Why Do Politicians Continue To Insist That A Magic Button Can Make Porn Disappear Online?

from the collateral-damage-on-the-way dept

It appears that UK Prime Minister David Cameron is announcing that any place in the UK that provides WiFi to the public must block porn. This is wasteful and pointless for a variety of reasons. Of course, it’s being pushed under the “for the children” banner, but that’s rarely true or accurate. The problem, of course, is that (1) such filtering tends not to actually block plenty of porn and (2) it regularly leads to collateral damage, including plenty of legitimate sites being blocked. Plus it’s just costly.

The Prime Minister said: “We are promoting good, clean, WiFi in local cafes and elsewhere to make sure that people have confidence in public WiFi systems so that they are not going to see things they shouldn’t.”

But that’s not what they’re doing. The internet won’t be clean. It’ll just be a nuisance. Furthermore, is the unexpected appearance of porn on computers in public places really that big a problem? I’ve yet to see any serious data suggesting that this happens very often. Most people sitting at a computer in a public space aren’t likely to be surfing porn anyway.

In the US, we’ve actually had something similar. Of course, we’re not allowed to make filters mandatory by law, so grandstanding US politicians tiptoed around the issue by just saying that they would deny funding to public internet access providers who don’t block porn. But, the end result was that many libraries, for example, stopped taking federal funding to avoid the issue altogether. This really seems like the worst kind of grandstanding: it gets plenty of attention, attacks a problem that probably isn’t a problem but which involves “the children!!!!” and it attacks the “problem” ineffectively. It’s the trifecta of useless grandstanding.

Filed Under: ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Why Do Politicians Continue To Insist That A Magic Button Can Make Porn Disappear Online?”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
87 Comments
Akari Mizunashi (profile) says:

I have WiFi set up in my house, and it just sits there, passing only its identifier in the signal. There’s no porn on it at all.

If I’m not mistaken, in order to access porn, I have to actively engage the search for it.

I may be off my rocker here, but I think fining people who get caught viewing porn using open WiFi would be a better deterrent than trying to block it.

Especially if the fine is very heavy.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

Still the point remains. Just like drugs, cigarettes, and alcohol, if a teen/kid wants it bad enough they can get it. Simply blocking it on an open Wifi network won’t solve anything.

Why the hell is it societies job to parent the children? Where the hell are parents?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

You’re crazy a fine for porn on open WiFi? What if I own the open network? I leave my network open because I can and because I live close to the hood and not everyone there can afford it. They’re happy to be able to get online and I have no problem letting them. I don’t give two shits about what they do because frankly it’s none of my business.

The only good idea would be to slap the fuck out of the moron that thinks it’s a good idea to try and block porn.

Duke (profile) says:

Re: Re:

You’re missing the point if you think this is about stopping people from viewing porn in public places.

It’s about appeasing people, making them feel safer, and making them think the Government is DoingSomething?.

It’s not about “protecting children” (otherwise they’d be implementing that recent recommendation in the UK that children be taught about porn in school, as part of sex ed, from a young age), it’s about making parents and the religious right feel that their children are being protected.

It’s also being done on an entirely voluntary basis (as with the nationwide child-abuse-image filtering). Probably because doing it through law would be illegal.

out_of_the_blue says:

It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

Now, disclaimer, I don’t advocate it as vital, but in public, sure, and main point, it’s EASILY DO-ABLE with a hosts file in your free Linux firewall, so Porno Mike’s* anti-moral panic is just his typical blather to gin up fanboys with a sort of false flag saying their fun is under attack.

* Props to “Teach” above.

Take a loopy tour of Techdirt.com! You always end up same place!
http://techdirt.com/
You’ve found the site of Internet Quipper Mike “Streisand Effect” Masnick!
01:53:04[b-810-4]

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

Art is something designed to elicit an
emotional reaction from people. Porn certainly
is that.

That’s ridiculous. Merely eliciting an emotional response is hardly the sole qualificiation for artisitic expression. If it were, then those bombs that went off in Boston a few weeks ago qualified as performance art on a grand scale.

John Fenderson (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

Well, yes, I oversimplified. But porn clearly seems to be art to me. Perhaps not good art, but that’s a subjective call.

I call it art because it is a creative expression that exists for its own sake (the very definition of “fine art”).

All I know is that literally every explanation of what art is that I’ve ever heard, whether I agree with it or not, applies equally well to porn.

Ninja (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

I’d say that there are porns that are worth watching regardless if you are planning to fap or not. I tend to like those x-art like material. There was that porn Red Hood parody that was quite funny (although the focus was the sex scene not the story in general).

We could say that it’s a case of good art and bad art maybe? Even though good and bad is highly subjective 😉

Ninja (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2 It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

I may be lynched for what I’m about to say but… Isn’t it heavily dependent on the point of view? If you were some sort of Bin Laden wouldn’t you find it a great work of art? Or if you were the Govt trying to remind people of what fear is after 9/11 in order to pass more Constitution-violating/privacy-eroding laws? (yeah, conspiracy nutty I know)

I think he is right, the main intent of an artistic work is to elicit some sort of reaction from the public.

btr1701 (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:4 It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

Clearly btr has never watched Naruto. There’s
a villian in it called Deidara who is a bomber,
who believes that explosions are the greatest
works of art.

Yes, and Hannibal Lecter thought there was artisitic expression in cannibalism, too.

The people who think that way do it because they’re insane.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

Only in public spots? That wouldn’t be a problem – except that when defined by performance rights organisations and the RIAA, everything done online constitutes as a public performance.

So by your own admission, you’re not disagreeing with Masnick. Shock horror, I know. I understand that disagreeing with Masnick to you is far more revolting than scatolotacle pornography.

Machin Shin (profile) says:

Re: It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

” it’s EASILY DO-ABLE with a hosts file in your free Linux firewall”

That statement right their proves beyond a doubt that you have no clue what your talking about. Nice try with the tossing around technical words you picked up though. Trouble is it means nothing.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: Re: It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

Here’s the amount of things wrong with blue’s sentence.

1) The vast majority of the world’s population does not run Linux.
2) Saying free and Linux in the same sentence is superfluous. Most software on Linux is free and open source, given the open source nature of the OS itself.
3) To block porn through a Hosts file means you would need to know the website address of every porn site in existence. What about sites that aren’t themselves devoted to porn but nonetheless have a subsection where there is porn? What about user-content generated sites?

PaulT (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

“1) The vast majority of the world’s population does not run Linux.”

Erm, I don’t know the stats, but many routers do (among many other devices), so most people using it probably don’t realise it. However, that’s as far as blue’s technical correctness goes, of course. Windows also supports host files that can be used as a crude blacklist in the same way. However, as you rightly note, nobody can possibly have a complete list. So, another useless suggestion by someone too busy attacking this site to understand the technology he;’s talking about.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: It's not "Make Porn Disappear Online", only in public spots.

“… it’s EASILY DO-ABLE with a hosts file in your free Linux firewall..”

Presuming, boy…
1) You’re using Linux (Many wi-fi setups DON’T)
2) You know how to code/implement the “hosts file”
(And feel free to present a step-by-step example, oh learned one, to demontrate “how easy it is”.)
3) You give a damn.

DannyB (profile) says:

What about pr0n stored on the hard drive?

Problem: WiFi is responsible for pr0n appearing on screens in public places. OMG!

Solution: Filter WiFi. (at someone else’s expense)

Problem: Hard drives are responsible for pr0n appearing on screens in public places. OMG!

Solution: Filter and inspect ALL hard drives brought into public places, or crossing borders such as national borders, state lines, county lines, city limits, precincts, and property boundary lines. Being within one hundred miles of any such boundary line should be subject to search without a warrant.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

The tricky part is when it involves government owned property such as schools, prisons, offices, etc.

The government, like any business or individual is free to implement whatever filtering they like on their connections. There are lists of porn sites available for those who want to implement the block.

Anonymous Coward says:

We need a Grandstand flash mob that goes to these events and any time a politician tries to Grandstand, the mob will roll into effect.
There will be sparklers, party poppers, confetti, dancing and music and then a couple of them will walk up onto stage behind the politician and unfurl a large banner behind them that reads GRANDSTAND!
It would be a grand event. You could even say a grandstanding event.

Chosen Reject (profile) says:

Re: Re:

No, it’s true. There is a button that will make porn disappear. It’s on the back of the WiFi access point. If it’s not there, there is probably a little switch on the surge protector it’s plugged into. If a surge protector isn’t being used, you might find the switch in a box with a lot of other switches that look similar (only some of those switches turn off the lights in the kitchen).

My guess is that at some point the government will require one or more of these buttons be employed. For the children of course.

Lord Binky says:

If he thinks the worst or most offensive pictures that can be found on the internet and viewed in a public space then that proves he is absolutely clueless about the internet.

Even though this would never work, it would sure seem that way eventually when everyone is viewing their porn on google glass style HMDs… I’m not the only one who thinks thats all people are doing with it right?

Anonymous Coward says:

What is porn?

One of the most vulgar disgusting shows on TV is one of the most accepted.

What is that?

Any US Baseball game.

What?

How dare they put a spitting contest where someone constantly upchucks on TV.

For gosh sakes thank of the children.

They are are glamorizing one of man most filthy actions.

The only hope is that TV networks do not start glamorizing other forms of body waste.

Filth is filth. Enough is enough.

It is best to leave piss and shit in the appropriate place, the bathroom, and not glamorize it on TV, the internet, and all sports stadiums.

Thus to eliminate on-line porn and filth Major League Baseball should be banned from TV, the internet, and all sports stadiums and 20 year jail sentences of solitary confinement should immediately be imposed on all participants with out benefit of trial or appeal.

Anonymous Coward says:

In certain urban areas porn is completely out of control, with children and minorities being affected disproportionately. We must do something, even if it saves only one child from being injured by the filth. Yes, obscenity is already illegal, but we must go further. After all, the First Amendment is not without limitations

Wait! Oops! I have this confused with gun control.

My bad.

Anonymous Coward says:

has this ‘magic button’ been applied in the physical world by these same fucking idiots? did it work? did porn publications cease to be? of course not!! and it wont happen with the net either! they think that because they are politicians, whatever they say will happen. the trouble is, the people who think they can stop anything and everything have got big mouths, big ideas and powers but haven’t got the brains of a rockin’ horse!! and they haven’t thought about the collateral damage or the consequences!!

Vidiot (profile) says:

“… many libraries, for example, stopped taking federal funding to avoid the issue altogether.”

Actually, the American Library Association credo is strongly anti-censorship, and member professionals guard Internet freedom like pit bulls. Even if it means that they have to occasionally clean up certain… fluids… left by their male patrons at the public access computers.

Anonymous Coward says:

Lenny Bruce nailed this DECADES ago

“Paul Malloy, who’s sort of Christ in concrete, he’s got a thing going, it’s “Decent-Indecent”–you know, “What is Good?” And Good is God is Danny Thomas. So, I want to show you some pictures of tramps.

[Holding up a pin-up nudie photo]

These are bums. This is an indecent woman. The Paul Malloy culture would call this lady indecent.

Ohhhh, no! Are you kidding? Indecent? How can that sweet, pink-nippled, blue-eyed, goyisha punim be indecent? Are you kidding? Indecent? God damn Paul Malloy, man. I love that lady. And she’s religious–see the beads?

If you believe that there is a god, a god that made your body, and yet you think that you can do anything with your body that’s dirty, then the fault lies with the manufacturer.

My concept? You can’t do anything with anybody’s body to make it dirty to me. Six people, eight people, one person–you can do only thing to make it dirty: kill it. Hiroshima was dirty.”

I note with interest that this proposal — like so many others before it — does NOTHING about the most horrific images of torture and murder and death and war…the things that, as Lenny Bruce pointed out, are truly obscene. CNN is free to show, over and over and over again, graphic footage of human beings being blown apart by bombs in Boston, but oh dear, a breast? A penis? Well, we just can’t have that, now can we?

art guerrilla (profile) says:

dog damn, i'm about sick of the pron hysteria...

…or *ANY* hysteria: could you delicate prudes, moral scolds, and authoritarian kreepazoids please blast off to your own (fascist, boring) planet ? ? ?

this, from a ‘justice’ (sic) dept who had to drape THEIR OWN statues of nekkid liberty/justice in their (actually, OUR) own house ! ! !

i mean, really, does ANYTHING more need to be said about how fucked up a society we lived in that has to pull idiotic shit like that ? ? ?

and, now, one of the greatest artists IN THE HIS STORY OF THE UNIVERSE gets the ‘naughty bits’ of his statuary on display in yemen or abu dhabi, or camelstan, whatever the fuck, has to be removed and/or have ‘modesty’ drapes put over them…

i’m sorry, i just have ZERO sympathy, patience, or even have a hard time justifying such ‘people’ be allowed to live as human beans…
PLEASE blast off to your own crappy planet and let us semi-normal nekkid apes alone…

dog damn, i hates me some authoritarian ‘do-gooders’…

art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof

Anonymous Coward says:

I don’t get it, if they don’t want porn, just remove all economic incentives for it to be created.

As we are told copyright is a great, great incentive for creation right?
Remove copyright for porn or anything that can be construed as porn, this may also include some other forms of art, but that is not a bad thing now is it?

Go after payment systems too, they already laydown the rules of how its done with pirate sites didn’t they?

Do the same thing with porn then.

btr1701 (profile) says:

Control

> “to make sure that people have confidence in
> public WiFi systems so that they are not going
> to see things they shouldn’t.”

Notice how he says “shouldn’t” instead of “don’t want to”.

That tells you all you need to know about him– that he’s just another nanny-statist control freak who can’t let grown adults decide for themselves how to run their own lives. He’s going to decide for you, because he knows better than you do what’s good for you.

That Crazy Freetard (profile) says:

So, what it looks like this issue boils down to is that the pols in the UK are worried about people looking at porno in public places.

“Clean wi-fi”, what a joke. Is there an epidemic across the UK of people setting up their laptops in cafes and watching porno in the middle of the day? Textbook grandstanding.

What he’s suggesting is censorship and an infringement on network neutrality. When will people learn that on the internet, it’s pretty much all or nothing(or whitelisting, in which case I’d probably still prefer nothing) in terms of access. This is especially true for something as prevalent as pornography. That’s about as possible as blocking people from reading news online.

As to blue’s comment here, I’ll say this: “You’re out of your element, Donny! Shut the fuck up!”

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...