Brits decide to censor the interwebs

**Drex** · 2013-07-23 00:18

I expect the US to wait for it to fail spectacularly and then implement it

**Kuya** · 2013-07-23 06:30

Sounds like he's trying to win brownie points with conservatives. Err, more conservative conservatives.

**Meresgi** · 2013-07-23 07:14

Originally Posted by Blubbartron

The puritanical views of this country do far more harm than good. Growing up repressed is way, way worse psychologically than being desensitized from overexposure.

This times a thousand. I went to a christian highschool and I would say 90% of the people who went to school with me were all very repressed at the time and through their lives, when they finally broke free a few became alcoholics, a few popped out kids with random guys, a couple turned to drugs and the majority just went crazy doing things they could finally take part in, but to an extreme. My wife's few friends were the same way and when they went off to college they partied every night, got into drugs, banged every guy they could and drank heavily.

It was always easy to tell how was the repressed kid growing up at college because he was the guy on his head chugging the keg or the one in the ambulance because he drank himself near death lol.

Spoiler: show

That image is great. Nothing wrong with showing all that or showing people being mutilated in theaters..but if you show people having sex and a woman enjoying it then it must be banned good sir!!

**Stumblingdrunk** · 2013-07-23 08:08

Originally Posted by Meresgi

a few popped out kids with random guys,

banged every guy they could

but if you show people having sex and a woman enjoying it then it must be banned good sir!!

You are a feminist hero.

Its a great thing that we're so much more enlightened than these other folks

**Meresgi** · 2013-07-23 10:00

Originally Posted by Stumblingdrunk

You are a feminist hero.

I'm not the hero they deserve..but i'm the hero they need.

**Meresgi** · 2013-07-25 09:03

http://www.zdnet.com/mp-behind-uk-in...it-7000018542/

In a shockingly embarrassing turn, the architect behind a three-year push to mandate ISP-level Internet porn filtering saw her website hacked - and reacted in a way that revealed she is essentially Internet and tech illiterate.

Guido Fawkes, a Sun columnist, posted about yesterday's hacking and defacement of MP Claire Perry's website to his personal, popular gossip blog.

When his post circulated, Perry bizarrely accused him of "sponsoring" the hacking of her website - even though he had merely reported on the event, not claimed the hack.

Perry also threatened him on Twitter, saying she would be having a word with his bosses at The Sun - despite the fact that the tabloid had nothing to do with the post.

The tech-illiterate MP claimed in a Tweet that Fawkes was 'hosting a link that distributed porn via her website' - the idea itself a boggle of the technically impossible.

It became disturbingly clear that MP Perry does not know how hyperlinks, websites, the fundamentals of content distribution works.

http://cdn-static.zdnet.com/i/r/stor...Z1BQ&upscale=1

**GoggleHead** · 2013-07-25 10:37

^ Why old people and the tech illiterate should not be tampering with the internet in any capacity. You don't have the faintest idea of how it works? Then leave it the fuck alone.

**Drex** · 2013-07-25 12:15

But that's really all that politicians do: regulate shit they don't understand

**Ragnus** · 2013-07-25 13:21

Looks like Britain is starting a conservative domino effect of retardedness.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/yourcommunity....html?cmp=fbtl

Next up in the game of "No Porn In Our Country" is Canada. Lets see how far this goes.

**Mazmaz** · 2013-07-25 17:31

Yes, 1 MP.

**Outlaw** · 2013-07-25 17:41

If the next president of the US is a Republican you can be guaranteed they will take up this cause.

**archibaldcrane** · 2013-07-25 17:46

Yeah, democrat presidents just try to obtain everyone's email passwords.

**Mazmaz** · 2013-07-25 18:18

Are we pretending there's more than 1 party in US?

**hey** · 2013-07-25 18:46

Originally Posted by Mazmaz

Are we pretending there's more than 1 party in US?

We've been doing it for so long, why stop now?

**Waraji** · 2013-07-25 19:10

Why stop? Democratic election is guaranteed if Hillary goes up on that ballot. That bitch is tough as nails. Who do Republicans have, Chris Christie? Rick Perry?

http://actastop.cz/img/p/24-71-large.jpg

Honestly, I'm not even sure how the fuck this would play out in the US, what with so many congressmen with sex scandals.

**Gryffes** · 2013-07-25 19:17

1. It's only a proposal, it's like obama saying lets do gun control brahhhhh. - doesnt mean shit.
2. It would be a tickbox in your account profile. Really it only affects <18s living w/ parents who dont know how to change the settings ( or aware parents who check those settings/keep password safe ).

But srsly. Nothings gonna happen.

**Dimmauk** · 2013-07-25 20:55

Democrats know better than to fuck with young people and the internet.

Also, LOLEngland

**notorious bum** · 2013-07-26 05:43

Originally Posted by Gryffes

1. It's only a proposal, it's like obama saying lets do gun control brahhhhh. - doesnt mean shit.
2. It would be a tickbox in your account profile. Really it only affects <18s living w/ parents who dont know how to change the settings ( or aware parents who check those settings/keep password safe ).

But srsly. Nothings gonna happen.

How naive to think that this censorship only affects the pr0n. Kinda like tumblr's failed attempt to censor with it's lazy, overreaching porn filter that banned blogs tagged with "gay" "bisexual" "lesbian" and etc.

The power is in the hands of extremely ignorant prudes, if this "opt-in" rhetoric starts being considered as a logical argument, it will be too easy to pass future internet censorship legislation hiding under this guise of "choice" and how it doesn't change anything.

Stop and think: Any sex education website can be censored, any photography blog, and anything that could get flagged as obscene(which, history tells us, could simply be someone who lives or supports an LGBT lifestyle). As if we need more sexually-ignorant or sheltered teens.

Subsequently, all websites would need to be on their toes to prevent themselves from being flagged as pornographic(provocative nude art? sex advice too candid?)

**Mazmaz** · 2013-07-26 06:36

Not to mention "pornography" can refer to non-sexual things, like violence/hate speech/etc.

**Drex** · 2013-07-26 06:45

Originally Posted by notorious bum

How naive to think that this censorship only affects the pr0n. Kinda like tumblr's failed attempt to censor with it's lazy, overreaching porn filter that banned blogs tagged with "gay" "bisexual" "lesbian" and etc.

The power is in the hands of extremely ignorant prudes, if this "opt-in" rhetoric starts being considered as a logical argument, it will be too easy to pass future internet censorship legislation hiding under this guise of "choice" and how it doesn't change anything.

Stop and think: Any sex education website can be censored, any photography blog, and anything that could get flagged as obscene(which, history tells us, could simply be someone who lives or supports an LGBT lifestyle). As if we need more sexually-ignorant or sheltered teens.

Subsequently, all websites would need to be on their toes to prevent themselves from being flagged as pornographic(provocative nude art? sex advice too candid?)

slippery slope guys, slippery slope!

Thread: Brits decide to censor the interwebs

Thread Tools

Latest Threads

Up & Coming Threads

Hottest Threads