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 | ... | 19
3343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1089

Trusted
Vocus

  Reply # 865173 24-Jul-2013 15:49
Send private message

What is it the company you work for does, Klipspringer?

2520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 937

Subscriber

  Reply # 865174 24-Jul-2013 15:50
One person supports this post
Send private message



So can somebody please tell me whats the difference between my ISP providing this service (block porn) or a thirdparty?

Currently I have to pay my ISP to receive Porn which I really don't want.

Then to make things worse, I have to pay a third party to block out this porn (which I can't opt out of) from my ISP.

It makes sense to do this at the ISP level.

Thise that still want porn, well they can simply "opt in" to receive it. I seriously don't understand the problem here.


The cost and effort of implementing and maintaining a system that only a small portion of users will use, and of those that do, a large percentage will complain about because it will NOT be 100%, is not worthwhile when it is not your core business. Why does NZ Post not have someone stand at your mailbox and prevent junk mail being put in?




Windows 7 x64 // i5-3570K // 16GB DDR3-1600 // GTX660Ti 2GB // Samsung 830 120GB SSD // OCZ Agility4 120GB SSD // Samsung U28D590D @ 3840x2160 & Asus PB278Q @ 2560x1440
Samsung Galaxy S5 SM-G900I w/Spark

3343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1089

Trusted
Vocus

  Reply # 865175 24-Jul-2013 15:51
Send private message

Inphinity: The cost and effort of implementing and maintaining a system that only a small portion of users will use, and of those that do, a large percentage will complain about because it will NOT be 100%, is not worthwhile when it is not your core business. Why does NZ Post not have someone stand at your mailbox and prevent junk mail being put in?


Exactly where I was going with it.

3665 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2185

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 865176 24-Jul-2013 15:52
2 people support this post
Send private message

Klipspringer:
CYaBro:
Klipspringer:

The bottom line here is that I would rather not have to do
it myself. I’m quiet happy to hand this over to my ISP.



http://www.watchdog.net.nz/


So can somebody please tell me whats the difference between my ISP providing this service (block porn) or a thirdparty?

Currently I have to pay my ISP to receive Porn which I really don't want.

Then to make things worse, I have to pay a third party to block out this porn (which I can't opt out of) from my ISP.

It makes sense to do this at the ISP level.

Those that still want porn, well they can simply "opt in" to receive it. I seriously don't understand the problem here.


If you don't get it, I would suggest you are wilfully ignoring logic.

You are not paying your ISP to receive porn. That's an inaccurate and emotive statement.

You are paying your ISP for a relatively unfiltered internet feed.

You are also expected to pay SOMEONE if you want SOMEONE to perform filtering on your internet feed. It takes them design time, extra overheads, extra equipment costs etc to manage this.

Stop suggesting that 'opting-in' to get porn is reasonable. It's a stupid idea.

Cheers - N


3725 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1211


  Reply # 865177 24-Jul-2013 15:52
Send private message

wasabi2k: As a step-parent to a 14 year old and someone who was a teenager with internet access - why do you want to prevent them looking at porn?

I totally understand little kids not being exposed to stuff, but your kid shouldn't be using the internet unsupervised before 12-13 in my opinion.

Censorship of the internet is not a good thing.


It is not censorship as there is an opt out.

Why would you want your 14 year old to be viewing the most degrading porn out there?  There are lots of reasons, just google "harmful effects porn teenagers".   The longer you can delay them the better I think.

It is impractical to 100% supervise 3 children simultaneously across a variety of devices such as desktops, notebooks, tablets/smartphones. And, they can just go over to their friends house and you have no idea if they supervise internet access. So, an ISP block sounds more encompassing to me. 

This is a good thing, to block accidental and basic attempts by curious children to find porn.   

I think it this is more aimed at pre-teens -- teens will probably find a way to circumvent via proxys/vpns or whatever but at least it is an obstacle. 

3665 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2185

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 865178 24-Jul-2013 15:54
One person supports this post
Send private message

surfisup1000: [snip]

This is a good thing, to block accidental and basic attempts by curious children to find porn.   [snip]


Heh, yeah, let's turn it into a challenge... We all know how bad kids are at using technology nowadays :-)

CHeers - N


2520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 937

Subscriber

  Reply # 865179 24-Jul-2013 15:55
One person supports this post
Send private message

surfisup1000:And, they can just go over to their friends house and you have no idea if they supervise internet access. So, an ISP block sounds more encompassing to me.  



... you know they'd be using their friends' internet connection at their friends house, so your ISP filtering your connection will have no impact?




Windows 7 x64 // i5-3570K // 16GB DDR3-1600 // GTX660Ti 2GB // Samsung 830 120GB SSD // OCZ Agility4 120GB SSD // Samsung U28D590D @ 3840x2160 & Asus PB278Q @ 2560x1440
Samsung Galaxy S5 SM-G900I w/Spark

3725 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1211


  Reply # 865180 24-Jul-2013 15:55
One person supports this post
Send private message

wasabi2k: I have to say I am mightily surprised by some of the attitudes in here.

Filtering Porn on the internet will do next to NOTHING to "save the children", "protect innocence" etc etc etc.


I really fail to understand this dread of porn. Viewing it is not going to turn your child into a pervert or axe murderer.

 



Google "harmful effects of porn on children".  So, yes it does have a harmful effect on children. 

ISP filtering porn on the internet will prevent a child looking for pictures of pussycats finding out a lot more about the world than they expected (this did happen to a friend of ours). 



2520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 937

Subscriber

  Reply # 865181 24-Jul-2013 15:57
One person supports this post
Send private message

surfisup1000:
Google "harmful effects of porn on children".  So, yes it does have a harmful effect on children. 

ISP filtering porn on the internet will prevent a child looking for pictures of pussycats finding out a lot more about the world than they expected (this did happen to a friend of ours). 




Google results tell me I can fart my way to Jupiter, so that must also be correct. Opt-in filtering is available for those that wish it.




Windows 7 x64 // i5-3570K // 16GB DDR3-1600 // GTX660Ti 2GB // Samsung 830 120GB SSD // OCZ Agility4 120GB SSD // Samsung U28D590D @ 3840x2160 & Asus PB278Q @ 2560x1440
Samsung Galaxy S5 SM-G900I w/Spark

2958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286


  Reply # 865182 24-Jul-2013 16:01
One person supports this post
Send private message

surfisup1000:
wasabi2k: As a step-parent to a 14 year old and someone who was a teenager with internet access - why do you want to prevent them looking at porn?

I totally understand little kids not being exposed to stuff, but your kid shouldn't be using the internet unsupervised before 12-13 in my opinion.

Censorship of the internet is not a good thing.


It is not censorship as there is an opt out.

Why would you want your 14 year old to be viewing the most degrading porn out there?  There are lots of reasons, just google "harmful effects porn teenagers".   The longer you can delay them the better I think.

It is impractical to 100% supervise 3 children simultaneously across a variety of devices such as desktops, notebooks, tablets/smartphones. And, they can just go over to their friends house and you have no idea if they supervise internet access. So, an ISP block sounds more encompassing to me. 

This is a good thing, to block accidental and basic attempts by curious children to find porn.   

I think it this is more aimed at pre-teens -- teens will probably find a way to circumvent via proxys/vpns or whatever but at least it is an obstacle. 


And at their friend's house dad has opted out of the porn filter so what good is the ISP filter then?






2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user


  Reply # 865183 24-Jul-2013 16:03
Send private message

Talkiet:
If you don't get it, I would suggest you are wilfully ignoring logic.

You are not paying your ISP to receive porn. That's an inaccurate and emotive statement.

You are paying your ISP for a relatively unfiltered internet feed.

You are also expected to pay SOMEONE if you want SOMEONE to perform filtering on your internet feed. It takes them design time, extra overheads, extra equipment costs etc to manage this.

Stop suggesting that 'opting-in' to get porn is reasonable. It's a stupid idea.


I think you missing my point.

I pay for internet, and then I have to subscribe to a thirdparty service, or install special software etc to keep my kids safe on the web ...

Fine. I have no hassles with that.

You just seem to not like the idea of the ISP taking over this service? Why must I buy separate software? Why must I pay a third party? Surely its easier for this to be handled and maintained by the ISP.

Thats my point.

"opting in" to get porn is just as reasonable as being able to "opt out"





2958 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286


  Reply # 865185 24-Jul-2013 16:06
2 people support this post
Send private message

Klipspringer:
Talkiet:
If you don't get it, I would suggest you are wilfully ignoring logic.

You are not paying your ISP to receive porn. That's an inaccurate and emotive statement.

You are paying your ISP for a relatively unfiltered internet feed.

You are also expected to pay SOMEONE if you want SOMEONE to perform filtering on your internet feed. It takes them design time, extra overheads, extra equipment costs etc to manage this.

Stop suggesting that 'opting-in' to get porn is reasonable. It's a stupid idea.


I think you missing my point.

I pay for internet, and then I have to subscribe to a thirdparty service, or install special software etc to keep my kids safe on the web ...

Fine. I have no hassles with that.

You just seem to not like the idea of the ISP taking over this service? Why must I buy separate software? Why must I pay a third party? Surely its easier for this to be handled and maintained my the ISP.

Thats my point.

"opting in" to get porn is just as reasonable as being able to "opt out"






That's why I posted the link to watchdog, they are an ISP who offers this service you require so change your ISP to them.




3343 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1089

Trusted
Vocus

  Reply # 865186 24-Jul-2013 16:06
One person supports this post
Send private message

Klipspringer:

...

Surely its easier for this to be handled and maintained my the ISP.

...

"opting in" to get porn is just as reasonable as being able to "opt out"

...




The problem being, no matter how many times you say those things, it doesn't make them any more true.

3665 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2185

Trusted
Spark NZ

  Reply # 865187 24-Jul-2013 16:08
2 people support this post
Send private message

Klipspringer: [snip]

You just seem to not like the idea of the ISP taking over this service? Why must I buy separate software? Why must I pay a third party? Surely its easier for this to be handled and maintained my the ISP.

Thats my point.

"opting in" to get porn is just as reasonable as being able to "opt out"



Short answer, no. It's NOT easier for your ISP to do it. You're just going to have to believe me on this one.

There ARE ISPs around that have chosen to make this part of their service offering, based largely on offering to the education market.

And no, in principle, "opting in" to get category A of legal content is no different in principle to opting in to get categories B, C and D of also legal content. If category A should be opt-in, why not B, C and D?

Cheers - N


2078 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 230

Subscriber

  Reply # 865188 24-Jul-2013 16:09
One person supports this post
Send private message

ubergeeknz:
Klipspringer:

...

Surely its easier for this to be handled and maintained my the ISP.

...

"opting in" to get porn is just as reasonable as being able to "opt out"

...




The problem being, no matter how many times you say those things, it doesn't make them any more true.


Exactly.  Why should I pay the cost both in price and performance terms for a filtered internet connection when I have no need or desire for this service.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | ... | 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.