Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19
8027 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 387

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 865961 25-Jul-2013 15:41
2 people support this post
Send private message

freitasm: Back to what Talkiet raised. Why block pornography? Because someone doesn't like it? This is not good enough reason.

We already have a filter that applies to filthiest of filthy, child exploitation. We are safe. So we don't have to worry about man and woman, woman and woman, man and man, etc.

Seriously, it is quite hard to stumble upon this kind of graphical stuff in normal day to day browsing.


Hard to stumble upon by accident sure... but not hard to access on purpose.

The justification for it would be the same justification we have for age ratings and censorship of books/tv/movies currently.

However when you weigh that justification against: potential abusive use of a filtering system, parent's responsibility, available voluntary options... I don't think the pros/cons stack up for going ahead with it.

1828 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 215
Inactive user


  Reply # 866025 25-Jul-2013 17:04
Send private message

If our govt wants block something on the internet then perhaps they should think about blocking the GCSB from spying on us, I'd pay good money for that to happen

3289 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1789

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 866101 25-Jul-2013 18:50
Send private message

I think it's bad enough we have the existing DIA filter, because whilst it's STATED purpose is to block kiddie porn, it could be used to block anything the government doesn't want you to see.

Look at the Australian equivalent for examples of blatant misuse of such a filter.

They open up the slippery slope of "if you can block X why are you not blocking Y".

I'd much rather the internet had no censorship what so ever.





Information wants to be free. The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.


810 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 191
Inactive user


  Reply # 866121 25-Jul-2013 19:44
Send private message

Lias: I think it's bad enough we have the existing DIA filter, because whilst it's STATED purpose is to block kiddie porn, it could be used to block anything the government doesn't want you to see.

Look at the Australian equivalent for examples of blatant misuse of such a filter.

They open up the slippery slope of "if you can block X why are you not blocking Y".

I'd much rather the internet had no censorship what so ever.



I would think it would be better to track people using these websites and/or shut them down. Blocking it just puts a band-aid on it, surely? And it still wouldn't be hard for a tech savvy pedophile to circumvent it.

624 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 123


  Reply # 866143 25-Jul-2013 20:07
One person supports this post
Send private message

Nothing at Cameron's level of filtering I would imagine is possible, technically and financially wise.

I have an 8 year old that did a week of learning all about body parts a few years ago now at school and what is good and bad behavior from a stranger etc...

Needless to say when they started talking about it at a farm... explaining how to spot the differences between bulls and cows - later that night after looking at a One Direction video, when she was left to her own devices for about 15 seconds she typed in these words in to YouTube.

Fortunately you have to sign in for most of the more adult content although that is changing on YouTube lately so her results rendered home birth videos etc... and medical training clips and we found this out before she watched any of it.

Needless to say we had a positive, not negative and taboo/embarrassing/shameful conversation about this and invited her if she wasn't embarrassed enough that she could ask Mum or Dad to find an appropriate video for her to watch like a home birth video or something that has a positive influence, rather than negative like what Cameron wants to block where Mum and Dad can use guidance and reasoning while she's still impressionable in her development and learning.

So would I want filtering as tight as Cameron wants? Well, I'm on the fence post. For the bad stuff, definitely. But for the most part no, just like money and employment shouldn't be banned from people because either can be used for the wrong moral reasons etc... Nore would I want my words filtered on a phone call if someone else found the odd one offensive.

There is absolutely no substitute for parental guidance/supervision when it comes to the Internet. I don't believe certain topics should be ignored, they should be discussed before hand so kids know what to do if something came up inappropriate but parents should be there so it can't in the first place.

My daughter now has a netbook but I have disabled the default route on her personal netbook and filtered her destination IP's on my small router. I have only allowed certain IP's/site to be accessed but even then she has to use the PC where Mum or Dad are around to visit new sites and asks first.

She's not embarrassed by what happened and is a great reasoning kid, that and Mum and Dad knowing where she's been is an awesome deterrent and in hindsight should have been what we said before she went online not just about what she shouldn't be typing in.

In a perfect world, all adult (not including educational or sign-in content)  would be under a particular domain like the .xxx thing, and easily blocked on a PC and impossible to work around by kids. But that perfect world doesn't teach kids to reason good from bad either and we can't protect them from parents that just don't care. So I'm open to seeing if the impossible is even possible since there is still a level of social responsibility for the imperfect world we live in. But I don't think they can enforce it financially or technically or unified around the world since half the problem is content generators. I they did, I don't believe it would last.

703 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 67

Trusted

  Reply # 866281 26-Jul-2013 02:22
2 people support this post
Send private message

When I was a lad, I guess about 10, I found an old scrap of paper jammed into the fence along the walkway I used.

Ever curious, I pulled it out. It looked like a photo. Why was it jammed there?

It was the centerfold of a playboy magazine. I thought it was great simply because I instantly knew this was something I "wasn't allowed". I showed it to my friends and was hero for the day. Of the woman, at the time, I simply thought "must be bloody annoying to piss with that".

I'd like to tell you a horror story of how this common piece of all of our histories ruined me for life, distorted my view of women, and turned me into a monster. Because those stories get on the "news" (e.g. the entertainment program that took over from the real news about when it became profitable to do so). But in real life, none of that happened.

What I did learn though was that looking at naked women was BAD. If you looked at naked women, they would be injured and you could go to jail. Even at this time though, I thought this odd as my immature reasoning ability listed contradiction after contradiction. I was also told "God will PUNISH YOU and you will burn in fire!".

Note: it wasn't my parents. They were quite liberal, but I sure as hell wasn't going to tell them what i found. No, it was Society. The media. The schools.


And now some of you want to add censorship power to the already heavy GCSB spy bill.

So your kids wont see any naked ladies. Or anyone having sex. Because, like me you were told it injures people. But unlike me, you didn't learn that was a lie.

I suggest an alternative strategy for you conservative parents: Educate your children and let them decide.

And keep your bloody filthy censorship hands to yourself!

Oh, and I also busted another myth early in life that I was repeatedly told: Swearing is somehow violent. Oh, I was never told how or why just told certain words were not allowed - even though everyone used them. No one seemed to know why these certain words were not allowed. It was like a secret. I eventually found out why: there is no reason. It's simply a tradition perpetrated by ignorant people in some vain effort to control the thoughts of others. But that form of censorship exists on this forum.

Oh, and I guess I better add it because there are some tiny minds out there who will claim otherwise: child abuse is already illegal, and rightfully so. As should child poverty be. We do not need a new law to prevent it, we need a few more cops.


And don't even get me started on the technical INABILITY we have to implement such a filter, nor the totalitarian power it grants to ANYONE running it.

2484 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 535
Inactive user


  Reply # 866295 26-Jul-2013 07:02
Send private message

12 pages and no-one comes close to telling us why porn should be banned, the last post came close to touching on the issue but as it was a positive for porn doesn't really count.

I love porn, I'd watch porn all the time if I could, that and Family Guy, I love porn and family guy.

I see nothing wrong with porn and no reason to ban it.

The opinion on porn being bad is just that an opinion, one that you are welcome to share on an internet forum, which as we can all see a lot of people choose to do, myself included.

I believe that if anyone comes up with a reason to ban porn I can easily counter it!

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 866297 26-Jul-2013 07:16
Send private message

AppleJackXD:

btw im 24 years old i like porn on redtube don't ruin it for me because YOU HAVE NO SELF CONTROL LOL : )

also if this happened then i would have to go to porn store and get dvds lol and guess what porn store is Christchurch CBD Christchurch CBD is cordoned off in red zone ,therefore i would have no way to get porn because of you lol and NO! i wont sign up to video store just for porn i have the internet porn is free.

I think you're part of a conspiracy and secret plot to destroy the internet and my freedom : (


Do you know how pathetic you sound? Telling me I have no self control?

Something tells me that the only "self control" you practice is late nights behind your PC, spanking the monkey with a box of kleenix. :-)))))

How about coming up with some good examples as to what kind of negative influences these laws will have on our society.

Pathetic.

Edit: Try real sex sometime. You may find it surprisingly good. (opps no partner? I wonder why).

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 866298 26-Jul-2013 07:26
Send private message

dickytim:
I believe that if anyone comes up with a reason to ban porn I can easily counter it!


Porn should not be seen by young kids.

And I don't think anybody is proposing banning it either.

Anything to add extra measures at preventing the above is a good thing.

Lets not go down the road of, if it happens its bad parenting.

Bottom line: Porn is far too accessible (on the internet) to the very young. Its banned from young kids everywhere else (except on the internet) Kids cannot obtain it from bookstores, porn shops, TV etc ...



4529 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2021

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 866299 26-Jul-2013 07:27
One person supports this post
Send private message

Ragnor:
insane: 

Obviously I can't speak for your network (like what i did there), but some implementations don't need to 'proxy' traffic to block it. Watchdog even ran a successful trial for Exetel in AU some years back with the smarts being here in NZ. Anyhow that's a discussion for another place and time, and I do appreciate that not every ISP would be able to implement such a thing as easily as the next.



Exetel's trial of NetClean / Watchdog, no false positives apparently.
http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/301839/web_filter_runaway_success_exetel/

Increased CDN usage eg: CloudFlare usage could be an issue these days.





That was a tightly directed list of child porn sites. Absolutely not the same as a general porn block which also needs to try to cope with user generated content as well as grey areas like sexuality discussion and education, or 'incidental porn' like a photo of swimmers at the beach.




iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


4529 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2021

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 866301 26-Jul-2013 07:30
2 people support this post
Send private message

Klipspringer: Lets not go down the road of, if it happens its bad parenting.


Ok, how about we just say that your inability to control what goes on in your own home does not mean that the rest of us can't manage it without government assistance.




iPad Air + iPhone SE + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.


2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 866302 26-Jul-2013 07:31
Send private message

SaltyNZ:
Klipspringer: Lets not go down the road of, if it happens its bad parenting.


Ok, how about we just say that your inability to control what goes on in your own home does not mean that the rest of us can't manage it without government assistance.


It is under control in our own home.

Why do u think otherwise?

Kids go out to places. They go to sleepovers. They can use other PC's, laptops etc ....
How do you propose any parent control that?

IE: my 6year old gets behind a friends computer that has been used the night before to watch some porn. She clicks on the location bar, it brings down a list of recent sites. She accidentally click on the latest one. Don't tell me it cant happen with a 5 year old!

As I said previously. Young kids do not need to see this stuff. Anything that proposes to limit it, or make it harder for kids to get there hands on it (accidentally/or on purpose), cannot be bad!

12860 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 6076

Trusted
Subscriber

  Reply # 866303 26-Jul-2013 07:36
Send private message

We already have controls on what can cross the border or be distributed here in the form of "hard copy" material customs etc will destroy it if intercepted so why should the internet be any different. There is a weird belief that the web should be a free for all immune from any law.

I don't believe ISP's should conduct law enforcement the Customs Service and Police should be given the tools to do this. However this does not remove parental responsibility to educate and shield children and civil responsibility to report any illegal or questionable material found. 




Mike
Retired IT Manager. 
The views stated in my posts are my personal views and not that of any other organisation.

 

 Mac user, Windows curser, Chrome OS desired.

 

The great divide is the lies from both sides.

 

 


2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 866305 26-Jul-2013 07:41
Send private message

freitasm: Back to what Talkiet raised. Why block pornography? Because someone doesn't like it? This is not good enough reason.



Will pornography have a negative influence if seen by young kids?

Yes of course.

Then surely we should be asking why are we not blocking it?

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 866310 26-Jul-2013 07:49
Send private message

Children Are Severely Victimized by Pornography

The combination of pornography and the pedophiles it produces is deadly for children. The brutal abuse of children by pedophiles pumped up on porn is tragic, shocking and heartbreaking.

Men who view pornography portraying 18-year-old women dressed to look like young teens, often act out their prurient sexual cravings by raping"real" young teens.

Children and teens who are exposed to pornography have these images etched in their memories for the rest of their lives. These images can be triggered and can surface without warning, leaving the potential for numerous problems in future life.

Internet pornography is often the first exposure that children and teens have to sexual images. This plants in them a twisted and perverse view of human intimacy that is difficult or impossible to weed out. These early learning experiences can lead to sexual deviancy and crime, and often negatively affect their future relationships and marriages.

When a father or mother is involved with pornography, the children will suffer in some way. This can range from something as simple as a parent who is often moody, angry, or "in his or her own world," to a father or mother who commits incest. Pornography hurts husband and wife relationships and breaks up marriages, which of course seriously impacts the children in the family. Only pain is in store for children with a father or mother hooked on pornography.


And we wonder why our society has turned out the way it has.

1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19
Filter this topic showing only the reply marked as answer View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic

Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.