Disaster UK Blocking All Porn/NSFW URL'S In April 2018. - For Profit Age Verification Companies Rejoice.

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/porn-block-ban-in-the-uk-age-verifcation-law

"The changes for online pornography are being introduced under the Digital Economy Act. For the first time, he added, the government would have the power to block websites, en-masse, without court orders. “This is a first in a democracy,” he continued. “Although this appears to be just about protecting children from porn, it isn't. It will block any site that doesn't comply with strict UK content rules.”

....

MindGeek is one of the companies developing a "solution" for age verification on pornography websites. On its website it delivers a "world-class portfolio of entertainment experiences and IT solutions". It does not mention it owns some of the world's biggest porn sites, including Pornhub.

For age verification, MindGeek has developed AgeID. The company says it expects to sign-up 25 million people in the UK its system. According to Sky News, people will be able to login to AgeID with an email address and password, then use a third party system to check their age. AgeID will log which pornography websites are visited and store them.

There are concerns such a system could create giant databases of people accessing pornography. Pornhub, which is the world's most-visited pornographic website, had 64 million visitors per day in 2017, and the UK is its second biggest traffic driver. Such a database would be an obvious target for hackers, hoping to hold pornography sites to ransom.

...

After a large amount of indecision, at the start of February 2018 it was confirmed the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) would become the regulator for age verification. The body is currently responsible for setting the age restrictions (PG, 12A, 18, etcetera) on films broadcast in the UK. It can make recommendations to cut content, or deny a certificate and reject the media’s right to circulate in the UK.

Tl;dr - The UK passed a resolution back in 2017 that they would block anything considered pornographic via world wide, en-masse content filtering unless users first verify their age. This block is set to go in effect April 1st 2018. A little over a month from now.

They've still no idea how to manage it and only just a week ago the government decided the same organization that classifies films and tv shows for age ratings should be the governing body of whats "pornography"

Sites like Reddit, Twitter and other popular social media platforms may also be blocked as they contain pornography.

Credit Card verification seems to be the angle everyone is leaning towards and Age Verification services are scrambling to get a piece of the pie.

Of course... it's all in the name of protecting children.

 
Última edición:
Presiona para expandir...
AbyssStarer dijo:
Oh good, all the anti-porn exceptional individuals are coming out of the woodwork to support this one. Can't have the brittle 8 year olds see scary porn on the internets! They'll never be able to function again if they see porn.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lx8s0UJ0L0UOnly they aren't blaming shitty parenting raising mongoloids, they're blaming the evil porn.
Presiona para expandir...

Kids definitely do not need to be watching porn. But it's not the government's job to stop that from happening.
 
The UK porn block isn’t coming into force from 1 April
The UK's porn block is still being worked out


https://inews.co.uk/news/technology/the-uk-porn-block-isnt-coming-into-force-from-1-april/

A law blocking access to free pornographic websites for visitors aged under 18 will not come into force from 1 April, contrary to widespread reports.

The age verification legislation has been designed to prevent children from accessing inappropriate material online, and requires providers of porn content to introduce systems to check visitors’ ages.

Once the process is rolled out, visitors to sites such as PornHub and YouPorn will required to enter an email address, password and age verification documentation using a driver’s licence, passport or credit card.

Following a number of setbacks, the government’s Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) said it plans to announce commencement plans “shortly”, following widespread reports it was due to come into force from next week. As first reported by PinkNews, this is not the case.

People close to the matter told i that reports the age-verification process was due to begin on 1 April, or had been pushed back until later in the year, were inaccurate.

An official commencement date has yet to be announced, they added.
“This is a world-leading step forward to protect our children from adult content which is currently far too easy to access online,” a DCMS spokesperson said.

“The government, and the BBFC [British Board of Film Classification] as the regulator, have taken the time to get this right and we will announce commencement plans shortly.”


UK porn block: A short history
The block was first outlined in the 2015 Conservative election manifesto and passed into law as part of the Digital Economy Act 2017.

It was originally due to come into force from April 2018 after then-digital minister Matt Hancock signed the commencement order for the Act in July 2017, but was pushed back further to allow further consultation time on ensuring the law was properly applied.

The rules will be enforced by the BBFC, which published guidance in October 2018 stating commercial porn providers must ensure that “material is not normally accessible by those under 18”.

This highlights the difficulties in enforcing age verification systems, given that internet users could easily circumvent it by using a VPN (virtual private network) to mask their location in the UK as being in another country.

There are also fears the block could encourage internet users to seek porn through the dark web. “Adults (and some children) may be pushed towards using ToR and related systems to avoid age verification, where they could be exposed to illegal and extreme material that they otherwise would never have come into contact with,” the government said in an impact assessment.

Any porn site that fails to comply with the news rules will face a fine of up to £250,000, or a blanket block by UK internet service providers.

The BBFC will also be able to block porn websites if they fail to show that they are denying under-18s access to their sites.

Margot James, UK Minister for Digital said in November last year that internet users could expect the block to come into force “by Easter of next year”, adding: “It has taken longer than I would have liked, but I’d balance that with a confidence that we’ve got it right,” she added.
Presiona para expandir...

Now what am I going to do tomorrow? I was planning on watching porn all day in protest.
 
If they really didn't want kids exposed to porn, they'd just ban the little shits from having smartphones. The issue is unrestricted internet access for kids, which seems to do nothing but scramble their brains with porn, Tumblr, and the garbage you find on chan sites. Plus, having constant unsupervised access to the internet and social media on mobile devices is probably shortening their attention span to the point of near retardation.
 
Gone_Fission dijo:
If they really didn't want kids exposed to porn, they'd just ban the little shits from having smartphones. The issue is unrestricted internet access for kids, which seems to do nothing but scramble their brains with porn, Tumblr, and the garbage you find on chan sites. Plus, having constant unsupervised access to the internet and social media on mobile devices is probably shortening their attention span to the point of near exceptionalism.
Presiona para expandir...
Has nothing to do with not exposing kids to porn. It's about 1) linking ID to an ISP 2) Clamping down on freedoms so that when they decide to do the big one, people will be more accepting and 3) generate income and jobs, need to employ porn licence verification.
Also don't think they are bright enough to clamp down on Twitter porn content, Premium Snapchat, and probably drawn/animated porn/hentai.
 
Slimy Time dijo:
Also don't think they are bright enough to clamp down on Twitter porn content, Premium Snapchat, and probably drawn/animated porn/hentai.
Presiona para expandir...
Or open an email service(we just say we have a leaked list and send them out randomly while in reality we just let people send in their adresses).
We have the Technologie and somebody who already knows how to send dick pics on a near industrial level.
 
https://order-order.com/2019/04/17/porn-laws-coming-force-july-15th/

The Government has announced that its authoritarian internet porn ban will be coming into force on 15th July. People in Britain will need to hand over their credit card details or buy a government-approved porn pass from a newsagent from £8.99 to access online porn from then. Tech-savvy Generation Z-ers will just get round it with a VPN…

Digital Minister Margot James says: “We want the UK to be the safest place in the world to be online, and these new laws will help us achieve this.” Combined with the Government’s impending assault on the wider internet and its latest genius plans to crack down on… Netflix and Amazon Video, the UK is rapidly becoming the most repressive democracy in the world to be online.

The Adam Smith Institute’s Matthew Lesh, says “This scheme, that requires linking of people’s identity to their online adult viewing habits, will seriously threaten our privacy, be a massive gift to scammers, and won’t even work. Young people will just get around it, and end up being exposed to more hardcore material.” The Government’s sledgehammer approach to the internet is what you’d expect from an authoritarian regime like China or Saudi Arabia, not the liberal democracy that invented it…
Presiona para expandir...

New date for when everyone has to hand in their credit card details for a masturbation licence- July 15th.
 
CWCissey dijo:
Lol watch that get pushed back again.

It's unenforceable and the government know it.
Presiona para expandir...
Won't stop them from trying to enforce it.
Either blanket ban it like Singapore or let people watch it, don't do this half-half bullshit. What a fitting summary for this current government, neither here nor there.
 
frozenrunner dijo:
Kids definitely do not need to be watching porn. But it's not the government's job to stop that from happening.
Presiona para expandir...
Even parents cannot stop it on their own since smart phones became available. You can keep your kids from seeing pornography while at home, but they go to school and some other shitty parent's kid has pornography on a phone & they show it to everyone. There were kids like that back in the day that showed porn to other kids, but they had to physically steal pictures from their dad's magazines to show it to other kids, which was risky, and obviousy it wasn't the goatse tier weirdness that is easy to find now.

Not that I think most parents are doing their job, just that even if were, all it takes is a few bad parents to ruin the whole thing. the exposure to pornography is leading to some really terrible social ills like kids molesting each other (because they imitate whatever they watch, its hard wired in to normal humans). That to me seems to be a point where government intervention might be sensible. I hope it works.
 
sperginity dijo:
Even parents cannot stop it on their own since smart phones became available. You can keep your kids from seeing pornography while at home, but they go to school and some other shitty parent's kid has pornography on a phone & they show it to everyone. There were kids like that back in the day that showed porn to other kids, but they had to physically steal pictures from their dad's magazines to show it to other kids, which was risky, and obviousy it wasn't the goatse tier weirdness that is easy to find now.

Not that I think most parents are doing their job, just that even if were, all it takes is a few bad parents to ruin the whole thing. the exposure to pornography is leading to some really terrible social ills like kids molesting each other (because they imitate whatever they watch, its hard wired in to normal humans). That to me seems to be a point where government intervention might be sensible. I hope it works.
Presiona para expandir...
Also...you want to see porn without going onto a porn site? Go to twitter, go onto snapchat. Explain how these geniuses plan on stopping people and teenagers from going on those sites? They can't, unless those go onto the block list, which won't happen.
 
Última edición:
Slimy Time dijo:
https://order-order.com/2019/04/17/porn-laws-coming-force-july-15th/



New date for when everyone has to hand in their credit card details for a masturbation licence- July 15th.
Presiona para expandir...

Holy shit.

The Government has announced that its authoritarian internet porn ban will be coming into force on 15th July. People in Britain will need to hand over their credit card details or buy a government-approved porn pass from a newsagent from £8.99 to access online porn from then.
Presiona para expandir...

I can’t imagine living in such a nanny state where I would have to buy a “government approved porn pass” just to look at porn. Why are British people so complacent about shit like this? Why do they just sit there and take it when their government keeps imposing more restrictions on them?
 
Cosmos dijo:
Holy shit.



I can’t imagine living in such a nanny state where I would have to buy a “government approved porn pass” just to look at porn. Why are British people so complacent about shit like this? Why do they just sit there and take it when their government keeps imposing more restrictions on them?
Presiona para expandir...
Welcome to the product of several generations of the nanny state and relying on the government to sort anything out.
Also, they have the usual government cover for passing this law, it's to "protect the children". What, you don't want to protect children? Are you some kind of sick pervert? They will use either that or "to get at the terrorists/racists".

Genuinely doesn't seem to matter which side of the mainstream spectrum people are on, be it left or right, they fucking love government getting all up in their ass. So many people I have talked to cannot comprehend the idea of the government being told to "leave us the fuck alone".

Edit: Here is an old article which may explain/give reason why Brits are so complacent regarding this: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/09/opinion/why-do-brits-accept-surveillance.html

LONDON — Think of it as the “Skyfall” session. In a committee room of the House of Commons, the heads of the British secret services appeared on Thursday before a panel of M.P.’s in what might have been a re-enactment of that scene from the latest Bond movie — minus the shootout.

Even without gunfire, it was not short of drama. The mere sight of the heads of Britain’s domestic and foreign intelligence agencies, MI5 and MI6, along with the director of its listening post, G.C.H.Q., was spectacle enough. This was their first joint appearance in public, addressing a parliamentary intelligence and security committee whose hearings had, until now, always been held behind closed doors. (Indeed, little more than 20 years ago even the names of the intelligence chiefs were a state secret.)
That fact alone guaranteed coverage on the evening news. Which meant a rare focus on the topic that provided the session’s most electrifying moments: the Edward Snowden affair. Rare because the dominant British reaction to the revelations provided by Mr. Snowden, the former National Security Agency contractor, has been a shrug of indifference. The Guardian helped break the story — that the N.S.A. and G.C.H.Q. (Government Communications Headquarters) have engaged in mass surveillance of American and British citizens online — and has covered it intensely, but the rest of the British media have largely steered clear. In Parliament, a few maverick individuals have raised concerns about civil liberties and privacy. When others have mentioned the subject, it’s mostly been to accuse The Guardian of damaging national security, rather than to ask whether the intelligence agencies have gone too far.
What explains this reaction — so at odds with the response in the United States, where Congress is reviewing its oversight arrangements and where everyone from President Obama on down has acknowledged that a debate is necessary, if not overdue, and so at odds with, say, Germany, where memories of Stasi eavesdropping ensure revulsion at the notion of all-seeing surveillance? The answers say much about the current political landscape of Britain — and much of what lies beneath.
Start with the politics. One might expect the opposition Labour Party to have picked up the Snowden issue, eagerly casting the government as Big Brother. The trouble is, Labour was itself in government just over three years ago, doubtless allowing many of these same practices. It is in no position to throw stones now.

Until 2010, the smaller Liberal Democrats could have been relied on to champion personal liberty. Untainted by power, and denied ministerial office for 65 years, they had never had to make the “tough decisions” so often cited in defense of the security services. Now, though, they are in coalition as the Conservatives’ junior partner. They can no longer complain about government intrusion: They are the government.

The media terrain has proved equally unpropitious for this story. The British press is known for its vicious rivalry: At least 10 national daily newspapers, all headquartered in London, fighting over an ever-shrinking market.
Few media outlets have run hard on the N.S.A. revelations, perhaps reluctant to give traction to a rival’s story. It’s worth admitting that The Guardian is resented by its rivals for exposing the phone hacking scandal that has resulted in the prospect of state-backed regulation of the newspaper industry. What used to be Fleet Street is in no mood to follow a lead set by the paper that’s caused them so much aggravation.
Which brings us to the intelligence agencies themselves. At a time when so many other British institutions — from Parliament to the police to the B.B.C. and the National Health Service — have seen their reputations tarnished by scandal, Britain’s intelligence establishment remains in good standing. A YouGov survey last month, long after the Snowden revelations, found that only 19 percent of Britons believed the security services had too much power; 64 percent reckoned they had the right amount or not enough.

In Britain few blame the spies for what might seem like the gravest intelligence debacle in recent history: The expectation that weapons of mass destruction would be found in post-invasion Iraq. Blame for that error tends to attach to the former prime minister Tony Blair, who is believed to have seen what he wanted to see in the reports he received, rather than to the agencies themselves.
It helps that Britain — which in 2015 will praise itself once more as the land that eight centuries earlier gave the world the great freedom charter, Magna Carta — has a curiously complacent attitude to civil liberties. A pragmatism prevails: If it protects us, it’s O.K. Many Brits accept the old securocrat formulation: If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.
For example, Britain is estimated to have more CCTV cameras than any other country, including China. They are found in every store, railway station, school or bus — one for every 11 people on these islands. People don’t object because the cameras are said to reduce crime. They violate no Bill of Rights or written constitution because Britain has neither.
And this might be the heart of the matter. Britain has a fundamentally different conception of power than, say, the United States. In America, it is “we the people” who are held to be sovereign. Viewed like that, the N.S.A., and other arms of the government, is a servant of the people: It is meant to do what it is told.
The British system, by contrast, still carries the imprint of its origins in monarchy: Officially, it remains “Her Majesty’s Government,” not the people’s. Power still emanates from the top and flows downward, with the public allowed a peek only when the state chooses. It means that Brits can be quite resigned toward the level of government power over, and intrusion into, their lives — because they don’t really see government as their servant in the first place. Britons remain subjects, not citizens.
And so, while Americans have been shocked and stirred to action by Mr. Snowden’s disclosures, Britain is resolutely unmoved. It’s not the old stiff upper lip of stoicism that you’re seeing, but a shrug of resignation and a habit of deference so deeply ingrained we hardly notice it.
Presiona para expandir...
TBH, the idea of politicians "serving the will of the people" only recently started popping up as important in the face of Brexit and the disastrous attempt to implement that.
 
Última edición:
Debes iniciar sesión o registrarte para responder aquí.
Atrás
Top Abajo