$15.00
$5.00
$20.00
Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
6 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: UK keeps on censoring its internet rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chengkai Yang
United States
Cupertino
California
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...

Seems like a cheap method of getting infrastructure and means in place for general content restriction. I mean it's not that hard once in place to start flagging other things when you got the hardware/software/tech staff in place. I wonder how long before you have to sign in with your citizen ID to surf the web on a government search provider. At the rate your going I don't think it warrants green text.

On a side note I'm interested on how you would ban specific videos on say Pornhub to a country. I'd be impressed if there were actual filters and means for specific videos but at that point we would have Cortana and not the failed teenage twitter bot. Plus any VPN should be able to circumvent this, so we come back to censorship and spying on people. I guess this is what you get when your elected leaders step down and someone no one voted falls into the top.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andy Leighton
England
Peterborough
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...

Seems like a cheap method of getting infrastructure and means in place for general content restriction. I mean it's not that hard once in place to start flagging other things when you got the hardware/software/tech staff in place. I wonder how long before you have to sign in with your citizen ID to surf the web on a government search provider. At the rate your going I don't think it warrants green text.

On a side note I'm interested on how you would ban specific videos on say Pornhub to a country. I'd be impressed if there were actual filters and means for specific videos but at that point we would have Cortana and not the failed teenage twitter bot. Plus any VPN should be able to circumvent this, so we come back to censorship and spying on people. I guess this is what you get when your elected leaders step down and someone no one voted falls into the top.


One of the problems is that there are people in the government who have a very conservative view wrt porn (among other things). They also don't have the first idea about how the net works. In the past the EU has kinda saved us - it voted through legislation that required all internet providers to treat online traffic "without discrimination" (with exceptions for stuff like child pornography and some other illegal stuff). It isn't just May but Cameron before her who had absolutely no fucking idea and seemingly wants a British equivalent of the great firewall of china (but only blocking the "bad stuff" in their eyes - even though most of the porn they want to ban depicts acts which are quite legal here).

I am a member of the Open Rights Group who try and inform MPs, the media and the public about (and campaigns against) such measures.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Finch
United Kingdom
BERKSHIRE
flag msg tools
Rule changes for tonight's game:-
mbmbmbmbmb
andyl wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...

Seems like a cheap method of getting infrastructure and means in place for general content restriction. I mean it's not that hard once in place to start flagging other things when you got the hardware/software/tech staff in place. I wonder how long before you have to sign in with your citizen ID to surf the web on a government search provider. At the rate your going I don't think it warrants green text.

On a side note I'm interested on how you would ban specific videos on say Pornhub to a country. I'd be impressed if there were actual filters and means for specific videos but at that point we would have Cortana and not the failed teenage twitter bot. Plus any VPN should be able to circumvent this, so we come back to censorship and spying on people. I guess this is what you get when your elected leaders step down and someone no one voted falls into the top.


One of the problems is that there are people in the government who have a very conservative view wrt porn (among other things). They also don't have the first idea about how the net works. In the past the EU has kinda saved us - it voted through legislation that required all internet providers to treat online traffic "without discrimination" (with exceptions for stuff like child pornography and some other illegal stuff). It isn't just May but Cameron before her who had absolutely no fucking idea and seemingly wants a British equivalent of the great firewall of china (but only blocking the "bad stuff" in their eyes - even though most of the porn they want to ban depicts acts which are quite legal here).

I am a member of the Open Rights Group who try and inform MPs, the media and the public about (and campaigns against) such measures.


This. I think it's clear that some content is objectively in need of blocking and provably illegal, but these measures just stink of politically expedient nanny-stateness and, per the OP, a fairly wispy smoke screen for surveillance escalation.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Edgar Forbis
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
Some content should obviously be blocked as some is illegal but they need a way to filter just those. They can't fix anything by blocking all porn sites like https://xhamster.com or https://www.webcamchamps.com and just annoy everyone that enjoy their content. It is a huge pile of work but that is why they have an army of men employed at the IT department.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mutton Chops
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
andyl wrote:
draxx01 wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/new...

Seems like a cheap method of getting infrastructure and means in place for general content restriction. I mean it's not that hard once in place to start flagging other things when you got the hardware/software/tech staff in place. I wonder how long before you have to sign in with your citizen ID to surf the web on a government search provider. At the rate your going I don't think it warrants green text.

On a side note I'm interested on how you would ban specific videos on say Pornhub to a country. I'd be impressed if there were actual filters and means for specific videos but at that point we would have Cortana and not the failed teenage twitter bot. Plus any VPN should be able to circumvent this, so we come back to censorship and spying on people. I guess this is what you get when your elected leaders step down and someone no one voted falls into the top.


One of the problems is that there are people in the government who have a very conservative view wrt porn (among other things). They also don't have the first idea about how the net works. In the past the EU has kinda saved us - it voted through legislation that required all internet providers to treat online traffic "without discrimination" (with exceptions for stuff like child pornography and some other illegal stuff). It isn't just May but Cameron before her who had absolutely no fucking idea and seemingly wants a British equivalent of the great firewall of china (but only blocking the "bad stuff" in their eyes - even though most of the porn they want to ban depicts acts which are quite legal here).

I am a member of the Open Rights Group who try and inform MPs, the media and the public about (and campaigns against) such measures.


Even for a comparatively small internetwork with a well-defined perimeter and clear-cut, sanction-supported AUP for the users within it, it's actually very expensive, time consuming and error prone to put in place the kind of thing they're talking about. I've had rather depressing conversations with people in very senior decision-making roles about what can and can't be done in terms of traffic filtering without spending the GDP of a small country on it. If one tries to explain the situation at high level, the conversation often devolves into the person concerned effectively repeating "But it must be possible" in various ways over and over again. If one then gets frustrated and tries to go low-level to explain technically why it can't be done, they either simply glaze over and can't take it in, or appear to listen, then accuse one of "blinding me with science" or "trying to obscure the facts with details" Politicians have never liked to have experts confounding their populist initiatives with inconvenient facts, but the recent rise of anti-factualism here and in the US is going to make combatting this kind of nonsense all the more difficult.

I wonder who will get the job of maintaining the white-list, so the country can still do business properly? I think I've said here before that any attempt at wholesale filtering will last precisely as long as the first significant revenue loss for a major British company occasioned by its application.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Junior McSpiffy
United States
Riverton
Utah
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
EdgarForbis wrote:
Some content should obviously be blocked as some is illegal but they need a way to filter just those. They can't fix anything by blocking all porn sites like https://xhamster.com or https://www.webcamchamps.com and just annoy everyone that enjoy their content. It is a huge pile of work but that is why they have an army of men employed at the IT department.


**grabs a pen and starts scribbling furiously** What other websites could they not be able to fix things by blocking? You know... for thoroughness sake?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.