Cameron Tells Pornography Websites To Block Access By Children Or Face Closure 381
An anonymous reader writes: Prime Minister David Cameron says that if online pornographers don't voluntarily install effective age-restricted controls on their websites he'll introduce legislation that will close them down altogether. A recent Childline poll found nearly 10% of 12-13-year-olds were worried they were addicted to pornography and 18% had seen shocking or upsetting images. The minister for internet safety and security, Joanna Shields, said: “As a result of our work with industry, more than 90% of UK consumers are offered the choice to easily configure their internet service through family-friendly filters – something we take great pride in having achieved. It’s a gold standard that surpasses those of other countries. “Whilst great progress has been made, we remain acutely aware of the risks and dangers that young people face online. This is why we are committed to taking action to protect children from harmful content. Companies delivering adult content in the UK must take steps to make sure these sites are behind age verification controls.”
How? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, precisely how again do they suggest sites verify ages? It needs to at least be proof against a minor with an adult's "borrowed" credit card, and it can't require sites to violate the law. This isn't a technical problem here, it's completely independent of the technology. If these politicians want the problem solved, they need to spend some time thinking about how to solve the problem. And yes, "make someone else solve it" is a valid option but only if having the sites apply that solution by making the politicians the "someone else" is also a valid option.
Re: (Score:3)
Is he going to shut them down in just the UK or in the whole world?
Re:How? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Some of Cameron's friends of pornographers of one sort of another. From soft-porn in "newspapers" to "lad's mags" to soft child porn (e.g. the Daily Mail).
Age versification would seem to require entry of credit card data, unless they are going to accept a simple "I am 18 years old" tick box (Facebook uses that technique to "prevent" children under 13 from using it, LOL). Let's assume credit card, that means that free sites will die or be forced overseas. Pay sites won't be able to give much away as a previe
Re: (Score:2)
The UK can ask the US banking system, political system and big pipe internet providers to to "fix" the pipes and payment options into the UK.
ie the ".com" just fails to load in the UK and a log is sent to some local UK authority about the access attempt.
If that fails the UK could fund US political leaders who understand the UK's
Re: (Score:3)
So, precisely how again do they suggest sites verify ages? It needs to at least be proof against a minor with an adult's "borrowed" credit card, and it can't require sites to violate the law. This isn't a technical problem here, it's completely independent of the technology. If these politicians want the problem solved, they need to spend some time thinking about how to solve the problem. And yes, "make someone else solve it" is a valid option but only if having the sites apply that solution by making the politicians the "someone else" is also a valid option.
The problem is, they don't care about kids seeing inappropriate material... Politicians are, after all, sexually abusing minors left and right in the UK.
Unemployment too high? You lost your job? What are we going to do about it? Sir, were you aware that your 11yr could possibly be addicted to Tentacled midget porn? You didn't even know that was a thing? Here are some shocking pictures. Go argue with your neighbors and leave us alone.
Re: (Score:2)
How do they verify anything? Do you really think people are going to provide a porn website with their actual names and dates of birth? Would you?
Why the hell would anybody trust a porn site with that? I wouldn't trust most any website with that information ... both because it's none of their damned business, and because I assume they're grossly incompetent at security.
These idiot politicians want a world which is wrapped in bubble wrap, and must
Re: (Score:3)
So yea don't by the line of "...risks and dangers that young people face online". Our generation turned out just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
If these politicians want the problem solved, they need to spend some time thinking about how to solve the problem.
Thinking? This is David Cameron you are talking about, ex PR flack and brain the size of a small peanut.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
yeah, if dealing with loonys, clearly is should be in canada.
Larry (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:How? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm not gonna remember a number like that!
If I need to bypass a child filter for a porn site in some hellish future UK dystopia, I'll just go ask a kid.
Re:How? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not gonna remember a number like that!
Just remember that credic card numbers have a checksum. Once you know that, you can look up or download the algorithm and generate valud numbers all day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How? (Score:5, Insightful)
So, you're looking for porn, do you pick:
Site A: In the UK which wants you credit card info.
Site B: In Uruguay which is happy to show you lots of free porn, no questions asked.
Re:How? (Score:5, Interesting)
Option C: Get a subscription with a newsgroup service for a fraction of the money a porn site will cost you, download as much as you like over a securely encrypted connection, have plausible deniability as to what the content was.
Option D: Get one of those P2P thingamajiganibobs
There are so many ways to get porn on the internet other than the vanilla website-and-a-subscription method.
And porn has the ultimate "Long Tail". There already exists enough digital porn for virtually anyone with a normal-ish kink spectrum to whack off to something new twice a day for the rest of their life. Even if you destroy the porn industry (which this won't, because not every jurisdiction is stupid), people will still trade and use porn, with impunity.
Re: (Score:2)
Option A just use google.
all the porn you want, without paying money for it. Bonus it is already chopped up into clips of less than 5 minutes for you quickies
Re: (Score:2)
And porn has the ultimate "Long Tail".
Who else. Literally.
Re:How? (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. Use CC verification.
Do you really think giving your credit card information to a pornography website operator (who in all likelihood is on the other side of the planet) is a good idea? I can't off the top of my head think of anyone less trustworthy. Maybe a crack whore or that Nigerian prince that keeps emailing me, but that's about it.
It's up to parents to monitor what their kiddies are doing online, not Prime Minister David Cameron.
Twenty years behind the times - just like Cameron (Score:3)
Whether you like the situation or not you've somehow managed to deny what happened about twenty years ago and led to the widespread use of credit cards on the net that we have today. Ironically the problem to be solved back then was for the pornographers to trust their customers and not the other way around.
Do you really think giving your credit card information to kids on minimum wage is a good idea? Somehow retail o
Re: (Score:2)
None of this affects the validity of using CC as age verification.
It's a form of age verification that can be charged.
Re: (Score:2)
In this country it used to be that under-18 year olds could only get a Solo [wikipedia.org] or card, which a lot of places used as a basic age check. [wikipedia.org]
But I read that our banks don't issue them any more because they weren't as widely accepted, because they didn't let you spend funds you didn't have access to.
Re:How? (Score:5, Insightful)
13-year-olds are quite capable of making their own porn these days.
Using the cameras and networking hardware given to them by their own parents.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Im moding so posting this anon
Visa, Master card, and American Express Gift cards. They can also get the prepaid re-loadable CC's sold at all the 7-11's.
All the porn sites accept them because people use them to protect their identity and to protect there bank accounts.
I know a lot of parents that get them for the kids and load them with there allowance. That way the kids can save up and order the cool stuff online.
Re: (Score:2)
More accurately, kids are allowed to own debit cards that function as credit cards for all intents and purposes aside from billing.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I'm sure that person was completely sincere. I've seen it many times here on /. and other discussion sites. It usually is in the vein of "The common people are ignorant morons, so we must silence them and ignore them so that we (the intelligent benevolent overlords) can properly rule them without disruption."
The sad thing is that I've seen it from people on the far left, far right, and centrists of the political range. Seems like most groups want to silence their opposition.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
You see it a lot more if you are searching for other types of content through less than legal means.
If you want to torrent something, you'll get pop-ups of webcam girls, porn sites, etc, that you didn't ask for and weren't in the market for. I imagine for the youth crowd, that's probably the main way they get exposed to it - they want to torrent the latest Iron Man movie, and they get pop-ups for Iron Dick.
Re:How? (Score:4, Insightful)
The number of users smart enough to use torrents but not adblockers seems like it would be small.
Re: (Score:3)
uh... I did a search for "ALS" one time, the top link wasn't a website about Lou Gehrig's Disease.
Holy fucking shit, Sylvia Saint has the roundest tits in existence.
Re: (Score:2)
I've gotten random links to porn. I'm afraid I also get social email from colleagues and clients who say "Hey, check this out". And I've also had clients who run pornography and escort services. The smaller ones don't always pay their bills, but adult traffic is a _very_ big provider and consumer of high bandwidth Intenet traffic, so they're a difficult market to ignore.
Re:How? (Score:4, Informative)
Anything more than that means he wants to just outright prevent access (as they've already tried) and there's more to it than the typical "think of the children" bologna.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it ok for adults to have sex with children too? Is it ok to record those that do? If age is just an 'number thing' then why discriminate who can participate?
Re: (Score:3)
Looks like a simple question but I've been pondering it.
We have very mature 14 year olds, I met a girl about 10 years ago and I swear to God she looked like she way 20 and talked like she was 20. She was 14. No, I didn't bang her if that's what you're wondering (I was engaged at the time and I'm the kind of dude who doesn't cheat).
Since then I saw many girls and boys whose age couldn't have been guessed. "Overgrown" comes to mind, there's no way you could tell they're less than 18. Now, there's people over
No, no, no (Score:5, Insightful)
they're trying to prevent what they're always trying to prevent:
being blamed or losing their jobs when some nutcase parent gets upset.
The purpose of policies is to be seen pretending to do something about fictional problems that have no solutions for the simple reason that some very loud people believe there's a problem.
Re:How? (Score:5, Informative)
I don't think they're trying to stop a 12 y/o who is determined to see porn. Rather, they're trying to stop someone from clicking on a link that brings them to adult content without a warning. It seems reasonable to me,
Wrong. They're trying to get some more votes from one of their demographics.
Nothing he can legislate will reduce the amount of porn children have access to.
Re: (Score:3)
Anonymous proof of age online is one of the features of the newfangled electronic ID cards in Germany. But as expected, there isn't much you can do with it besides checking your speeding tickets. Even services that would not require to trust the government that anonymous indeed means anonymous don't use it.
Parenting (Score:5, Insightful)
How about instead of trying to introduce draconian inappropriate laws that will no doubt be misused to censor other sites the government properly fund the enforcement of existing laws? We already have very effective parental neglect laws and if a child as young as the Childline survey suggests is accessing pornography surely the parents are neglectful?
Re: (Score:2)
Parental neglect laws don't apply when you are the Prime Minister, though...
http://i2.mirror.co.uk/incomin... [mirror.co.uk]
I mean, what kind of person leaves their 8-year old behind in the pub because they forgot about them?
Re: (Score:2)
Such a simple and rational solution right? Too bad that the governments there have spent the last 20 odd years restricting what parents can actually do to their children in terms of punishment. The state is more of a parent then anything else.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No it's not even that. When I was a kid growing up in the UK before the internet we still encountered porn at that age - either left by builders in the building sites we used to dick around in, brought into school by that one kid whose dad creepily collected page 3 pictures from The Sun, or call girl leaflets with pornographic imagery on them that used to be left in phone boxes (remember them?).
The fact is, kids will encounter porn, you could ban the whole internet and they still would, just like I did and
Re: Parenting (Score:2)
I don't know about black supremacists but plenty of nasty religious extremists are in prison in the UK and there are a number of banned organisations.
Re: (Score:2)
Percentages? (Score:5, Informative)
A recent Childline poll found nearly 10% of 12-13-year-olds were worried they were addicted to pornography and 18% had seen shocking or upsetting image
Years ago (mid 80s or something) there was a "video nasty" frenzy in the UK based on figures that purported to show what percentage of kids and watched "video nasties". The data was gathered by asking kids which of a list of films they had seen. Turned out to be totally bogus, a later study got the same results when the list had a mix of real and invented titles. Not suprising really. Are these figures any better?
Re: (Score:3)
now we have laptops, smartphones and tablets and internet
Re: (Score:2)
A recent Childline poll found nearly 10% of 12-13-year-olds were worried they were addicted to pornography and 18% had seen shocking or upsetting image
Years ago (mid 80s or something) there was a "video nasty" frenzy in the UK based on figures that purported to show what percentage of kids and watched "video nasties". The data was gathered by asking kids which of a list of films they had seen. Turned out to be totally bogus, a later study got the same results when the list had a mix of real and invented titles. Not suprising really. Are these figures any better?
This is the internet, 135% of all statistics are made up. The last 47% are skewed in favor of whatever the article is trying to sell.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Be careful when someone plays the morality card and see if you can look behind the curtain to see what they are
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, I know I didn't really have a firm grasp on what did and didn't count as addiction at that age - even by the age of 18 I was still grappling with the concept of whether spending 8 hours a day in online video games was addiction or not. Given that I could still walk away at any moment and do something else for days on end, and at times, did, I'm still not overly sure to this day if it was.
Ask a 12 - 13 year old whether they're addicted and they'll have no fucking idea.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
That isn't relevant. The named numbers are usefull in his cause, so they are presented as fact. That happens everywhere - remember the "indisputable" proof of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?
To be entirely fair there, the U.S. and Britain knew he had them because we sold them to him in the first place.
http://rense.com/general29/wes... [rense.com]
Re: (Score:2)
... You do realize there was proof (we sold them to him) and that he was bragging about it on national TV in order to keep Iran from walking all over his ass right?
Take your ignorance and shove it up your ass, your political agenda and reality are two entirely different things. It is possible to disagree with war and not have to make up a bullshit excuse for why you disagree, especially when you continue to drive your Ford Explorer around cheap gas because of it.
Happy, happy, joy, joy... (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
This is just the beginning of another five years of the Tories
No, not another. This is something new. The last 5 years were apparently heavily tempered by the lib dems. I say apparently because it wasn't all that apparent at the time, but now without having to please another coalition party they've gone into full batshit crazy slash and burn (except fopr cronies) mode.
Well, all those whiny Lib-Dem supporters who through a massive shitgit when the CON-lib coalition wasn't 100% pure libdem and defected, congr
Re: (Score:2)
This is just the beginning of another five years of the Tories and their rural mafia shoving their crappy conservative values down the throats of the 63.9 percent of the UK population that did not vote for them and now that the Scottish national party has split the Labour vote it looks like this is how things will stay this way for the foreseeable future. It is an utter travesty that a political party can achieve a parliamentary majority with 36.1 percent of the population behind it and that a party that gained 12.9% of the popular vote (UKIP) gets one parliamentarian. I'm no fan of UKIP by any means but they should have gotten more seats.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone who lives outside the UK actually understand British politics?
Re: (Score:2)
Few people in the UK understand British politics either, including the post you quoted.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. His name is Rupert Murdoch :(
Re: (Score:2)
I've been trying to think of a way we can get the Single Transferable Vote introduced. It's going to be difficult, especially since the people with the power to do it would be giving up some of their power. Also, most of the British public claim they are too thick to understand it.
Anyone have any ideas?
Re: (Score:2)
It's going to happen anyway, UK politics are in turmoil. Labour is on the verge of committing suicide, and when it does it'll fracture leaving the Tories the only electable party.
Except, they wont be electable because the longer a party is in power, the more fucking batshit it becomes, and as such people are going to split away from it and it wont hold a parliamentary majority. It may remain the biggest party but wont be able to form a government, hell, it's barely there now - wait until the EU referendum i
Re: (Score:2)
I've been trying to think of a way we can get the Single Transferable Vote introduced.
STV won't solve a lot of the problems. The district nature of it is what allows wild misrepresentaiton. I suspect the SNP would have gained their 56 seats with STV, while still acrtuing around 5% of the votes.
But the plus side is you get to vote for a person as much as a party.
Re: (Score:2)
Districts would have to be grouped together to implement STV. It only works properly if there is more than one seat available.
Won't some one PLEASE think of the children (Score:2)
.. and not our lack of leadership regarding issues of poverty, income inequality, education, criminal bankers, revolving door lobbyist appointments, pollution, global warming.
I thought this type of wedge issue diversion was mostly an American political tactic.
Re: (Score:2)
By contrast, in the 2014 U.S. Congressional elections, an estimated 36.6% percent of eligible voters participated. (Source: http://www.usnews.com/news/blo... [usnews.com] ). I'd have gladly taken the UK turnout rate.
Re: (Score:3)
You're ignoring the turnout. Only 66.1% of people bothered to vote. Which means 33.9% of the electorate don't care who won. Their inactivity is just as complicit in the result as those who voted for the "nasty party".
And this is moot anyway. British democracy allows you to select your local MP - and that's all. The PM and the government are appointed by the Queen based on the allegiances of the elected MPs.
Yes but with the way the UK electoral system is organized most of the people who voted for UKIP, just to take one example, might just as well not have bothered. They were a significant portion of the population and got one MP, agian I'm not a UKIP fan but those voters deserve representation. The whole system seems to be geared up for a couple of large parties taking turns at being in power with the Tories in particular riding tiny rural constituencies into power backed by a ridiculously small number of vote
Re: (Score:2)
The UK electorate recently had an opportunity to change the electoral system to the "Alternative Vote", while would at least have decreased the disparity between the percentage of the vote and the number of MPs. In the referendum on the subject, 67.9% voted "no". So however twisted the current system is, I think they only have themselves to blame...
You're preaching to the converted here, I'm in the minority who was in favor of that change. In fact I don't think it went far enough. I won't be happy until one citizen effectively has one vote. The way it is now rural constituencies for example weigh more than heavily populated areas which is downright unfair and as I pointed out the fact that UKIP got 13 percent of the vote and one MP is simply outrageous. Democracy is about fair representation, not keeping the Tories in power so that they can lock the B
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
More likely people will simply get their porn elsewhere.
What, you think kids get their porn on legit UK websites and not via various methods of sharing ranging from torrents to social media?
Re: (Score:2)
Shutting down all online porn-sites in the UK? Yeah, go ahead, see how long the public is willing to play along; I predict quite an uproar. Besides, it wouldn't stop porn-sites from outside the UK anyways, so it would both upset a lot of people and yet be wholly ineffective.
Right...because such sites couldn't possibly be blocked regardless of where they're based...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes well that was my point wasn't it
Moron (Score:3)
Cameron you complete fucking moron, (at least) three things:
1. Most porn sites are not in the UK.
2. Computers can't tell if people are lying.
3. Most people want free porn and are too lazy or too smart to be giving potential criminals their personal details.
Re: (Score:2)
#2: yet apparently Facebook can tell if you're contemplating suicide...
Here's a better idea (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They already have this : it now defaults to "on" by default.
It's DNS level filtering though, so it can be defeated by a simple change of settings. The younger generation are mostly techno-dufuses though, so it probably defeats them.
Re: (Score:2)
Three UK have always had an adult content filter defaulted to "on". You had to either call CS and giver over a credit card (not a debit card for some reason) number to "verify" your age, or go into a store to have a salesdroid unlock your account.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
the really weird thing is, Virgin used to (I don't know if they still do) have default locks on adult content too, thing is you have to be over 18 here to consent to contract. Don't they think someone who is old enough to sign a fucking broadband contract is *legally* old enough to view/purchase/STAR IN porn?
Tell the govt what!!!!!! (Score:2)
Please enter you gov't ID here [ ] [OK]
Then click ok so that the gov't can confirm that you are authorised to watch gay midget porn.
Protect the children - but not from this or that. (Score:5, Interesting)
As an aside, anyone else enjoying the irony in the British government which for decades had gone to great lengths to protect the identity of people they knew were repeatedly sexually assaulting children now claiming that this measure it to protect children? Exactly when will those prosecutions be beginning, Mr Cameron?
Erm... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
um... just no.
All taxes go into the consolidated fund. Out of that, MOST of the money goes to pay part interest on loans made on behalf of the British Government through the five largest banks in Europe. I say part interest because the arrangements are such that the loans will NEVER be paid off because the interest rates alone exceed the GDP of the entire nation. The Royal Family actually receives very little money from the public purse (shy of £40 million this year). Most Royal income comes from the
Silly puritans (Score:2)
I mean, when members of the House of Lords make selfies in womens underwear, don't you realize your prudishness is the cause of that, not the effect?
Keep going cameron (Score:3)
Gee, 12-13 year olds worried about sex somehow? (Score:5, Interesting)
Doesn't sound like a porn plague, it sounds like puberty.
12-13 year olds going through puberty, their hormones turned up to 11, obsessed with sex in some manner or other? Unsure of feelings they have about sex, worried they think about it too much (or not enough), all the anxieties of youth and social/sexual roles?
This is somehow new and driven by online porn?
When I was that age we were obsessed with porn, too. Everybody knew whose dad had a skin mag, some had their own secret stash. My friend and I on our way to junior high in 1978 found 3 porno mags in the street. Two were issues of Hustler and one was called "Double Cunt Fucker", a hardcore mag that had penetration, a 3-way and jiz shots. Probably average for what's online.
The problem with porn is that it's only appealing because society can't get a grip on sexuality.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
> and one was called "Double Cunt Fucker"
Bizarre but that was actually David Cameron's nickname at Eton
Understanding? (Score:4, Funny)
Responsibility (Score:2)
How about parents taking some responsibility here.
There's been porn on the Internet as long as there's been an Internet and I doubt that will ever stop.
Educate your kids to these risks the same as you would educate them for any other risks and they'll police themselves better than any end site will be able to.
More importantly.... (Score:2)
Kiddy porn is the fabric of the web that binds the corrupt establishment together.
John DeCamp's expose The Franklin Cover-Up [amazon.com] is an incredible read on the subject.
Also, Conspiracy of Silence [youtube.com] is a (banned) documentary on the subject.
Skewed (Score:5, Interesting)
A recent Childline poll found nearly 10% of 12-13-year-olds were worried they were addicted to pornography
Because you told them that because they looked at one image in a magazine that they were addicted. You set them up to answer that way, likely by saying 'Are you addicted to porn' while shaking your head yes at them suggestively.
A 12-13 year old has no fucking clue what addiction is, even if they were. I'm fairly certain based on its usage here that no one involved in the study or conversation about the study knows what addiction actually is to.
Infatuation is not addiction morons.
18% had seen shocking or upsetting images.
Actually its 100%, but the other 82% were smart enough not to mention the shit they've seen mommy and daddy do. The real world sucks, if they can't cope with 'upsetting images' then porn is the least of your concern and hiding the kid in a card board box for the rest of his/her life so they don't have to survive on their own might be your best bet.
As a result of our work with industry, more than 90% of UK consumers are offered the choice to easily configure their internet service through family-friendly filters
And 0% Use it because the parents aren't the ones that are freaked out about their kids looking at porn.
How sad is your world view when you think see two people do something entirely natural and REQUIRED FOR THE SURVIVAL OF OUR SPECIES and it offends you. And then to top it off, you have to freak out and project your personal issues with seeing boobies on to 12-13 year olds and convince them they are 'addicted' to something. 12-14 year olds are addicted to EVERYTHING THATS TABOO. If you told them it was dirty and sexual to brush their teeth 4 times a day, England would suddenly have the worlds healthiest teeth in the 12-13 year old group.
This kind of ignorance is spewed from some jack ass who doesn't have a kid (or isn't actually a parent to the kid) and doesn't realize that it will actually make MORE kids look at MORE porn.
How the fuck do people get old and totally forget what being a kid was like. It blows me away.
I got yer age-verification right here, ... (Score:2)
... Bubba!
It's called "parenthood."
They forgot one (Score:2)
They should also put checks to see if you are narrow minded. That should catch some of the politicians.
The World is Scary, Film at 11... (Score:3)
If this wasn't more blatant political pandering and yet another attempt to censor the Internet by the fucking Brits, I would ask whether or not anyone is smart enough to realize that the world is a scary place. We don't let kids wander around aimlessly in real life, we have designated areas, usually our own homes, the homes of trusted friends and neighbors, schools, etc. where children are allowed to be and operate with minimal controls.
When we take children to the city, or the store, or anywhere else that Bad Things Can Happen(tm), they are closely supervised and monitored. Now, I realize that that's impossible on the Internet. So, instead of trying to get some kind of verification method, tld, or whatever not-gonna-work flavor of the week they can come up with, why not just have a ".kids" tld or something that only has approved kiddy-friendly bullshit then set up your connections so that's all the kids can get to? All the big sites could set up .kids friendly pages, so there wouldn't be a need for anyone under, say, 12, to go anywhere else. And 13+, they're practically adults anyway and can handle the unfettered internet.
It would be so much easier to set up a whitelist than any of these half-cocked identity schemes for political brownie points, but again this is all about pandering and censorship, not protecting children, so no real solution will ever be put in place as the regulators don't want their favorite bogeyman to disappear.
BS statistics (Score:2)
A recent Childline poll found nearly 10% of 12-13-year-olds were worried they were addicted to pornography and 18% had seen shocking or upsetting images.
Kids going through puberty find porn interesting. News at 11.
I'd say the percentage of kids that have seen "shocking or upsetting images" is a good approximation of 100%. The other 82% are merely lying about it. It's impossible to even turn on the evening news without seeing shocking or upsetting images. I welcome the day when I no longer have to hear any more ads for boner pills. Try explaining that one to a 6 year old.
So many comments, and you do not get it, do you? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> Two things.. one, almost all of these porn sites are not in the UK so basically won't give a shit.
That's why you will really need mandatory filtering in the UK, soon.
Won't anyone think of the children?
Re: (Score:2)
Secondly, isn't it the case the those people who are most on a crusade against porn are the ones with the really sick and disturbing fetishes. Perhaps I could have 30 minutes with David Cameron's personal laptop just to check?
I didn't realise there was "pandering to bigots while shitting on anyone not a tory crony" porn, but well, I should have realised because of Rule 34 and all.
Re: (Score:2)
you don't have children, do you?