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.

(Daily Mail)   "Blocks on internet will begin next year, and 20 million users will have to make a choice whether or not they want access to such filth." And if you don't want to read this article, on the sidebar there are bikini and Victoria's Secret models   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 120
    More: Ironic, TalkTalk, Virgin Media, computer skills, hardworking families, mr cameron, nomads, Victoria's Secret, parental controls  
•       •       •

12748 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Nov 2013 at 12:57 PM (40 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-16 11:23:19 AM
But not in America, right?
 
2013-11-16 11:25:10 AM
I hope people inclined to post Daily Fail links here remember that this scumbag rag forcefully advocated for this censorship program.  As the Brits would say, sod off, you farking wankers.
 
2013-11-16 11:39:10 AM

jake_lex: I hope people inclined to post Daily Fail links here remember that this scumbag rag forcefully advocated for this censorship program.  As the Brits would say, sod off, you farking wankers.


If Daily Mail readers cared about scumbaggery there would be no Daily Mail readers.
 
2013-11-16 11:55:31 AM
Or, if I had kids, I could just block them myself.
 
2013-11-16 12:06:04 PM
i105.photobucket.com
What blocks on the internet might look like.
 
2013-11-16 12:51:17 PM
Only an adult will be able to change the filter settings ...
i.chzbgr.com
 
2013-11-16 12:58:49 PM
Oh yes, because I'm sure that will totally work.

/sarcasm off
 
2013-11-16 12:59:43 PM
Because prohibition has always worked so well.
 
2013-11-16 01:00:36 PM

OregonVet: Only an adult will be able to change the filter settings ...
[i.chzbgr.com image 500x333]


Parents have historically always been more tech savvy than their teenage kids. Especially when those teens have no real drive to circumvent their parents' attempts at control against something that's as trivial to teens as porn. I think it's fail safe.
 
2013-11-16 01:00:45 PM
In 20 years, there will be entire new genres of porn, some of which we haven't even thought up yet. I'm excited.
 
2013-11-16 01:01:01 PM
They want it blocked for YOU.
That's why you must opt IN.
 
2013-11-16 01:02:19 PM
I hope Virgin decides not to follow suit just for the potential headlines
 
2013-11-16 01:04:01 PM
Well at least they're %100 objective about adult entertainment, not labeling it "filth" or anything ...

/ seriously, I hope everyone at the fail gets leukemia
 
2013-11-16 01:08:26 PM
This sounds like it's all end user stuff; not actual blocks on the Internet. I'm not sure it would be possible to control all of that traffic server side; unless you got all of the pron sites to agree to go through some sort of regulatory server or something. Still, you'd need to create accounts, passwords, ect; before it would work. Then, you'd have to verify the user's identity.

/ a lot of consternation; and I'd bet $5 that it wouldn't take more than 24 hours for the first account to be subverted by horny teens
 
2013-11-16 01:09:14 PM
You will also be required to post a large sign in front of your house, apartment and work place:


WARNING:


(YOUR NAME, AGE, SEX, PICTURE)


A PORN WATCHING PERVERT LIVES/WORKS HERE!!!


(list of red flagged sites and google searches viewed)

 
2013-11-16 01:10:12 PM
They said something in TFA about how 1/3 of kids under 10 had seen some internet porn, and it makes me think back to my pre-internet childhood...I'm fairly sure nearly 100% of the boys I ran around with had seen a skin mag by age 10. So, same stuff, different technology.
 
2013-11-16 01:10:31 PM
In related news, porn traffic on bittorrent sites up 3,000%
 
2013-11-16 01:10:49 PM
Wow the UK really likes it governanny, sadly the US is full speed ahead to that type of intrusive government thanks to democrats and the sheeple that keep giving them more power to fark us.
 
2013-11-16 01:10:49 PM

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: In 20 years, there will be entire new genres of porn, some of which we haven't even thought up yet. I'm excited.


Flying car bangbus.
 
2013-11-16 01:11:00 PM
At least Fark scrubbed all the Boobies links....

http://www.foobies.com/
 
2013-11-16 01:11:54 PM
I don't trust a government to understand what porn is.
 
2013-11-16 01:12:37 PM
i915.photobucket.com
 
2013-11-16 01:17:04 PM
Can we tell the filter exactly which filth we want to access? It would make internet searching a lot more efficient if I could opt out of "old fattie porn" and the like.
 
2013-11-16 01:18:14 PM
Since Britain has a conservative government, and conservatives are publicly against sex unless it is to make babies (but not privately, of course, the rules against "fornication" and "erotic literature" are only for the thoroughly stupid suckers that vote for them) this can be expected.

"Censorship is telling an adult he can't have steak because a baby can't chew it." - Mark Twain.

And the Brits had the nerve to criticize the US for re-electing Bush II.
 
2013-11-16 01:18:56 PM
bringbackinternetporn.co.uk
 
2013-11-16 01:19:11 PM

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: In 20 years, there will be entire new genres of porn, some of which we haven't even thought up yet. I'm excited.


Double amputee lesbians, with a penchant for sodomy, rum and the lash?
 
2013-11-16 01:20:27 PM
"And if you don't want to read this article, on the sidebar there are bikini and Victoria's Secret models"

There was a side boob too but it was kinda mournful
 
2013-11-16 01:20:30 PM
The other thing those 4 companies have in common? they are not just ISPs, they also make money selling TV and movies to people.

I suspect this has nothing to do with blocking porn for them and everything to do with the fact that they can stop people getting warez.
 
2013-11-16 01:22:42 PM
bikini and Victoria's secret models subby? In the linked article I'm getting full on hardcore porn gifs from Brazzers in the sidebar.

Why would I ever block that?
 
2013-11-16 01:23:55 PM

FatherDale: I don't trust a government to understand what porn is.


s2.postimg.org

Something like this, I'd imagine.
 
2013-11-16 01:25:25 PM

Day_Old_Dutchie: Since Britain has a conservative government, and conservatives are publicly against sex unless it is to make babies (but not privately, of course, the rules against "fornication" and "erotic literature" are only for the thoroughly stupid suckers that vote for them) this can be expected.

"Censorship is telling an adult he can't have steak because a baby can't chew it." - Mark Twain.

And the Brits had the nerve to criticize the US for re-electing Bush II.


We didn't re-elect these clowns. No party had a majority after the last election and the Conservatives formed a coalition government with the Liberal Democrat party (supposedly left-wing) who completely sold-out their voter base for a sniff of power. They've managed to shut down opposition to this internet filtering plan by cynically entangling the concepts of child pornography and children viewing pornography to poison the well.
 
2013-11-16 01:26:16 PM
About 1/3 of the sidebar images/stories would be unavailable in a porn banned world.
/where porn is defined by some government authority.
 
2013-11-16 01:26:45 PM

iheartscotch: Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: In 20 years, there will be entire new genres of porn, some of which we haven't even thought up yet. I'm excited.

Double amputee lesbians, with a penchant for sodomy, rum and the lash?


www.brooklynvegan.com

/It was the least gross and offensive pic I could find.
 
2013-11-16 01:28:40 PM
Hey, you, Whitehouse Daily Fail, ha-ha, charade you are.
 
2013-11-16 01:31:01 PM
Great idea, make that a setting at the ISP.  I guess no one thought about the political value of knowing which way some public figure has that bit flipped.  Also, we're going to put their names in the paper like gun owners too, right?
 
2013-11-16 01:33:13 PM

farker99: About 1/3 of the sidebar images/stories would be unavailable in a porn banned world.
/where porn is defined by some government authority.


Part of the problem with this plan is that porn isn't defined by a government authority. Charities (read: not accountable to voters) like the Internet Watch Foundation will be the people deciding what is or is not pornography.
 
2013-11-16 01:35:29 PM

Mugato: But not in America, right?


Certainly not. We're the ones who filled up the Internet with porn in the first place.
 
2013-11-16 01:35:57 PM
This isn't quite censorship, since you can still choose to access it. This is closer to making magazine stands keep the skin mags behind the counter where they can't be seen unless requested.

I'd love it if government gave me the "opt in" option on a lot of things that are currently banned entirely, like being able to buy incandescent light bulbs, for example.
 
2013-11-16 01:36:43 PM
Somewhere between grown adults making personal choices that aren't detrimental to others and dragging every technology we create straight to the gutter likes a useful balance.  And this doesn't seem to be it.
 
2013-11-16 01:37:15 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: Hey, you, Whitehouse Daily Fail, ha-ha, charade you are.


Exactly... The Daily Mail saying smithing is sleaze is like the pot calling the kettle black.
 
2013-11-16 01:38:39 PM
something to note:these 4 ISPs also sell their own content. You think this is really about porn and not about stopping people reaching "sites that may host malware" (i.e. warez sites)?

and apparantly working around it is as simple as changing DNS settings to say, Google DNS. Which is cool as the anti-porn nutters now think it's all safe again, and the rest of us can carry on with what we want.
 
2013-11-16 01:39:45 PM
For every porn video you don't watch,

I'm going to watch three.
 
2013-11-16 01:39:47 PM

jjorsett: I'd love it if government gave me the "opt in" option on a lot of things that are currently banned entirely.


Hmm...I can't offhand think of anything I want to do that I can't do.
 
2013-11-16 01:40:43 PM
TFA: Six in ten parents say they are worried or very worried about their sons and daughters seeing violent and sexual material on the web.

This is a terrible way to justify a plan like this - parents are constantly worried about thier kids. If you asked parents if they were worried about their children choking to death on their socks then 6 out of 10 would say yes.

They are completely irrational whenever the subject of their children comes up in a debate. You hear it from them all the time: "If you've never had children you can't possibly understand!". i.e., "You don't share my source of irrationality on this issue!"
 
2013-11-16 01:41:21 PM
Can you still google for filth in UK?
 
2013-11-16 01:41:40 PM

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: You will also be required to post a large sign in front of your house, apartment and work place:


WARNING:
(YOUR NAME, AGE, SEX, PICTURE)
A PORN WATCHING PERVERT LIVES/WORKS HERE!!!
(list of red flagged sites and google searches viewed)


Signs, Signs, Everywhere there's signs.
Blocking out the scenery. Breaking my mind.
 
2013-11-16 01:42:17 PM

jake_lex: I hope people inclined to post Daily Fail links here remember that this scumbag rag forcefully advocated for this censorship program.  As the Brits would say, sod off, you farking wankers.


how is it censorship if the end users gets to choose to turn it on or off
 
2013-11-16 01:43:23 PM
Strange, I've heard the Internet is really great for porn though!

/And biatching about movies
 
2013-11-16 01:46:54 PM

abiigdog: Wow the UK really likes it governanny, sadly the US is full speed ahead to that type of intrusive government thanks to democrats and the sheeple that keep giving them more power to fark us.


Not sure if trolling, but you're only half right. Both parties having been going strong for this sort of thing for many many decades.
 
2013-11-16 01:47:12 PM

Mugato: OregonVet: Only an adult will be able to change the filter settings ...
[i.chzbgr.com image 500x333]

Parents have historically always been more tech savvy than their teenage kids. Especially when those teens have no real drive to circumvent their parents' attempts at control against something that's as trivial to teens as porn. I think it's fail safe.


Where there's a will, there's a way.

www.circuitbentvideo.com
 
Displayed 50 of 120 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report