are talking about Peter Fyle (sorry, Kyle) - who does have a degree in geography, international development, and environmental studies, and a doctorate in community development. Nothing about his career would indicate that he has any knowledge of technology beyond a TV remote control!

And what does this Act have anything to do with CSE anyway? It’s supposed to make it harder for under-18s to see content ‘which could be harmful to children’.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Itshim

Guess I am being really stupid, just went on this , can't see any

---------- Post added at 19:43 ---------- Previous post was at 19:40 ----------



As the norm for this government of fools, a knee jerk reaction. He should follow Trump and sue

The Online Safety Act was brought in by the last Conservative Government.

---------- Post added at 00:34 ---------- Previous post was at 00:30 ----------

Originally Posted by jem

"Farage has said that Reform would repeal at least this part of the Act, so the technology secretary asked if this meant that he supported those that predate on children.”

Ah, so anyone who opposes this Act for whatever reason is automatically a supporter of child abuse, yes? This from a ‘technology secretary’ - I assume we are talking about Peter Fyle (sorry, Kyle) - who does have a degree in geography, international development, and environmental studies, and a doctorate in community development. Nothing about his career would indicate that he has any knowledge of technology beyond a TV remote control!

And what does this Act have anything to do with CSE anyway? It’s supposed to make it harder for under-18s to see content ‘which could be harmful to children’.

That isn't what was said, it was a question. Instead of answering it Farage has responded as if he had been accused of supporting child predators.

CSE?

[nffc]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

The Online Safety Act was brought in by the last Conservative Government.

Yes it was but Labour have had over a year to cancel it if they didn't agree with it. Plus it would have passed a vote in Parliament when it was brought in which Labour MPs at the time would have had a vote on.


It's pretty clear they agree with it

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Even if its only 1% effective, what's your objection? PCs can be set up not to download install software. Older kids yes, they'll get round it. OAPs might struggle though ...
Some protection, even if its flawed, is better than none.

The objection is that this places restrictions on us all. It’s pathetic over-reach by a woke government obsessed with trying to dictate everything we do.

---------- Post added at 16:58 ---------- Previous post was at 16:51 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

This legislation won't affect children with responsible parents as inappropriate websites won't be accessible anyway, it's those that aren't or can't be responsible that it aims to protect.

But it won’t protect them as they will get around it with a VPN. This is the point you are not addressing.

Additionally, the Act threatens free speech. How long before we can only read the government version of what’s what?

It’s a truly slippery slope and this legislation needs to be reversed.

---------- Post added at 17:03 ---------- Previous post was at 16:58 ----------

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

The Online Safety Act was brought in by the last Conservative Government.

That doesn’t make it right! The last Sunak government was as bad as the current government….well, almost.

The Draft OSA was published in May 2021, and the Bill was introduced into Parliament in March 2022 (by Nadine Dorries), when Johnson was PM...

[Itshim]

Originally Posted by nffc

Yes it was but Labour have had over a year to cancel it if they didn't agree with it. Plus it would have passed a vote in Parliament when it was brought in which Labour MPs at the time would have had a vote on.


It's pretty clear they agree with it

---------- Post added at 17:46 ---------- Previous post was at 17:45 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The objection is that this places restrictions on us all. It’s pathetic over-reach by a woke government obsessed with trying to dictate everything we do.

---------- Post added at 16:58 ---------- Previous post was at 16:51 ----------



But it won’t protect them as they will get around it with a VPN. This is the point you are not addressing.

Additionally, the Act threatens free speech. How long before we can only read the government version of what’s what?

It’s a truly slippery slope and this legislation needs to be reversed.

---------- Post added at 17:03 ---------- Previous post was at 16:58 ----------



That doesn’t make it right! The last Sunak government was as bad as the current government….well, almost.

Well said

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The objection is that this places restrictions on us all. It’s pathetic over-reach by a woke government obsessed with trying to dictate everything we do.

Me thinks thou doth protest too much OB. Its restrictions on yourself you're worried about and sod the kiddies? (If you need a VPN recommendation let me know ).

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Mr K

and sod the kiddies?

There’s no evidence harms to children have increased over the years, I believe suicide rates are down.

This is just a censors charter.

[peanut]

I've not seen one bit of evidence to say viewing something online is THE cause for anyone to commit suicide.

But it seems the actual cause, the real cause which isn't the internet is always overlooked but then blamed on the internet. This is what I have issues with.

As for porn.. After seeing that C4 Bonnie Blue docu last night, I've given up all hope the younger generation. I am all for banning porn sites if it's done right. But what's happening isn't being done right.

[mrmistoffelees]

Perhaps a better idea would have been for isps to follow mobile networks for example example on Vodafone by default your not able to view adult content without logging into your accountant enabling the functionality. (This is seperate to secure net)

Also can we call it porneaux ? There’s just something a bit more eloquent about that

[nffc]

Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees

Perhaps a better idea would have been for isps to follow mobile networks for example example on Vodafone by default your not able to view adult content without logging into your accountant enabling the functionality. (This is seperate to secure net)

Also can we call it porneaux ? There’s just something a bit more eloquent about that

Ok, so wouldn't that apply to the connection and not necessarily the person using it? With a mobile the person enabling that is pretty much always going to be the person using the handset. With a broadband connection the whole family would be using it. So adults would enable it meaning the kids would be able to access it too once it's been enabled on the connection?