UK Gov't Considering Requiring A 'Porn License' If You Want To Look At Porn Online
from the seriously? dept
We hear this idea pop up every now and again, and I'd thought by now it had been shown to be pointless enough times that no one would seriously consider it again. Apparently, I was wrong. UK Prime Minister David Cameron is considering requiring adults who want to see porn online to "opt-in" by getting what is effectively a "porn license" to surf the sites deemed naughty by the government. Those in the UK government who actually think this is a smart idea might want to talk to their friends Down Under. Australia has toyed with similar ideas in the past, and they've all gone down in embarrassing flames. There was the filter that blocked educational sites, but left plenty of porn available. And there was the filter that took a teenager all of a half hour to crack.
Both of these highlight the key problems with the plan. Once you go down the path of censoring the internet, suddenly very, very big questions are raised about what gets put on the censorship list. It's easy to say "oh, well, porn is blocked," but something countless people (including judges) have struggled with over the years is how to precisely define porn. It's not nearly as easy as many people think. In nearly every case with filters we see a pattern: perfectly legitimate content that almost no one would consider to be porn gets blocked. And tons and tons of "porn" isn't blocked. Second, people will very, very, very quickly figure out how to get around such blocks.
The other issue, which doesn't come up as often, is the sheer ridiculousness of requiring people to effectively announce to the government that they want to view porn. They describe it as an "opt-in," but as I've said in the past, it's really more of a "porn license." People may have all sorts of reasons for looking at porn, but having to tell your government that you want to look at porn seems like a clear attempt to humiliate people for no reason other than that some in the government don't like the fact that others like porn.
If there's concern about kids viewing porn -- often the "think of the children!" justification that we hear -- there's nothing stopping parents from putting in place their own filters (which are likely to be as effective as any national filters). Why go further and try to block things for everyone?
Both of these highlight the key problems with the plan. Once you go down the path of censoring the internet, suddenly very, very big questions are raised about what gets put on the censorship list. It's easy to say "oh, well, porn is blocked," but something countless people (including judges) have struggled with over the years is how to precisely define porn. It's not nearly as easy as many people think. In nearly every case with filters we see a pattern: perfectly legitimate content that almost no one would consider to be porn gets blocked. And tons and tons of "porn" isn't blocked. Second, people will very, very, very quickly figure out how to get around such blocks.
The other issue, which doesn't come up as often, is the sheer ridiculousness of requiring people to effectively announce to the government that they want to view porn. They describe it as an "opt-in," but as I've said in the past, it's really more of a "porn license." People may have all sorts of reasons for looking at porn, but having to tell your government that you want to look at porn seems like a clear attempt to humiliate people for no reason other than that some in the government don't like the fact that others like porn.
If there's concern about kids viewing porn -- often the "think of the children!" justification that we hear -- there's nothing stopping parents from putting in place their own filters (which are likely to be as effective as any national filters). Why go further and try to block things for everyone?






Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Control of the citizenry's minds, for starters.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Business Opportunity
On the gripping hand, to be effective, they'll have to block/monitor bittorrent (good luck), irq, ftp, every chat channel which can accommodate file transfers, and the good'ol sneakernet. Hell of a goal they've set.
I'd wish them luck, but there's not a snowball's chance in hell they will succeed.
Unless they put a little paper hat on their snowball, in which case the snowball will last a long time.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Business Opportunity
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
BBC Porn
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: BBC Porn
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: BBC Porn
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Business Opportunity
The paranoid part of me thinks that proxies are the actual target in all of this. Between porn, copyright legislation, attempts to put in backdoors for government, etc. etc. etc., it's almost as if authorities all over the world are attempting to foster proxies being primarily used for all the things they've made illegal. Once that's done, they can legislate against the proxies, perhaps the whole point the entire time.
But then I remember: Nah, that's tinfoil hat craziness. Governments wouldn't setup false flag operations like that, and surely there was no Reichstagg Fire....
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Business Opportunity
Lay off the porn, buddy.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
Billie's fine, but if I get to choose someone to go hardcore with the Doctor, I'm opting for Amy Pond.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Business Opportunity
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Business Opportunity
1) get everyone to use proxies
2) arrest proxy end points and charge providers for all crimes on network
3)
4) profit
??
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: It really is simple
Step 1: Install keylogger on computer.
Step 2: Find blocked legitimate site.
Step 3: Request that parent bypass block for legitimate site.
Step 4: Retrieve password from keylogger.
I'm sure there are other ways to get around them too, but that was how my first day with my own laptop went.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
For the record, I mean no offense against Muslims.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Nothing else will protect children online. Children learn very quickly how to circumvent filters and blocks.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Business Opportunity
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Sex and nakedness are what most porn is all about after all. So if one is harmful to everyone involved (online porn) then surely the other (consensual sex and nakedness) is just as harmful to everyone involved?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Business Opportunity
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Fixing the wrong problem
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
New rule
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
If said porn license is required to view actual porn, will a separate license be required to watch non-porn sexual activity? What if I want to log in to Chatroulette and view random penises? Is that covered or do I need to be licensed as a "Manhandler Class C" or something?
Followup to the followup:
Is there anything out there that prevents Chatroulette from being nothing but wall-to-wall penises? If so, I have a friend who's very interested in knowing the details...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Business Opportunity
intentional or happpy accident?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Business Opportunity
I guess, it's time to go off the grid.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
Number Ten with the DoctorDonna. *runs away cackling madly*
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
If there are licenses, does that also means that you can get a learner's permit but you have to view it with one of your parents ?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
China?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Business Opportunity
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It really is simple
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Business Opportunity
are you trying to perpetuate the dirty puns, or is it unintentional?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Mandatory Scrubs reference
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
OMG Noooooooo!!!!
And I'm saying that as a Muslim!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Business Opportunity
This is government - they have no need of profit (hence the current debt levels)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Well this isn't going to help TD...
This is certainly not going to help convince the german moral police(otherwise known as the German Media Control Authority) that TD isn't filled the to digital rafters with smut.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
This is the coalitions re-launch!
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Licence the legislators
It would need some kind of basic intelligence and technology awareness test, with a yearly re-test. Also a psych test, to exclude psychopaths, megalomaniacs and other lunatics.
A person would need to have this license before standing for election, or taking any powerful civil service position.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Business Opportunity
Does it involve two "police officers" and a pool cleaner?
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Business Opportunity
Although you could call it porn, if you consider classic age-style 'hard' Sci-fi to be pr0n for techies...
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BBC Porn
...and euuuuuwww!
Why should it have to be a parent? How about someone a bit more... experienced? :)
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Backfire
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment