Jump to content



Photo
britain pornography block proxy silk road government david cameron

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Tk1917

Tk1917

    Neowinian

  • 98 posts
  • Joined: 21-January 11

Posted 22 July 2013 - 18:16

Alex Deane, the Head of Public Affairs at Weber Shandwick, looked red in the face on yesterday’s #SkyPapers when he criticised David Cameron and Claire Perry’s plans to block pornography in households unless there is an opt-in submission to have access.

He was of course right: if we are genuinely concerned about the problems that pornography is causing young people then it is a family issue to control – not a role for the state to police.

But that’s irrelevant, because using the moral argument can only get you so far in our sorry state of contemporary British Politics. What is not irrelevant is that this policy announcement does not have a hope in hell of being successful.

 

 

http://thebackbenche...ech-generation/




#2 Growled

Growled

    Neowinian Senior

  • 41,508 posts
  • Joined: 17-December 08
  • Location: USA

Posted 30 July 2013 - 18:14


What is not irrelevant is that this policy announcement does not have a hope in hell of being successful.

 

Of course it doesn't. The government doesn't have a clue when it comes to technology.



#3 Aergan

Aergan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 2,398 posts
  • Joined: 24-September 05
  • Location: Staffordshire, UK
  • OS: Xubuntu 14.04.1 / Server 2012 R2 / Ubuntu Server 14.04.1
  • Phone: Sony Xperia Z1

Posted 30 July 2013 - 19:55

You'd think they would go for something a little more serious and relevant like people sharing / posting snuff content publicly.



#4 Aheer.R.S.

Aheer.R.S.

    I cannot Teach Him, the Boy has no Patience!

  • 11,536 posts
  • Joined: 15-October 10

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:05

<rant> Oh, it's the government's responsibility to parent kids, guess I've been doing all the wrong things teaching them myself.
(Not to mention how easy it is to circumvent these blocks)

I hate being told what I can or can't do with something I'm paying for, especially when it's easy to place adult filters on computers and routers/superhubs. Some can be as simple as a check box for Christ sake.

<rant over>

#5 +Phouchg

Phouchg

    Resident Misanthrope

  • 5,689 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 11
  • Location: Neowin Detainment Camp

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:10

Laugh as you want, "tech generation". After all, it's the only thing you can do, "tech generation". It has never been about porn or kids.

Gubbermint has enough clue to understand that internets can, is and will be used to manipulate with people.

 

Tech generation... dumbass generation, I'm sorry.



#6 NinjaGinger

NinjaGinger

    Neowinian

  • 511 posts
  • Joined: 06-January 02

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:11

The Government's porn block idea is being laughed at by the Tech Generation,

 and me.And I'm not dumb



#7 Richard C.

Richard C.

    Neowinian Senior

  • 3,649 posts
  • Joined: 15-April 05
  • Location: Around
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro & Mac OSX
  • Phone: iPhone 5

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:25

The porn block is a fairly transparent attempted at introducing generic web censorship, another article in the news today where the govt has said it fears e-crime also supports this theory.

 

Seems they are after MMORPGs too



#8 ahhell

ahhell

    Neowinian Senior

  • 8,896 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 03
  • Location: Winnipeg - coldest place on Earth - yeah

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:26

Did you see that ludicrous display last night?  :laugh:

 

 

By the way UK, your nutty politics is starting to rub off on the rest of the world.  Please stop.  K thx bye.



#9 +Phouchg

Phouchg

    Resident Misanthrope

  • 5,689 posts
  • Joined: 28-March 11
  • Location: Neowin Detainment Camp

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:29

The Government's porn block idea is being laughed at by the Tech Generation,

 and me.And I'm not dumb

 

If you cling to the idea that porn is their target instead of being only a scapegoat, I'm... afraid you might need to re-assess that allegation.



#10 +Chicane-UK

Chicane-UK

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,783 posts
  • Joined: 02-November 01
  • Location: The UK!
  • OS: MacOS 10.9 Mavericks
  • Phone: Google Nexus 4

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:36


He was of course right: if we are genuinely concerned about the problems that pornography is causing young people then it is a family issue to control – not a role for the state to police.

 

EXACTLY! If parents aren't monitoring what their children are up to on the internet, then it's their fault! Why should the rest of the population be made to jump through hoops to view whatever they want on the internet, because a vocal minority are completely ignorant about what their kids are doing on the internet?! 



#11 MightyJordan

MightyJordan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,398 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 06
  • Location: Plymouth, England
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro x64
  • Phone: Google Nexus 5 32GB

Posted 30 July 2013 - 20:57

By the way UK, your nutty politics is starting to rub off on the rest of the world.  Please stop.  K thx bye.

 

Not our fault; we didn't vote them in!



#12 FloatingFatMan

FloatingFatMan

    Resident Fat Dude

  • 15,860 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 04
  • Location: UK

Posted 31 July 2013 - 06:03

By the way UK, your nutty politics is starting to rub off on the rest of the world.  Please stop.  K thx bye.

 

You come from Canada, and say WE have nutty politics? :rofl:


Not our fault; we didn't vote them in!

 

Uh, yes.. .We did...



#13 MightyJordan

MightyJordan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,398 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 06
  • Location: Plymouth, England
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro x64
  • Phone: Google Nexus 5 32GB

Posted 31 July 2013 - 06:11

Uh, yes.. .We did...

 

We didn't...

 

UK.PNG

 

In 2010, we voted, but no party got a majority. They then took the decision out of our hands and decided amongst themselves, meaning we ended up with a mess of a coalition government that no one voted for. Admittedly, it is better than having complete Conservative rule, but not by much. :/



#14 FloatingFatMan

FloatingFatMan

    Resident Fat Dude

  • 15,860 posts
  • Joined: 23-August 04
  • Location: UK

Posted 31 July 2013 - 06:27

You need to read up on election law a bit more.  The Tories had enough votes to form a government on their own, but it would have been a rather weak one.  Forming a coalition with another part to combine votes is perfectly legal.

 

Your own graph proves that more people wanted the Tories in than they wanted labour, and another term with labour in charge would have completely ruined this country.



#15 MightyJordan

MightyJordan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 16,398 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 06
  • Location: Plymouth, England
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro x64
  • Phone: Google Nexus 5 32GB

Posted 31 July 2013 - 06:56



another term with labour in charge would have completely ruined this country.

 

 

The country's pretty much ruined now under Tory rule. They're continuing their privatisation crusade off from Mrs. Thatcher's reign; this time round, it's the fire brigade, Royal Mail (even Thatcher herself said she wouldn't dare sell off the Queen's head), and worst of all, the NHS. If you're willing to read a wall of text, here's what they've managed to do in just three years.

 

Under current Labour, yes, it would probably be just as bad, as thanks to Tony Blair, the Labour party are now just Tories in red ties; the only difference being we'd probably still have a public NHS, and better treatment of people with disabilities or mental health issues, not forcing some of them to commit suicide like what's happening right now.