5 ms·

A bigger question is why does the police spend time looking for pornography? What type of society is the UK developing into?

ry_ry 9y ago
Isn't this specifically intended to identify images of child abuse though, rather than rifle through the average users pornhub cache?
- beaconstudios 9y ago
  Yes, but we are in fact getting a nation wide porn filter in the near future.
  - shocks 9y ago
    Are we? Source?
    - have_faith 9y ago
      I believe they are referring to the opt-out default filter isp's have been enabling. Not sure on the laws surrounding it.
      - edjw 9y ago
        No laws requiring ISPs to apply filters. It's just a voluntary agreement between ISPs and the Government. The Digital Economy Act 2017 has provisions in it to allow ISPs to apply default filters if subscribers agree to them in terms of service. There are requirements in the DEA 2017 for 'adult' websites to verify the age of people who visit the site with the threat of their website being blocked if they don't comply. Check openrightsgroup.org for more on this
        noir_lord 9y ago
        I think they just want to introduce a generation of teenages to VPN's because any sane person can see how this is going to go, that's assuming any site outside the UK even bothers to comply.
        merb 9y ago
        > to verify the age of people which is just silly. because they only need to ask for your age.
        nly 9y ago
        You're missing one important detail: the reason the agreement is 'voluntary' is that the Government threatened to force ISPs to do it through law if they didn't volunteer.
        lostlogin 9y ago
        Voluntold.
        pjc50 9y ago
        I do wonder how that's going to pan out. Are they going to block reddit, imgur, 4chan, and tumblr?
beaconstudios 9y ago
Not a great one, but that's not new. We've been getting incrementally more draconian surveillance and laws for some time.
zeristor 9y ago
This is from 20 years ago, the idea was to scan a selection of laptops going through border control on Eurostar, although it only worked on PCs: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/150465.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/150465.stm
kleiba 9y ago
No, this was for after work.
DanBC 9y ago
> The police force already leans on AI to help flag incriminating content on seized electronic devices, This is people who're being investigated for possessing images of child sexual abuse. This might be because they've accessed a website known to distribute such images; or they've created imags of a child which were found. Police need to search all the devices that person owns in order to find all the images. They need to do this to protect children who are still being abused; to detect unknown abusers; to add images to the various IWF etc lists; and to ensure the correct prosecution and sentencing approach is taken.
walshemj 9y ago
So they can bully those who they don't like the disgraced bob quick's (senior counterterrorist cop who had to resign for security breaches) vendetta against a tory MP is one case.
- DanBC 9y ago
  The MP was part of a government who made a lot of moral comment about pornography. He accessed extreme pornography at work. Police needed to investigate because it was so extreme it might have been illegal. He then lied about what the police had done. That's not a vendetta, that's holding people to account.
  - yetanother1980 9y ago
    This post is factually inaccurate and defamatory. The computer was searched as part of a separate investigation (into leaks) which found nothing. The pornography was not extreme.
    - DanBC 9y ago
      The pornography was extreme. It was found a few weeks before laws were introduced that made it unlawful. This claim has been made many times, in print, and Green has denied it but not used UK defamation law to prevent the claims being made or to force corrections to be printed.
      - jotm 9y ago
        What is extreme porn? I'm really skeptical of politicians that want to ban "extreme pornography" on the Internet yet let actual prostitution just kind of, slide under the radar. Surprisingly not many Brits are aware that you can get a couple of high end hookers who will do anything for a few hundred quid per hour, and it's legal. Lots of these "escorts" are barely legal age, as well. Maybe it's a ploy to get people off porn and into actual sex lol.
        deleted 9y ago
dazc 9y ago
We (the UK) recently experienced a scandal where a celebrity was allegedly a prolific paedophile. After his death it transpired that numerous incidents had been reported and covered up by the police and the BBC (his main employer). So now, guess what, the same police and BBC have transformed to be holier than thou organisations free to cast judgement on anyone they don't like because this will absolve them of any guilt regarding past failures (obviously).

ry_ry 9y ago

Isn't this specifically intended to identify images of child abuse though, rather than rifle through the average users pornhub cache?

beaconstudios 9y ago
Yes, but we are in fact getting a nation wide porn filter in the near future.
- shocks 9y ago
  Are we? Source?
  - have_faith 9y ago
    I believe they are referring to the opt-out default filter isp's have been enabling. Not sure on the laws surrounding it.
    - edjw 9y ago
      No laws requiring ISPs to apply filters. It's just a voluntary agreement between ISPs and the Government. The Digital Economy Act 2017 has provisions in it to allow ISPs to apply default filters if subscribers agree to them in terms of service. There are requirements in the DEA 2017 for 'adult' websites to verify the age of people who visit the site with the threat of their website being blocked if they don't comply. Check openrightsgroup.org for more on this
      - noir_lord 9y ago
        I think they just want to introduce a generation of teenages to VPN's because any sane person can see how this is going to go, that's assuming any site outside the UK even bothers to comply.
      - merb 9y ago
        > to verify the age of people which is just silly. because they only need to ask for your age.
      - nly 9y ago
        You're missing one important detail: the reason the agreement is 'voluntary' is that the Government threatened to force ISPs to do it through law if they didn't volunteer.
        lostlogin 9y ago
        Voluntold.
      - pjc50 9y ago
        I do wonder how that's going to pan out. Are they going to block reddit, imgur, 4chan, and tumblr?

beaconstudios 9y ago

Not a great one, but that's not new. We've been getting incrementally more draconian surveillance and laws for some time.

zeristor 9y ago

This is from 20 years ago, the idea was to scan a selection of laptops going through border control on Eurostar, although it only worked on PCs: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/150465.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/150465.stm

kleiba 9y ago

No, this was for after work.

DanBC 9y ago

> The police force already leans on AI to help flag incriminating content on seized electronic devices, This is people who're being investigated for possessing images of child sexual abuse. This might be because they've accessed a website known to distribute such images; or they've created imags of a child which were found. Police need to search all the devices that person owns in order to find all the images. They need to do this to protect children who are still being abused; to detect unknown abusers; to add images to the various IWF etc lists; and to ensure the correct prosecution and sentencing approach is taken.

walshemj 9y ago

So they can bully those who they don't like the disgraced bob quick's (senior counterterrorist cop who had to resign for security breaches) vendetta against a tory MP is one case.

DanBC 9y ago
The MP was part of a government who made a lot of moral comment about pornography. He accessed extreme pornography at work. Police needed to investigate because it was so extreme it might have been illegal. He then lied about what the police had done. That's not a vendetta, that's holding people to account.
- yetanother1980 9y ago
  This post is factually inaccurate and defamatory. The computer was searched as part of a separate investigation (into leaks) which found nothing. The pornography was not extreme.
  - DanBC 9y ago
    The pornography was extreme. It was found a few weeks before laws were introduced that made it unlawful. This claim has been made many times, in print, and Green has denied it but not used UK defamation law to prevent the claims being made or to force corrections to be printed.
    - jotm 9y ago
      What is extreme porn? I'm really skeptical of politicians that want to ban "extreme pornography" on the Internet yet let actual prostitution just kind of, slide under the radar. Surprisingly not many Brits are aware that you can get a couple of high end hookers who will do anything for a few hundred quid per hour, and it's legal. Lots of these "escorts" are barely legal age, as well. Maybe it's a ploy to get people off porn and into actual sex lol.
      - deleted 9y ago

dazc 9y ago

We (the UK) recently experienced a scandal where a celebrity was allegedly a prolific paedophile. After his death it transpired that numerous incidents had been reported and covered up by the police and the BBC (his main employer). So now, guess what, the same police and BBC have transformed to be holier than thou organisations free to cast judgement on anyone they don't like because this will absolve them of any guilt regarding past failures (obviously).