Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   35% of parents want complete porn filtering. 15% want partial porn filtering. The other 50% are men   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 67
    More: Interesting, pornographic film, NSPCC, parental controls, sexual identity, parliamentary inquiry, Internet pornography  
•       •       •

1661 clicks; posted to Geek » on 15 Dec 2012 at 11:53 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-15 11:57:00 AM  
Oddly enough, the number shoots down to 0% when you include "50 Shades Of Grey" in the definition of "porn".
 
2012-12-15 12:02:44 PM  
I find it hilarious that government and big business think they somehow own the internet. It's the tech's that keep it up and running, and it's the techs that decide if it will continue. It's like owning land. You rent it for a long period, but you never really own it. A small group of dedicated hackers can take down an important chunk of the internet in a single hour if they feel the need to flex their control. What makes any government audacious enough to think they can control the intertubes?
 
2012-12-15 12:12:29 PM  
As a defender of the first amendment, I advise that y'all take that protectionist crap and shove it up yer pooper chutes.

If you don't want the kids ruined by the Internet, don't let them use it unsupervised.
The world is not your babysitter.
 
2012-12-15 12:16:00 PM  
Porn can EASILY be filtered at the client end. If you have a small child (which I do), it is YOUR responsibility to keep them safe on the internet. Now I know this may be a lot to ask, but realistically this DOES involve actually paying attention to your child. A novel concept to some, but I can assure you it pays good dividends.
 
2012-12-15 12:20:41 PM  
 
2012-12-15 12:25:03 PM  

Inigo: And now for the same report with added WHARRGARBL


What I find amazing is that people believe the right would only want this, if they can set this in place then it would be easy to control the information flowing whenever they wanted.
 
2012-12-15 12:34:01 PM  
I remember the first time I saw porn. Think I was still in grade school. I turned into a ravenous tentacled sex beast that preys on Japanese school girls.
 
2012-12-15 12:43:06 PM  

nekom: Porn can EASILY be filtered at the client end. If you have a small child (which I do), it is YOUR responsibility to keep them safe on the internet. Now I know this may be a lot to ask, but realistically this DOES involve actually paying attention to your child. A novel concept to some, but I can assure you it pays good dividends.


I've been wrestling with how to deal with a growing kid in the current age of internet, and while young-age filtering and monitoring will be necessary, once they hit jr. high, I plan on going with:

Ok, I'm removing all the blockers from the internet, and while you know there's stuff I don't think is appropriate for you out there, I acknowledge that I can't stop you from getting it if you're determined to. As such, you can do whatever you please- but be aware that in this house, I will know exactly what you've looked at, and for how long.

If they manage to hack around whatever I set up, well, it'll be hard to get mad about that.

/I will also control the wifi PW
 
2012-12-15 12:43:46 PM  

nekom: Porn can EASILY be filtered at the client end. If you have a small child (which I do), it is YOUR responsibility to keep them safe on the internet. Now I know this may be a lot to ask, but realistically this DOES involve actually paying attention to your child. A novel concept to some, but I can assure you it pays good dividends.


Any recommendations?
 
2012-12-15 12:48:54 PM  
why ban porn before we have even discussed if porn is bad?
 
2012-12-15 12:53:12 PM  

Gergesa: I remember the first time I saw porn. Think I was still in grade school. I turned into a ravenous tentacled sex beast that preys on Japanese school girls.


That happened to me, too! It was so liberating the first time, my tentacles were trembling so bad as I worked up my nerve by caressing her tender flesh. Her pleas drove me wild, and finally I gained the resolve to have her, to take her. After half an hour she was begging for more, and I was all too happy to oblige.

Now she never stops calling, or coming over to visit.
 
2012-12-15 12:53:30 PM  
So I can filter my internet content so all I get is the porn?

Where do I sign up?
 
2012-12-15 12:55:11 PM  
when i was a lad the house had one wall mounted phone placed in a central location. we didn't use the phone much but when we did all could hear the conversation. parents knew what was what.

blahblahblah young lad just a few channels on the one TV set in the living room. Mom knew exactly what we did & didn't watch.

we don't need to stifle the Internet. we need to change who does and does not get to have, raise and teach children. there are few things more precious than the little ones. farking people are way overdue to wake up and stop letting all the wrong people have, raise and be around children. it's a huge responsibility most people have well proven they are not capable of. we see and suffer the end results of the wrong every farking day.
 
2012-12-15 01:00:03 PM  
I say we ban stupid people.
 
2012-12-15 01:08:48 PM  

Saberus Terras: Gergesa: I remember the first time I saw porn. Think I was still in grade school. I turned into a ravenous tentacled sex beast that preys on Japanese school girls.

That happened to me, too! It was so liberating the first time, my tentacles were trembling so bad as I worked up my nerve by caressing her tender flesh. Her pleas drove me wild, and finally I gained the resolve to have her, to take her. After half an hour she was begging for more, and I was all too happy to oblige.

Now she never stops calling, or coming over to visit.


How is your mom these days?
 
2012-12-15 01:19:19 PM  
Another 'big government' push by parents too retarded to raise their own children.
 
2012-12-15 01:22:55 PM  
You can have my porn when you pry it from my cold, sticky fingers
 
2012-12-15 01:26:11 PM  

GF named my left testicle thundercles: why ban porn before we have even discussed if porn is bad?


Definitely nsfw but not porn.
 
2012-12-15 01:36:42 PM  
I was afraid this was more people biatching about the Google thing.

Yeah, automatic filtering is wrong. There are several services that can filter for you on your own computer without telling me what I can see.
 
2012-12-15 01:39:56 PM  
Good. Let's start with romance novels, since those are far easier for kids to access.
 
2012-12-15 01:39:57 PM  

KrispyKritter: when i was a lad the house had one wall mounted phone placed in a central location. we didn't use the phone much but when we did all could hear the conversation. parents knew what was what.

blahblahblah young lad just a few channels on the one TV set in the living room. Mom knew exactly what we did & didn't watch.

we don't need to stifle the Internet. we need to change who does and does not get to have, raise and teach children. there are few things more precious than the little ones. farking people are way overdue to wake up and stop letting all the wrong people have, raise and be around children. it's a huge responsibility most people have well proven they are not capable of. we see and suffer the end results of the wrong every farking day.


As much as I like the idea that "the stupids shouldnt have the chilrens", suggesting that certain people be "allowed" to have kids is ridiculous, fascist, and irresponsibly places far too much trust and authority in the government.

The best idea I've come up with is: At age 18, you can sign a legal document that, following a chemical sterilization (no reversals there), you will be paid $10,000 tax free. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what gets spent on an unwanted kid dropped into "the system." It'll stimulate the economy, and slow the birth rate in this country. If toothless hillbillies in West Virginia (or pick whatever undesirable class of people shouldn't be having kids in your mind) can get $10,000 instantly AND they make sure they can't ever get anyone accidentally pregnant again? How is this not win-win?
 
2012-12-15 01:40:12 PM  

Saberus Terras: Gergesa: I remember the first time I saw porn. Think I was still in grade school. I turned into a ravenous tentacled sex beast that preys on Japanese school girls.

That happened to me, too! It was so liberating the first time, my tentacles were trembling so bad as I worked up my nerve by caressing her tender flesh. Her pleas drove me wild, and finally I gained the resolve to have her, to take her. After half an hour she was begging for more, and I was all too happy to oblige.

Now she never stops calling, or coming over to visit.


hottalkla.com

You can't fool me. You got nowhere with her because you don't have your own "tasty" Camaro SS!
 
2012-12-15 01:40:28 PM  
Just another American hypocrisy. Most people masturbate and look at porn, but the major of the country the expressed a religious notion (especially the conservative south) just won't talk about that despise how Nohweh says it's wrong, they still do it. It's like those dry counties that all drink but still vote to ban the sale of alcohol.
 
2012-12-15 01:42:04 PM  
indarwinsshadow:
I find it hilarious that government and big business think they somehow own the internet. It's the tech's that keep it up and running, and it's the techs that decide if it will continue. It's like owning land. You rent it for a long period, but you never really own it. A small group of dedicated hackers can take down an important chunk of the internet in a single hour if they feel the need to flex their control. What makes any government audacious enough to think they can control the intertubes?

Um... the fact that the internet as we know it requires massive, costly infrastructure that is readily regulated and controlled via the corporations who own and maintain it? I suppose a distributed wireless darknet could be run by amateurs, but it would have a mere sliver of the utility of the Internet.

But yes, internet content SHOULD be filtered at the client end, if only because no two clients agree about what is acceptable. Your "smut" may be my "sexual health resources I want my kids to have access to in their teens". My "revolting crap" might be your "Evangelical church's website" (though I would never filter that).
 
2012-12-15 01:42:20 PM  

encyclopediaplushuman: Just another American hypocrisy. Most people masturbate and look at porn, but the majority of the country that express a religious notion (especially the conservative south) just won't talk about that despite how Nohweh says it's wrong, they still do it. It's like those dry counties that all drink but still vote to ban the sale of alcohol.


Fixed errors.
 
2012-12-15 01:56:13 PM  
I'm confused. I don't want my children viewing porn on the Internet, so I don't let them.
 
2012-12-15 02:14:19 PM  

Gergesa: I remember the first time I saw porn. Think I was still in grade school. I turned into a ravenous tentacled sex beast that preys on Japanese school girls.


Yeah, I had a friend who had found his dad's stash of dirty mags, probably... 5th grade? I thought it was an interesting novelty, then quickly got back to more important things, like figuring out how to do more detailed painting on the model cars I liked to build at the time.

Far as I know, the friend grew up, had kids, a mortgage, and less hair than when he was 12.

When I worked in the ISP business, I had a knack for extracting usage patterns from traffic data - something useful when your profitability depends on it. Extremely religious neighborhoods browse porn not much more than the general population, but they do it in a binge, and are mind-numbingly predictable about it: Every weekday night, 11:15 PM, for 12 minutes. For reasons I can't fathom, they use bittorrent like mad too, way worse than college kids (who use it less than I thought - probably easier just to copy it direct from a friend or something?)

Can never be certain it wasn't the kids, but, if it was, I'm honestly surprised they overlap so heavily between drudgereport and fetish porn. Usually takes a couple decades to develop such narrowly-focused interests.
 
2012-12-15 02:15:45 PM  

WhippingBoy: I'm confused. I don't want my children viewing porn on the Internet, so I don't let them.


And you are always with them whenever they are surfing the web? I'm not saying you aren't a good parent. But any parent who thinks their kids won't access pornography sooner or later on the Internet has their head in the sand.
 
2012-12-15 02:27:19 PM  

grinding_journalist: KrispyKritter: when i was a lad the house had one wall mounted phone placed in a central location. we didn't use the phone much but when we did all could hear the conversation. parents knew what was what.

blahblahblah young lad just a few channels on the one TV set in the living room. Mom knew exactly what we did & didn't watch.

we don't need to stifle the Internet. we need to change who does and does not get to have, raise and teach children. there are few things more precious than the little ones. farking people are way overdue to wake up and stop letting all the wrong people have, raise and be around children. it's a huge responsibility most people have well proven they are not capable of. we see and suffer the end results of the wrong every farking day.

As much as I like the idea that "the stupids shouldnt have the chilrens", suggesting that certain people be "allowed" to have kids is ridiculous, fascist, and irresponsibly places far too much trust and authority in the government.

The best idea I've come up with is: At age 18, you can sign a legal document that, following a chemical sterilization (no reversals there), you will be paid $10,000 tax free. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what gets spent on an unwanted kid dropped into "the system." It'll stimulate the economy, and slow the birth rate in this country. If toothless hillbillies in West Virginia (or pick whatever undesirable class of people shouldn't be having kids in your mind) can get $10,000 instantly AND they make sure they can't ever get anyone accidentally pregnant again? How is this not win-win?


I've been saying this for years. Hell, up it to $20k. It's a pittance compared to the alternative. As a bonus, make it completely tax-free.
 
2012-12-15 02:33:07 PM  

Pincy: And you are always with them whenever they are surfing the web?


Yes. Is this a strange concept or something?
 
2012-12-15 02:33:27 PM  
Bill Clinton already tried this.
 
2012-12-15 02:37:19 PM  
When i was growing up my PC didnt have any porn blocking software on it. It was just in the living room. Whatever i was doing on my PC was visible to anyone in the house.
 
2012-12-15 02:39:42 PM  

pxlboy: As a bonus, make it completely tax-free.


I covered that :)

Glad to see I'm not the only one that thinks this way. Hell, it might even get some people who are in bad places out of them- but is far more likely to put fancy TVs and stereos in trailer homes, which is fine just fine with me so long as they aren't crapping out crotchfruit.

/full disclosure: my wife is pregnant
//I knocked her up AFTER we had the cars, the house, the yard, the dogs, jobs, and the white picket fence
///American dream? I ain't rich, but I'm livin' it.
 
2012-12-15 02:59:19 PM  

WhippingBoy: I don't want my children viewing porn on the Internet, so I don't let them.


That is not possible without curtailing everyone's freedoms.
 
2012-12-15 03:30:09 PM  

Inigo: And now for the same report with added WHARRGARBL


I'm pretty certain that the Daily Fail website would do more damage to my future kids than even the most depraved internet porn. Especially if I had a girl, the way the mail parade round celeb bikini pictures as normal and tears down stars when they're seen outside without makeup would probably do a lot of self esteem damage.
 
2012-12-15 03:32:48 PM  
Frankly, I don't have too much of a problem with my son looking at porn on the internet. He's 15, and what's available for free is certainly better than what I had on hand. The Sears catalog, scrambled HBO, and the nasty magazines my Dad had did not make for much enjoyment. As long as he steers clear of websites with spyware and shiat, I'm ok with it. He's at an age where his hormones are going crazy, and I'd rather he fap at home than getting a girl pregnant.
 
2012-12-15 04:04:21 PM  
But the government says internet providers should encourage parents to switch on parental controls.

If you're too stupid and/or lazy to use the tools you already have, the question isn't "should we inconvenience everyone else" but rather "are you competent to retain custody of your children"?
 
2012-12-15 04:08:32 PM  

MisterTweak: When I worked in the ISP business, I had a knack for extracting usage patterns from traffic data - something useful when your profitability depends on it. Extremely religious neighborhoods browse porn not much more than the general population, but they do it in a binge, and are mind-numbingly predictable about it: Every weekday night, 11:15 PM, for 12 minutes.


They're not watching the heathen-scientist-meteorologist. They rely on God for weather, not some moron in front of a green screen. This extra time becomes fap-time, as God is busy watching the forecast.
 
2012-12-15 04:30:25 PM  

MorePeasPlease: nekom: Porn can EASILY be filtered at the client end. If you have a small child (which I do), it is YOUR responsibility to keep them safe on the internet. Now I know this may be a lot to ask, but realistically this DOES involve actually paying attention to your child. A novel concept to some, but I can assure you it pays good dividends.

Any recommendations?


Ass Masters IV, definitely the best bar none porn there is.
 
2012-12-15 04:47:47 PM  
Why don't these lazy assholes learn some programming and make their own content filter, or quit bugging the living fark out of the rest of us and go buy one.
 
2012-12-15 05:07:21 PM  

WhippingBoy: Pincy: And you are always with them whenever they are surfing the web?

Yes. Is this a strange concept or something?


Well, unless we are talking about little kids who are dependent upon you for everything right now, no, you will not always be with them when they are surfing the web.
 
2012-12-15 05:49:19 PM  
Oh, wait, you mean "complete porn filtering" does NOT mean "porn only mode"?
 
2012-12-15 06:50:57 PM  
Technology has made it easier than it has ever been, in the history of mankind, for parents to observe what their children do. There is absolutely no reason to implement any sort of filtering at an ISP or internet level.

If anyone thinks the internet is dangerous enough to crap over the 1st amendment should take the time required to regulate *their own* children's internet access.

Problem solved.
 
2012-12-15 07:08:42 PM  

grinding_journalist: KrispyKritter: when i was a lad the house had one wall mounted phone placed in a central location. we didn't use the phone much but when we did all could hear the conversation. parents knew what was what.

blahblahblah young lad just a few channels on the one TV set in the living room. Mom knew exactly what we did & didn't watch.

we don't need to stifle the Internet. we need to change who does and does not get to have, raise and teach children. there are few things more precious than the little ones. farking people are way overdue to wake up and stop letting all the wrong people have, raise and be around children. it's a huge responsibility most people have well proven they are not capable of. we see and suffer the end results of the wrong every farking day.

As much as I like the idea that "the stupids shouldnt have the chilrens", suggesting that certain people be "allowed" to have kids is ridiculous, fascist, and irresponsibly places far too much trust and authority in the government.

The best idea I've come up with is: At age 18, you can sign a legal document that, following a chemical sterilization (no reversals there), you will be paid $10,000 tax free. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what gets spent on an unwanted kid dropped into "the system." It'll stimulate the economy, and slow the birth rate in this country. If toothless hillbillies in West Virginia (or pick whatever undesirable class of people shouldn't be having kids in your mind) can get $10,000 instantly AND they make sure they can't ever get anyone accidentally pregnant again? How is this not win-win?


"I My client was only 18 and naive. I didn't really understand what it meant to be permanently sterile. How could my client know then that at 26 they would find that they wanted kids and would be in a position to have them? Your honor, I demand that this court find in favor of the plaintiff in this case for the full amount of $20 million." (paraphrased, IANAL)

That's how. Make it reversible, or give a Free Foster Kid coupon with every sterilization and maybe you have something.
 
2012-12-15 07:28:50 PM  

Pincy: WhippingBoy: Pincy: And you are always with them whenever they are surfing the web?

Yes. Is this a strange concept or something?

Well, unless we are talking about little kids who are dependent upon you for everything right now, no, you will not always be with them when they are surfing the web.


I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. In any case, what my children see on the web is entirely my responsibility.
 
2012-12-15 07:39:06 PM  

pxlboy: grinding_journalist: KrispyKritter: when i was a lad the house had one wall mounted phone placed in a central location. we didn't use the phone much but when we did all could hear the conversation. parents knew what was what.

blahblahblah young lad just a few channels on the one TV set in the living room. Mom knew exactly what we did & didn't watch.

we don't need to stifle the Internet. we need to change who does and does not get to have, raise and teach children. there are few things more precious than the little ones. farking people are way overdue to wake up and stop letting all the wrong people have, raise and be around children. it's a huge responsibility most people have well proven they are not capable of. we see and suffer the end results of the wrong every farking day.

As much as I like the idea that "the stupids shouldnt have the chilrens", suggesting that certain people be "allowed" to have kids is ridiculous, fascist, and irresponsibly places far too much trust and authority in the government.

The best idea I've come up with is: At age 18, you can sign a legal document that, following a chemical sterilization (no reversals there), you will be paid $10,000 tax free. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what gets spent on an unwanted kid dropped into "the system." It'll stimulate the economy, and slow the birth rate in this country. If toothless hillbillies in West Virginia (or pick whatever undesirable class of people shouldn't be having kids in your mind) can get $10,000 instantly AND they make sure they can't ever get anyone accidentally pregnant again? How is this not win-win?

I've been saying this for years. Hell, up it to $20k. It's a pittance compared to the alternative. As a bonus, make it completely tax-free.


A better solution if I may, I think, would be to offer a lower amount and free birth control using an implant or injection method, and a higher cash bonus for perm. sterilization after 21. There's lots of kids very hard up for cash at that age who might like to be parents later. Offering them methods and incentives for birth control with sterilization later avoids that problem.

Of course you'd still have to deal with religious nuts who are against birth control, but you can't make everyone happy.

India has had such policies (studied them a few years back) but their program wasn't as successful because they allowed women to get a payment to sterilize after having their kids. Going purely off memory, the average number of children of women taking advantage of the program there was 4.

The best method for preventing too many kids? May surprise some, but female income ability. Women who are able to financially support themselves at adulthood marry later on average (and marry far less often overall) and when marriage age is delayed, the number of children drops TREMENDOUSLY. Which is why the best methods for limiting population in poorer countries and among depressed economic groups is making birth control easily available, and working to create financial freedom for women so they do not have to marry young. This ALSO works in conservative cultures. Japan is a very conservative culture and because women financially autonomous at a much higher rate, marriage rates have plummeted and their birth rate is down as well. :)
 
xcv
2012-12-15 07:58:49 PM  

Lady Indica: A better solution if I may, I think, would be to offer a lower amount and free birth control using an implant or injection method, and a higher cash bonus for perm. sterilization after 21. There's lots of kids very hard up for cash at that age who might like to be parents later. Offering them methods and incentives for birth control with sterilization later avoids that problem.


I think Planned Parenthood should just hand out a gift card for every abortion. Like a gun buy-back program, this will get fetuses off the streets and it will be effective way to reach pregnant teens that are screwing up their lives.
 
2012-12-15 08:00:00 PM  

grinding_journalist: KrispyKritter: when i was a lad the house had one wall mounted phone placed in a central location. we didn't use the phone much but when we did all could hear the conversation. parents knew what was what.

blahblahblah young lad just a few channels on the one TV set in the living room. Mom knew exactly what we did & didn't watch.

we don't need to stifle the Internet. we need to change who does and does not get to have, raise and teach children. there are few things more precious than the little ones. farking people are way overdue to wake up and stop letting all the wrong people have, raise and be around children. it's a huge responsibility most people have well proven they are not capable of. we see and suffer the end results of the wrong every farking day.

As much as I like the idea that "the stupids shouldnt have the chilrens", suggesting that certain people be "allowed" to have kids is ridiculous, fascist, and irresponsibly places far too much trust and authority in the government.

The best idea I've come up with is: At age 18, you can sign a legal document that, following a chemical sterilization (no reversals there), you will be paid $10,000 tax free. It's a drop in the bucket compared to what gets spent on an unwanted kid dropped into "the system." It'll stimulate the economy, and slow the birth rate in this country. If toothless hillbillies in West Virginia (or pick whatever undesirable class of people shouldn't be having kids in your mind) can get $10,000 instantly AND they make sure they can't ever get anyone accidentally pregnant again? How is this not win-win?


i could go with it, but i would like it to be reverse-able if you can repay your way out with interest. also, -$1000 payment each year 'til $5k.

possible downside= entire male population is sterile...
 
2012-12-15 08:17:36 PM  

WhippingBoy: Pincy: WhippingBoy: Pincy: And you are always with them whenever they are surfing the web?

Yes. Is this a strange concept or something?

Well, unless we are talking about little kids who are dependent upon you for everything right now, no, you will not always be with them when they are surfing the web.

I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. In any case, what my children see on the web is entirely my responsibility.


So when your child is at school it's your responsibility? When your child is at a friend's house? When your child is at the public library? I could go on.

You must be a young parent because apparently you haven't come to terms with the fact that you aren't going to be able to control your kids for very long. You should concentrate more on instilling good values and giving them the tools to make good decisions. That will go a lot farther than trying to be some sort of helicopter parent controlling their every move.

Good luck with that.
 
2012-12-15 09:23:23 PM  

Pincy: WhippingBoy: Pincy: WhippingBoy: Pincy: And you are always with them whenever they are surfing the web?

Yes. Is this a strange concept or something?

Well, unless we are talking about little kids who are dependent upon you for everything right now, no, you will not always be with them when they are surfing the web.

I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. In any case, what my children see on the web is entirely my responsibility.

So when your child is at school it's your responsibility? When your child is at a friend's house? When your child is at the public library? I could go on.

You must be a young parent because apparently you haven't come to terms with the fact that you aren't going to be able to control your kids for very long. You should concentrate more on instilling good values and giving them the tools to make good decisions. That will go a lot farther than trying to be some sort of helicopter parent controlling their every move.

Good luck with that.


WTF are you talking about? That's exactly what I intend to do. My point was that it's my responsibility for my children, and the world shouldn't have to change because of them.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report