Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

ckn

Ban it, block it, censor it

43 posts in this topic

Is it just me being daft here but what's the point in the frothy-mouthed "the internet is evil" stuff we're seeing this week in the news?  Were there never paedophiles, sex addicts or people with badly deluded opinions of women before the internet?  I'm even fairly confident in saying that the incidences of those really nasty things are less now than in the 70s due to societal changes.  The internet is a convenient scapegoat for those who just want to "do something!" about some genuinely nasty situations rather than really put their minds into root causes and better solutions.  I'm completely convinced that the nasty sexual criminals would still be nasty sexual criminals even if the internet never existed, spending time on the internet looking at even the most extreme porn isn't going to rewire an already damaged mind, it's a symptom and a big red flag that calls for intervention but not the root cause.

 

So... the government's plan is to put a block on porn on the internet.  That's not going to work.  If I really wanted to I could get to any banned content on the internet in seconds, as could any teenager, never mind having to be technically astute when it comes to interweb things.  If my ISP, say, blocked access to a file sharing website, it would take me a few clicks of the mouse to get around that block.  Even if the government went beyond the excesses of the Chinese government and implemented a "white list" of safe sites that you could access and nothing else then you'd get around it with IP addresses.  Restrict it to UK addresses only?  Piggy-backed proxies on the global commercial backbones.  The internet genie is out the bottle, it can't be put back in, surely it's far better to address the root cause of a problem rather than a symptom?

 

All this will do is defer yet again proper analysis of root causes along with better detection procedures.  Put the "ban" in place and the government gets a free ride on it for a year or two after having "done something".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree...though I doubt the free ride would last  even a year as the realities of modern comms technology must eventually become obvious even to our senior civil servants, govt officials, politicians of all persuasions and media reporters. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That bloke from the Co-op Bank lives in the local authority ward where he was a Labour Councillor.  He was also a Methodist minister. He apparently was under extreme pressure at work and turned to porn and taking drugs, just like a lot of the people in his ward would have done under the same circumstances.

 

He must have some positive qualities or he wouldn't have achieved those positions. He must have been wealthy but chose to carry on working for the Church and to live in a poor borough.

 

He is being pilloried by all sides ... the press, Labour, the Bank and his Church are ganging up to disparage him so they look good in the media. As yet, he has not been found guilty of any crime.

 

If he stood again as an Independent in my ward, I'd be tempted to vote for him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're back to "If a solution doesn't solve the problem 100% then we shouldn't try it since an 80% solution isn't worth anything".

 

CKN might know various ways of getting around filters but I don't and I'm hardly alone.

 

You can't "solve" paedophilia but you can't solve drink driving or murder either, but you can reduce it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its not an 80% solution, though, in my view. its probably not even an 8% solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its not an 80% solution, though, in my view. its probably not even an 8% solution.

Not as yet. The government are trying to do something that is "out there" in terms of the technology. But more and more things that seemed impossible are becoming "do-able".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're back to "If a solution doesn't solve the problem 100% then we shouldn't try it since an 80% solution isn't worth anything".

 

CKN might know various ways of getting around filters but I don't and I'm hardly alone.

 

You can't "solve" paedophilia but you can't solve drink driving or murder either, but you can reduce it.

It's not a solution though, it's hiding a symptom of a damaged mind.  I can't even see it solving a trivial bit of the problem, never mind 80%.

 

Also, did you know that we're more effective now than ever at catching dangerous predators of children because of the internet?  These truly deranged people take more risks than average people including going to websites that traffic this nasty stuff, the police around the world record those who visit and occasionally skim off those that they can positively identify.  Some of these nasty people are stupid enough to even use their credit cards to buy access to police controlled honey-trap sites.  Yes, I really, really don't want this stuff on the internet but it's genuinely working in catching some nasty scumbags before they can turn their fantasies into reality.

Look at the paedophile rings of the past, before the internet.  How did these people get to know each other?  How did they get their victims?  How difficult was it to the police to get into these circles?  It was massively difficult for the police to break them down as it's very hard to pretend to like child sex offences enough to get into the circle to get evidence to capture more than one or two outsiders.  The internet does make it easier to get to some obscene material but it also makes it much easier to catch people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are issues with access on the internet, especially by children.  However, a 'global' filter is not what is needed.  Parents need to either put filters on themselves or get smart with what their kids are doing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a solution though, it's hiding a symptom of a damaged mind.  I can't even see it solving a trivial bit of the problem, never mind 80%.

 

Also, did you know that we're more effective now than ever at catching dangerous predators of children because of the internet?  These truly deranged people take more risks than average people including going to websites that traffic this nasty stuff, the police around the world record those who visit and occasionally skim off those that they can positively identify.  Some of these nasty people are stupid enough to even use their credit cards to buy access to police controlled honey-trap sites.  Yes, I really, really don't want this stuff on the internet but it's genuinely working in catching some nasty scumbags before they can turn their fantasies into reality.

Look at the paedophile rings of the past, before the internet.  How did these people get to know each other?  How did they get their victims?  How difficult was it to the police to get into these circles?  It was massively difficult for the police to break them down as it's very hard to pretend to like child sex offences enough to get into the circle to get evidence to capture more than one or two outsiders.  The internet does make it easier to get to some obscene material but it also makes it much easier to catch people.

This the exact same "guns don't kill people; people kill people" arguments that the gun lobby in the US trot out. The obvious point is that guns are one of the most efficient ways of killing people and thus restricting them would lower the murder rate.  Similarly the Internet is the most efficient way of communicating and distributing images of abuse.

 

I don't need to use the Internet to talk to people about RL but it's a hell of a lot easier to do it online than in a city where very few people are interested. If I wanted to meet paedos then it would be a million times easier online than in real life where people are likely to react violently.

 

Added to which the Internet has created a market for images of abused children that did not really exist before. Oh I'm sure that some people peddled such stuff but it's like comparing a cottage industry to a global conglomerate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This the exact same "guns don't kill people; people kill people" arguments that the gun lobby in the US trot out. The obvious point is that guns are one of the most efficient ways of killing people and thus restricting them would lower the murder rate.  Similarly the Internet is the most efficient way of communicating and distributing images of abuse.

 

I don't need to use the Internet to talk to people about RL but it's a hell of a lot easier to do it online than in a city where very few people are interested. If I wanted to meet paedos then it would be a million times easier online than in real life where people are likely to react violently.

 

Added to which the Internet has created a market for images of abused children that did not really exist before. Oh I'm sure that some people peddled such stuff but it's like comparing a cottage industry to a global conglomerate.

Not really.  Much like all of these things, black and white answers just aren't at all useful.  Much of the censorship and control that we've had imposed over the years for everything from anti-terrorism to paedophilia do nothing but inconvenience the innocent while not even slightly stopping the bad guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really.  Much like all of these things, black and white answers just aren't at all useful.  Much of the censorship and control that we've had imposed over the years for everything from anti-terrorism to paedophilia do nothing but inconvenience the innocent while not even slightly stopping the bad guys.

Nonsense.

 

Exactly how have these laws affected the innocent?

 

I really can't see how there is any kind of right to view the sexual abuse of children. And if your tastes are to "normal porn" featuring teenagers (18-19) then there isn't any shortage of that freely available.

 

edit: and let's not shift this to terrorism. that's OT.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That bloke from the Co-op Bank lives in the local authority ward where he was a Labour Councillor.  He was also a Methodist minister. He apparently was under extreme pressure at work and turned to porn and taking drugs, just like a lot of the people in his ward would have done under the same circumstances.

 

He must have some positive qualities or he wouldn't have achieved those positions. He must have been wealthy but chose to carry on working for the Church and to live in a poor borough.

 

He is being pilloried by all sides ... the press, Labour, the Bank and his Church are ganging up to disparage him so they look good in the media. As yet, he has not been found guilty of any crime.

 

If he stood again as an Independent in my ward, I'd be tempted to vote for him.

 

 

Ok, who's the funny guy and hacked Wolford6's account and come out with a rational, measured and empathetic post?

 

Edit, I'm not sure that the church (forgive and forget), labour and the bank are doing what they're doing to look good. More to avoid being accused by the press of refusing to condemn him which in the eyes of the press is tantamount to endorsing his shortcomings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with it. The inconvenience someone might face in accessing pornography is far outweighed by children not being exposed to it.

I don't see it as censorship but common sense.

One worry though, I did read that paedophiles have started to use code words now instead of obvious terms. Broccoli is one of these terms apparently, so I hope people aren't hauled in whilst ordering their veg online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So... the government's plan is to put a block on porn on the internet.  That's not going to work.  If I really wanted to I could get to any banned content on the internet in seconds, as could any teenager, never mind having to be technically astute when it comes to interweb things.  

 

Some kids can get round anything.

 

All a ban on this kind of thing will lead to is a return to hedgerows lined with grot mags.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some kids can get round anything.

All a ban on this kind of thing will lead to is a return to hedgerows lined with grot mags.

What's wrong with that? Anything that makes porn harder to access is ok with me.

And I say that not as a puritan but someone who us worried about the availability of porn today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with it. The inconvenience someone might face in accessing pornography is far outweighed by children not being exposed to it.

I don't see it as censorship but common sense.

One worry though, I did read that paedophiles have started to use code words now instead of obvious terms. Broccoli is one of these terms apparently, so I hope people aren't hauled in whilst ordering their veg online.

That's the problem though.  Unless you ban people from the internet entirely and shut down all the ISPs then you're not going to stop it.  I can guarantee you that the first time you put a block out there at ISP level that your kids will be told by their friends at school about proxies, VPNs and darknet/ToR, with many of them utterly untrackable except in the most extreme circumstances, and even then it's not guaranteed.

 

Those are the things that are used now by people from those just paranoid about their privacy through to the most extreme edge of criminality out there.  They know it's safe and almost unbreakable.

 

For those things the ISP will ban, how will they do it?  Based on website addresses?  It takes seconds to set up a new one.  Who says a website goes on the list?  What if a politician decides that the BNP website is unsafe for kids?  Block that too?  What if then the next step is to completely ban these things for everyone?

 

Look at China, it's paranoid to the extreme about what its citizens can see on the internet but they've all bar given up trying to censor things because the availability of the bypass technologies are so ubiquitous that anyone who needs to use them can get them.  It's not rocket science to get around virtually any ISP level blocking tools.

 

That's why I'm quite happy with things as they stand.  It puts responsibility on the parents to monitor their kids' internet usage.  What kid would go to his friends and tell them that his mummy and daddy had put child protection software on their computers?  If you can afford to buy a computer then you can afford to buy this software and learn how to use it.

 

My friend allows his daughter unrestricted access to whatever she wants on the internet but has the computer configured so she can't delete browsing history, he tells her he reads this once a week and checks her emails at the same time.  He has her messenger set up to verbosely duplicate messages received or sent on her iPhone on his computer.  She grumbled about how unfair it was but was bluntly told that it was her choice if she didn't want to use them.  He told me he actually randomly scans her browser history once a month or so when he remembers but the threat of it alone is enough to bluntly force good behaviour.  Also, as he has the computer locked down he can see any bypass tools she'd install or such websites visited, he also has the privacy mode disabled on the computer's browsers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I steer clear from all of it. I know that sounds holier than thou but looking at pics or vids that may or may not be illegal isn't for me.

 

I wouldn't even know what is or isn't illegal in the rudey-dudey world of the internet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course you won't eliminate it and those so inclined will find a way round it. But that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with trying to restrict it and reduce the number of people exposed to it.

You won't stop people burgling houses but it doesn't mean we don't lock our doors.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CKN might know various ways of getting around filters but I don't and I'm hardly alone.

 

 

Me neither, but I am sure 10 minutes on Google could probably enlighten you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me neither, but I am sure 10 minutes on Google could probably enlighten you.

It probably would but then most people don't have the literacy / ICT skills to be able to follow this kind of "tip". If they did then nobody would earn a living fixing computers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the problem though.  Unless you ban people from the internet entirely and shut down all the ISPs then you're not going to stop it.  I can guarantee you that the first time you put a block out there at ISP level that your kids will be told by their friends at school about proxies, VPNs and darknet/ToR, with many of them utterly untrackable except in the most extreme circumstances, and even then it's not guaranteed.

 

Those are the things that are used now by people from those just paranoid about their privacy through to the most extreme edge of criminality out there.  They know it's safe and almost unbreakable.

 

For those things the ISP will ban, how will they do it?  Based on website addresses?  It takes seconds to set up a new one.  Who says a website goes on the list?  What if a politician decides that the BNP website is unsafe for kids?  Block that too?  What if then the next step is to completely ban these things for everyone?

 

Look at China, it's paranoid to the extreme about what its citizens can see on the internet but they've all bar given up trying to censor things because the availability of the bypass technologies are so ubiquitous that anyone who needs to use them can get them.  It's not rocket science to get around virtually any ISP level blocking tools.

 

That's why I'm quite happy with things as they stand.  It puts responsibility on the parents to monitor their kids' internet usage.  What kid would go to his friends and tell them that his mummy and daddy had put child protection software on their computers?  If you can afford to buy a computer then you can afford to buy this software and learn how to use it.

 

My friend allows his daughter unrestricted access to whatever she wants on the internet but has the computer configured so she can't delete browsing history, he tells her he reads this once a week and checks her emails at the same time.  He has her messenger set up to verbosely duplicate messages received or sent on her iPhone on his computer.  She grumbled about how unfair it was but was bluntly told that it was her choice if she didn't want to use them.  He told me he actually randomly scans her browser history once a month or so when he remembers but the threat of it alone is enough to bluntly force good behaviour.  Also, as he has the computer locked down he can see any bypass tools she'd install or such websites visited, he also has the privacy mode disabled on the computer's browsers.

Most Chinese people don't use facebook. A lot of them have the skills to get around the "great firewall of China" but there is no particular point in doing so when there is an ap that is equivalent to facebook and isn't blocked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It probably would but then most people don't have the literacy / ICT skills to be able to follow this kind of "tip". If they did then nobody would earn a living fixing computers. 

 

Somebody would probably post a guide on Youtube showing you step by step how to do it....or Craig might tell you if you asked nicely. 

 

No disrespect to the IT folk but I would imagine that it's not rocket science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Somebody would probably post a guide on Youtube showing you step by step how to do it....or Craig might tell you if you asked nicely. 

 

No disrespect to the IT folk but I would imagine that it's not rocket science.

It probably isn't and those youtube videos probably already exist. But most people don't know about "How to" videos on youtube.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People simply don't think to use google (or other search engine) to answer the questions that they have. I used to work for a software house in a non-technical role, and none of the geeks writing code could kid me on anything. Part of being a clever geek seems to be the desire and will to share that cleverness with the world. The only thing that is lacking in people is the lateral thought to work to actually recognise the power of the web to solve their "not so unique problem" but how to actually thinking about seeking out a source that will help them solve their computer problems. Having the skills to press the keys in the right order should be a given, unless you're like L'Ang,

As for the pornography issue. The internet is no different to the days of magazines. Those that want to see and consume pornography will find a way to do so, either by stealing the magazines, or acquiring them by other more devious means. Likewise with the internet. The web hasn't made teenage boys and the like want to access it, but it has made it easier. I don't know whether that's a bad thing or not (that try can access what they want more easily), but the clock will not be rolled back whatever any government may claim.

There are clear issues with pornography, in the way it shapes and distorts young minds as to what is normal sexual behaviour and the role of both men and women in sex, but I don't see how a ban will address this issue in any way. On another thread Mistress Marlow posted a video about this which I thought was illustrative of some of the problems with pornography.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry, no way, absolutely no way, is Internet porn the same as days gone by. The only way you could view porn when I was growing up was either find a magazine in the bushes, find an adults stash maybe or for the better off, videos usually from abroad.

On top of this, most of it was in retrospect, pretty tame. The ease with which anyone can view extreme porn now disturbs me. Who knows what effect it will have on developing minds?

I am not some moral guardian, I don't care what consenting *adults* get up to, but think the risk pornography presents to immature minds is a dangerous one. Just look on twitter or tumblr etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017