3 ms·

To the surprise of exactly nobody, it turns out that people don't mind being able to access porn.

by mangecoeur 12y ago

csmeu 12y ago
Are you sure that its not that the first site they hit which is a false positive causes them to opt out? ThinkPad wiki is the one comedic false positive I get when I was testing Sky's offering (to determine workarounds in case this shit becomes mandatory one day).
- mangecoeur 12y ago
  I'm sure that's what everyone will claim :P Seriously though, a huge proportion of people access porn even though an equally huge proportion of people would deny it. And that's the whole point of a private life - people should be free and comfortable to do things in private that they might not want other people to know about. You shouldn't HAVE to tell anyone about your online habits, it's none of their business. It's not the Government's job to even ASK you about that sort of thing, let alone TELL you to have these filters. It's patronizing and paternalistic and intrusive. Of course, it's also a thinly veiled excuse to force the installation of traffic monitoring and filtering equipment across the whole of the UK internet - since obviously you can't block sites without inspecting the traffic. It certainly makes GCHQs job easier - why bother hacking servers and tapping fibre when you've got ISPs forced to monitor every connection and paying for it too.
DanBC 12y ago
The filters on mobile were over-restrictive. I think I remember HN being blocked by T-Mobile's "Content Lock".
7952 12y ago
And most people have accessed the internet through filters before at work/school/college and know how bad false positive can be.
andygates 12y ago
Alternatively, users just accept default settings and never change them. Some ISPs are now changing the filter question on signup to default to "yes". We'll see which is correct in a few months.

3 ms·

To the surprise of exactly nobody, it turns out that people don't mind being able to access porn.

by mangecoeur 12y ago

To the surprise of exactly nobody, it turns out that people don't mind being able to access porn.

csmeu 12y ago
Are you sure that its not that the first site they hit which is a false positive causes them to opt out? ThinkPad wiki is the one comedic false positive I get when I was testing Sky's offering (to determine workarounds in case this shit becomes mandatory one day).
- mangecoeur 12y ago
  I'm sure that's what everyone will claim :P Seriously though, a huge proportion of people access porn even though an equally huge proportion of people would deny it. And that's the whole point of a private life - people should be free and comfortable to do things in private that they might not want other people to know about. You shouldn't HAVE to tell anyone about your online habits, it's none of their business. It's not the Government's job to even ASK you about that sort of thing, let alone TELL you to have these filters. It's patronizing and paternalistic and intrusive. Of course, it's also a thinly veiled excuse to force the installation of traffic monitoring and filtering equipment across the whole of the UK internet - since obviously you can't block sites without inspecting the traffic. It certainly makes GCHQs job easier - why bother hacking servers and tapping fibre when you've got ISPs forced to monitor every connection and paying for it too.
DanBC 12y ago
The filters on mobile were over-restrictive. I think I remember HN being blocked by T-Mobile's "Content Lock".
7952 12y ago
And most people have accessed the internet through filters before at work/school/college and know how bad false positive can be.
andygates 12y ago
Alternatively, users just accept default settings and never change them. Some ISPs are now changing the filter question on signup to default to "yes". We'll see which is correct in a few months.