PompeyVillan Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 I work in a school. Children are very clever with computers, more so than most adults. They've spent their entire lives with them. They will find it very easy to bypass this after not very long at all. In fact so will everyone. It seems completely pointless. I don't use piratebay and it's blocked by my ISP, but I searched google for proxies and mirrors the other day to see how easy it was to access it. A few clicks. It's not saving anyone from anything as far as I can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 (edited) But surely Labour and the Libs will vote against the bill and it will never see the light of day Or of course amongst all the tory bashing you folks all missed the part where one of the other major parties said they were also for it and worried Cameron wouldn't go far enough Edited July 22, 2013 by tonyh29 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 The Facebook post of my mate's recently graduated son. He's intelligent enough to have written it, but I assume that the quotation marks used means that he has entered into honest plagiarism. Made me laugh, anyway. "Once upon a midnight dreary, while I porn-surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While I clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", I muttered, " Give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404." Oo, so close. Any censoring wouldn't be getting the destination server to 404 the page, it would be either null routing the IP, or dropping DNS queries, or maybe just dropping the packets based on dest IP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 The Facebook post of my mate's recently graduated son. He's intelligent enough to have written it, but I assume that the quotation marks used means that he has entered into honest plagiarism. Made me laugh, anyway."Once upon a midnight dreary, while I porn-surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While I clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", I muttered, " Give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404." Oo, so close. Any censoring wouldn't be getting the destination server to 404 the page, it would be either null routing the IP, or dropping DNS queries, or maybe just dropping the packets based on dest IP. 403 error ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrentVilla Posted July 22, 2013 Moderator Share Posted July 22, 2013 But surely Labour and the Libs will vote against the bill and it will never see the light of day Or of course amongst all the tory bashing you folks all missed the part where one of the other major parties said they were also for it and worried Cameron wouldn't go far enough You have a fair point. A couple of equally fair points though if I may, 1. It is David Cameron who is grandstanding on this policy, his governments policy as he seeks to safeguard children seemingly forgotten he once left one of his behind at the pub. Sorry that was a cheap dig but I couldn't resist. It is though his and this governments policy so even though you are right the other parties haven't come out against it they won't obviously get the same amount of stick. 2. We will see how people vote, I rather suspect people might vote against this but aren't willing to come out and say "er no Mr Cameron we rather like porn" Personally, I don't much see any of this as much of an issue. Anyone who wants to access porn will continue to do so, kids or otherwise. This piece of legislation is stupid though and massively over the top and for that reason those behind it do deserve scorn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 But surely Labour and the Libs will vote against the bill and it will never see the light of day Or of course amongst all the tory bashing you folks all missed the part where one of the other major parties said they were also for it and worried Cameron wouldn't go far enough The point is that it's politically difficult for other parties to vote against it, because the press will crucify them, without the slightest attempt to consider the issue. It's the shallowest cyncism. They know full well the measure will be entirely ineffective. Have you seen the letter from the government to the ISPs, asking them to use the term "default-on" while admitting it's no change at all to what they do now? So it can be presented as forcing the ISPs to back down, though they know it's a lie? Here. Utterly pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 We bypassed the porn filters at school and broadband internet was new then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 A political bill that has gotten 6 pages of unanimous condemnation in the first day. This has clearly touched a nerve for the Villa Talk massive 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mantis Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 But surely Labour and the Libs will vote against the bill and it will never see the light of day Or of course amongst all the tory bashing you folks all missed the part where one of the other major parties said they were also for it and worried Cameron wouldn't go far enough The point is that it's politically difficult for other parties to vote against it, because the press will crucify them, without the slightest attempt to consider the issue. It's the shallowest cyncism. They know full well the measure will be entirely ineffective. Have you seen the letter from the government to the ISPs, asking them to use the term "default-on" while admitting it's no change at all to what they do now? So it can be presented as forcing the ISPs to back down, though they know it's a lie? Here. Utterly pathetic. And what does that say about them if they won't vote against something that is clearly wrong just because they might get a bit of bad press (but also a lot of support from the public)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 The Facebook post of my mate's recently graduated son. He's intelligent enough to have written it, but I assume that the quotation marks used means that he has entered into honest plagiarism. Made me laugh, anyway."Once upon a midnight dreary, while I porn-surfed, weak and weary, over many a strange and spurious site of ' hot xxx galore'. While I clicked my fav'rite bookmark, suddenly there came a warning, and my heart was filled with mourning, mourning for my dear amour, " 'Tis not possible!", I muttered, " Give me back my free hardcore!"..... quoth the server, 404." Oo, so close. Any censoring wouldn't be getting the destination server to 404 the page, it would be either null routing the IP, or dropping DNS queries, or maybe just dropping the packets based on dest IP. 403 error ? But that doesn't rhyme. More like 'doth Chrome, fail-e-or' Yeah I know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 But surely Labour and the Libs will vote against the bill and it will never see the light of day Or of course amongst all the tory bashing you folks all missed the part where one of the other major parties said they were also for it and worried Cameron wouldn't go far enough The point is that it's politically difficult for other parties to vote against it, because the press will crucify them, without the slightest attempt to consider the issue. It's the shallowest cyncism. They know full well the measure will be entirely ineffective. . They don't want to vote against it .. Least Labour don't not sure if the libs have offered an opinion yet ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrenm Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 This has clearly touched a nerve Not for much longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 22, 2013 Moderator Share Posted July 22, 2013 Politicians have no balls, they won't stand up to be counted on their actual convictions, they are piss weasels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 Politicians have no balls, they won't stand up to be counted on their actual convictions, they are piss weasels My MP is a woman., I suspect the ball count may be low Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 Someone send this to Dave: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 I wonder what the French will do with images like this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 But surely Labour and the Libs will vote against the bill and it will never see the light of day Or of course amongst all the tory bashing you folks all missed the part where one of the other major parties said they were also for it and worried Cameron wouldn't go far enough The point is that it's politically difficult for other parties to vote against it, because the press will crucify them, without the slightest attempt to consider the issue. It's the shallowest cyncism. They know full well the measure will be entirely ineffective. Have you seen the letter from the government to the ISPs, asking them to use the term "default-on" while admitting it's no change at all to what they do now? So it can be presented as forcing the ISPs to back down, though they know it's a lie? Here. Utterly pathetic. And what does that say about them if they won't vote against something that is clearly wrong just because they might get a bit of bad press (but also a lot of support from the public)? It says they're on a hiding to nothing. That any attempt to discuss the reality, the problems, the reasons why it won't work, will be drowned out in a cacophony of phoney outrage from contemptible, scummy, wholly offensive rags like the Scum and the Heil. That they know this, and will seek not to engage. It says that if we want to create a climate where political views can be expressed with honesty, we have to deal with the vile filth which is the popular press. Implementing Leveson would be a help. But Dave won't be doing that. And it says we're a long way away from where we should be. We have a national political debate conducted at about the level of seven-year-olds. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 I wonder what the French will do with images like this You filthy, filthy bastard. Don't you know children might see that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 Frogs porn ---- sacre bleu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 I thought they were implementing Leveson light as agreed by all 3 main parties ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts