Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 101939	2009-08-01 15:34:00	This proposed child porn filter...	Kindel (6640)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
797164	2009-08-02 06:17:00	who's to say they're not going to decide "terrorist" websites (this could be anything from Maori separatism to animal rights to, hell, I don't know, the Save The Gay Whales Trust). Might, might, might.... How about complaining about them when they happen, instead of assuming all this. I think it's a good idea blocking evil kiddie porn sites. Why are you so upset about it?	pctek (84)
797165	2009-08-02 06:27:00	Flag bloggin the sites, just hang the sick ****s viewin it	hueybot3000 (3646)
797166	2009-08-02 06:46:00	Might, might, might.... How about complaining about them when they happen, instead of assuming all this. I think it's a good idea blocking evil kiddie porn sites. Why are you so upset about it? I have to side with Kindel here - as much as I detest child pornographers. If you complain AFTER something happens, it's usually a hell of a lot more difficult to reverse it (example: Sue Bradford's well-intentioned, but poorly thought through, anti-smacking legislation), especially when you are talking about a government department. Look at the fuss and cost we are facing for that pile of crap!!) Most people work on the "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" principle... Once it's a done deal, I can see all sorts of objections being raised by various (self-)interest groups to prevent the Save The Gay Whales Trust site (or similar - in other words, sites that should never have been there in the first place) being taken off The List... "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes (en.wikipedia.org)??" Slippery slope.....:groan:	johcar (6283)
797167	2009-08-02 07:22:00	The slippery slope is the concern - once the technology is in place, it is easy for the government to "accidentally" start blocking other websites. The best way is to simply prosecute those who view this material - it's absolutely disgusting that anyone would look at that sort of stuff. The systems are already in place to identify offenders.	somebody (208)
797168	2009-08-02 21:45:00	What needs to happen is like what becoming a regular theme in some movies of late, where there is a team of geeks the track and trace KP posters/suppliers and send a death sqaud after them. Noone would care about the death of them kiddie porn freaks. So lets just kill them. Honest.	rob_on_guitar (4196)
797169	2009-08-03 03:18:00	Nah - - Susie Smack would claim you are discriminating against them on the basis of occupation.	R2x1 (4628)
797170	2009-08-03 03:55:00	I also have concerns about who gets to choose what is and isn't blocked and how they decide this. Of course if like they say, they are only blocking child porn and nothing else then I guess that is OK. But again, once this program is in place, adding more websites to the blocked list would be very easy I remember the program they used at school, you couldn't search google images for "Blue screen of death" but you could search google normally for "I want to be a terrorist and make bombs to blow up the school" (WTF!?!?! - and no, I am not joking) "Better a fence at the top of a cliff then an ambulance at the bottom" I agree, it always makes more sense to address the root cause of a problem than to patch up the results of it. But what to do here? Arrest the people who run the sites and those who look at them? Sounds like a good idea - maybe. Even that would have its downsides. (remember many people have been threatened by the MAFIAA for piracy that never happened because someone forged their IP or broke into their WiFi) In any case just blocking this stuff (or anything) never stops it. Look at the prohibition of alcohol in America, that didn't work either. Personally I would rather use programs on my own computer to block sites that I don't want (which I do) Perhaps this big blocklist could be "open source" ? Noone would care about the death of them kiddie porn freaks. So lets just kill them. Honest. I wouldn't care either but when you're talking about the death penalty you have to be sure that you've got the right person. And don't forget that the death penalty makes people like this cover their tracks by any means necessary so they don't get caught	Agent_24 (57)
797171	2009-08-03 04:17:00	Has anyone here ever happened across what would be termed child porn while browsing the internet? I never have, so whose going to report it?, people activly searching for child porn? just doesn't add up to me.	Metla (12)
797172	2009-08-03 04:41:00	Perhaps this big blocklist could be "open source" ? Which would make it a Porn Shopping List.... Has anyone here ever happened across what would be termed child porn while browsing the internet ? I never have, so whose going to report it ? , people activly searching for child porn ? just doesn't add up to me. Ditto. And a well-intentioned anti child porn organisation is pushing a plugin for Firefox (http://www.childalert.co.nz/) to report sites.... :groan:	johcar (6283)
797173	2009-08-03 10:18:00	Has anyone here ever happened across what would be termed child porn while browsing the internet? I never have, so whose going to report it?, people activly searching for child porn? just doesn't add up to me. That's a good point actually, though I use Opera which as a built-in adblocker, I used the internet for years before that in the days of IE before I knew any better, and still never came across anything like child porn. Ditto. And a well-intentioned anti child porn organisation is pushing a plugin for Firefox (http://www.childalert.co.nz/) to report sites.... :groan: Saw this on the news, the DIA review the reported sites. I can imagine it just being flooded with false reports and cancelled. Got a trouoblesome ex-partner you don't like? Why not report his or her site as child porn! etc. Or just people doing it for the hell of it. Sure to be a high-school computer lab hit.	Kindel (6640)
1 2 3 4 5