5 ms·

I totally get all the snarky comments and dislike for the porn filter but as a father of a 11-year-old girl who surfs the web I am 100% behind the idea of regul

I totally get all the snarky comments and dislike for the porn filter but as a father of a 11-year-old girl who surfs the web I am 100% behind the idea of regulating material that is not suitable for kids. The current filter may or may not work but the idea is sound and I'd like to think that the politicians who are putting the filter into place are doing so for the right reasons, i.e. to protect innocent eyes.

NAFV_P 13y ago
> I totally get all the snarky comments and dislike for the porn filter but as a father of a 11-year-old girl who surfs the web I am 100% behind the idea of regulating material that is not suitable for kids. Does the filter protect children from "cyberbullying"?
- Adirael 13y ago
  It protects them from learning about sex. That will work wonders for teen pregnancy rates.
  - NAFV_P 13y ago
    Back in my day the best place to learn about sex was the school canteen.
scott_karana 13y ago
Okay, so install a filter yourself. Alternatively, opt IN to a filter. Why impose your choice as the default on an entire nation?
sillysaurus2 13y ago
She's probably not as innocent as you'd like to believe, and she's probably tougher than you give her credit for. She also has a basic human right to access information. Please try to see that restricting information when someone is young deforms their worldview for the rest of their life. We as parents hope that the deformation is a positive one, but this isn't necessarily so. We're biased into thinking we've made positive choices for our children regardless of any evidence to the contrary. The bias is hardwired, and unless we take conscious steps to evaluate whether our behavior makes sense then it's easy to get swept up in a "think of the children" argument.
- rhubarbcustard 13y ago
  Totally agree with you but I'm sure you'd agree that watching porn is not something that a 11-year-old should be doing? She is more or less free to browse what she wants, she reads Wikipedia articles, reads the news etc etc but I can't see how viewing porn would be good for her worldview?
  - BlackDeath3 13y ago
    >watching porn is not something that a 11-year-old should be doing Why? Note I'm truly not trying to start a fight here, but I do try to stay open-minded and question assumptions. To me, this: >I can't see how viewing porn would be good for her worldview is not only not terribly convincing, it's also not a reason to censor something.
  - prawks 13y ago
    I think children's worldview is largely determined by how their parents teach them (usually indirectly) how to internalize information they absorb and encounters they have. What would your 11-year-old do if she saw porn? How would she think about it? How would it affect her worldview? Would it really be negative? How would you have reacted at that age? Would it have changed your worldview in a negative way? What kinds of information does she not have access to that she should? When should she be sexually educated? Just some things to think about.
  - Crito 13y ago
    If she is actively seeking it out, there really are no technical solutions that you can use to stop her (short of taking all electronics from her). She'll find a way around any filter. If that is the sort of situation that you're in, sitting down with her and having a talk is really the only workable solution. If the concern is accidentally viewing porn... well, I have a few thoughts on that: 1) How often does that actually happen? My office does not have content filters on the internet, yet I have never accidentally viewed porn at work. I can't actually remember the last time I accidentally viewed porn at work. I strongly suspect that 95% of the "accident" cases are excuses that people make when they get caught. 2) If the concern is popups and she won't stop going to shady sites that have porn popups, use adblock. Problem solved. Also, tell her not to go to those sites, before you get the UK equivalent of a DMCA notice from your ISP... 3) Accidentally viewing a few naked people in popups is probably not going to damage her worldview. Would it be good for it? No. But I don't think it will cause any damage either.
SixSigma 13y ago
Shouldn't you be paying for a cleanfeed connection for your home broadband then instead of having the govt. back hand it onto everyone?
a-priori 13y ago
I get that concern, and it's your prerogative as the parent to limit what your daughter can access on the Internet. What I don't get is delegating this to the government rather than using something that's under your control.
vfclists 13y ago
If you don't want your children to watch porn you are supposed to subscribe to a service which keeps lists of websites which offer or are believed to offer porn and block them in your router, without your ISP or the government's involvement. These services have existed for a long time, but it looks like the governments want to get involved for surveillance purposes. It is your router which is supposed to be doing that, not your ISP. What you are essentially doing is giving the government and the ISP an excuse to monitor the your interests and communications and those of your family, which they would in any case, only in this instance you have given them your explicit permission.
MichaelGG 13y ago
I've got a daughters aged 7 and 5. They've had unfettered connectivity all their lives. I'm far more concerned about them finding crap material that "suitable" for kids, such as most of Netflix's kids category. I'm much more worried that they're drawn into watching crappy cartoons or playing dumb Flash games. Companies invading their privacy is far more a threat than some random porn site injecting an ad somewhere. My 5-yr-old says she's looking forward to playing Go online with her own account. I'm not in the slightest bit worried that she's at risk by being in the chatrooms on KGS. Both girls like Reddit (/r/roomporn and /r/aww and stuff like that). My kids don't need the government protecting their innocent eyes. They need intelligence on how to understand what they're doing, and the drive to inquire and be open about things bothering them. It's like parents that worry about their kids going somewhere because of "pedophiles", yet have no problems driving them many miles each day, which is absolutely a higher risk to their safety. These parents are not acting rationally, they are not improving safety, they just feel like they're doing something. What's the real threat model that I'm trying to prevent as a parent? Kids viewing porn? Really? As my kids age, if they decide they want to start watching porn, I hope we're able to speak intelligently about it. Sexual maturity can be difficult for people, and porn is only one small aspect of the whole thing. So what's the real threat? People attacking them? But retarded URL filters won't help. And teaching them general savvy and critical thinking will help more against that threat, and in life in general. I'm not sure what threat a stupid filter is supposed to address. In 3 decades, I haven't accidentally run into any life-scaring materials on the Internet (or BBSes), and if I actively wanted to find something, I'd find it regardless of restrictions. The only filters I've wished for is to remove "dumb" content, but that's just my failing as a parent to get my children engaged with more intelligent stuff.
wvenable 13y ago
You should be regulating that material and there are many ways of doing it from limiting access to the computer to when you are physically present to all kinds of software solutions. There is no reason for the government to be involved nor should they be determining what is blocked. You should be doing that.
- IanCal 13y ago
  > There is no reason for the government to be involved They aren't. > nor should they be determining what is blocked They aren't. > You should be doing that He is. The government has pushed the ISPs to offer a software filter for free to all customers. When signing up you get the choice to either have or not have it. BT for example have two buttons, one for "yes please, free filter thanks" and one for "nope, I'll handle this". It can also be turned off at any time by the account holder.
k-mcgrady 13y ago
I can understand why you feel that way - but how about taking responsibility and regulating your daughter's use of the internet? It doesn't seem that difficult to me. Monitor her browsing on the home computer (an 11 year old doesn't need their own private PC); if she has a smartphone disable the browser and app store (same applies on a tablet) and take advantage of the parental controls. This is probably also going to be a lot more reliable than trusting our incompetent government to do a good job.
JackpotDen 13y ago
Then buy a netfilter. They're about £20.

NAFV_P 13y ago

> I totally get all the snarky comments and dislike for the porn filter but as a father of a 11-year-old girl who surfs the web I am 100% behind the idea of regulating material that is not suitable for kids. Does the filter protect children from "cyberbullying"?

Adirael 13y ago
It protects them from learning about sex. That will work wonders for teen pregnancy rates.
- NAFV_P 13y ago
  Back in my day the best place to learn about sex was the school canteen.

scott_karana 13y ago

Okay, so install a filter yourself. Alternatively, opt IN to a filter. Why impose your choice as the default on an entire nation?

sillysaurus2 13y ago

She's probably not as innocent as you'd like to believe, and she's probably tougher than you give her credit for. She also has a basic human right to access information. Please try to see that restricting information when someone is young deforms their worldview for the rest of their life. We as parents hope that the deformation is a positive one, but this isn't necessarily so. We're biased into thinking we've made positive choices for our children regardless of any evidence to the contrary. The bias is hardwired, and unless we take conscious steps to evaluate whether our behavior makes sense then it's easy to get swept up in a "think of the children" argument.

rhubarbcustard 13y ago
Totally agree with you but I'm sure you'd agree that watching porn is not something that a 11-year-old should be doing? She is more or less free to browse what she wants, she reads Wikipedia articles, reads the news etc etc but I can't see how viewing porn would be good for her worldview?
- BlackDeath3 13y ago
  >watching porn is not something that a 11-year-old should be doing Why? Note I'm truly not trying to start a fight here, but I do try to stay open-minded and question assumptions. To me, this: >I can't see how viewing porn would be good for her worldview is not only not terribly convincing, it's also not a reason to censor something.
- prawks 13y ago
  I think children's worldview is largely determined by how their parents teach them (usually indirectly) how to internalize information they absorb and encounters they have. What would your 11-year-old do if she saw porn? How would she think about it? How would it affect her worldview? Would it really be negative? How would you have reacted at that age? Would it have changed your worldview in a negative way? What kinds of information does she not have access to that she should? When should she be sexually educated? Just some things to think about.
- Crito 13y ago
  If she is actively seeking it out, there really are no technical solutions that you can use to stop her (short of taking all electronics from her). She'll find a way around any filter. If that is the sort of situation that you're in, sitting down with her and having a talk is really the only workable solution. If the concern is accidentally viewing porn... well, I have a few thoughts on that: 1) How often does that actually happen? My office does not have content filters on the internet, yet I have never accidentally viewed porn at work. I can't actually remember the last time I accidentally viewed porn at work. I strongly suspect that 95% of the "accident" cases are excuses that people make when they get caught. 2) If the concern is popups and she won't stop going to shady sites that have porn popups, use adblock. Problem solved. Also, tell her not to go to those sites, before you get the UK equivalent of a DMCA notice from your ISP... 3) Accidentally viewing a few naked people in popups is probably not going to damage her worldview. Would it be good for it? No. But I don't think it will cause any damage either.

SixSigma 13y ago

Shouldn't you be paying for a cleanfeed connection for your home broadband then instead of having the govt. back hand it onto everyone?

a-priori 13y ago

I get that concern, and it's your prerogative as the parent to limit what your daughter can access on the Internet. What I don't get is delegating this to the government rather than using something that's under your control.

vfclists 13y ago

If you don't want your children to watch porn you are supposed to subscribe to a service which keeps lists of websites which offer or are believed to offer porn and block them in your router, without your ISP or the government's involvement. These services have existed for a long time, but it looks like the governments want to get involved for surveillance purposes. It is your router which is supposed to be doing that, not your ISP. What you are essentially doing is giving the government and the ISP an excuse to monitor the your interests and communications and those of your family, which they would in any case, only in this instance you have given them your explicit permission.

MichaelGG 13y ago

I've got a daughters aged 7 and 5. They've had unfettered connectivity all their lives. I'm far more concerned about them finding crap material that "suitable" for kids, such as most of Netflix's kids category. I'm much more worried that they're drawn into watching crappy cartoons or playing dumb Flash games. Companies invading their privacy is far more a threat than some random porn site injecting an ad somewhere. My 5-yr-old says she's looking forward to playing Go online with her own account. I'm not in the slightest bit worried that she's at risk by being in the chatrooms on KGS. Both girls like Reddit (/r/roomporn and /r/aww and stuff like that). My kids don't need the government protecting their innocent eyes. They need intelligence on how to understand what they're doing, and the drive to inquire and be open about things bothering them. It's like parents that worry about their kids going somewhere because of "pedophiles", yet have no problems driving them many miles each day, which is absolutely a higher risk to their safety. These parents are not acting rationally, they are not improving safety, they just feel like they're doing something. What's the real threat model that I'm trying to prevent as a parent? Kids viewing porn? Really? As my kids age, if they decide they want to start watching porn, I hope we're able to speak intelligently about it. Sexual maturity can be difficult for people, and porn is only one small aspect of the whole thing. So what's the real threat? People attacking them? But retarded URL filters won't help. And teaching them general savvy and critical thinking will help more against that threat, and in life in general. I'm not sure what threat a stupid filter is supposed to address. In 3 decades, I haven't accidentally run into any life-scaring materials on the Internet (or BBSes), and if I actively wanted to find something, I'd find it regardless of restrictions. The only filters I've wished for is to remove "dumb" content, but that's just my failing as a parent to get my children engaged with more intelligent stuff.

wvenable 13y ago

You should be regulating that material and there are many ways of doing it from limiting access to the computer to when you are physically present to all kinds of software solutions. There is no reason for the government to be involved nor should they be determining what is blocked. You should be doing that.

IanCal 13y ago
> There is no reason for the government to be involved They aren't. > nor should they be determining what is blocked They aren't. > You should be doing that He is. The government has pushed the ISPs to offer a software filter for free to all customers. When signing up you get the choice to either have or not have it. BT for example have two buttons, one for "yes please, free filter thanks" and one for "nope, I'll handle this". It can also be turned off at any time by the account holder.

k-mcgrady 13y ago

I can understand why you feel that way - but how about taking responsibility and regulating your daughter's use of the internet? It doesn't seem that difficult to me. Monitor her browsing on the home computer (an 11 year old doesn't need their own private PC); if she has a smartphone disable the browser and app store (same applies on a tablet) and take advantage of the parental controls. This is probably also going to be a lot more reliable than trusting our incompetent government to do a good job.

JackpotDen 13y ago

Then buy a netfilter. They're about £20.