I'm already aware of it allJoJo said:Not all of the Internet providers have rolled it out yet, so if you're with someone like Virgin Media or something you won't have it yet. It's opt-in or opt-out anyhow, so try and persuade your family to opt-out when the choice comes >.>SkarKrow said:There's a porn filter now?
Actually, I'm led to believe that United Stateser is commonly used by people in other parts of the Americas to refer to USAliens.Trillovinum said:Actually this is not technically true... it is accepted to call people from the United States 'Americans' simply because there isn't such a word as UnitedStatian or UnitedStater. (Then again, I know you probably spoke in jest dear fellow carbon-based life form.)Weaver said:This is kind of like asking Canada if they're happy electing Obama now that his second term is coming to an end.
Canadia*, please.Weaver said:This is kind of like asking Canada if they're happy electing Obama now that his second term is coming to an end.
Hmm... cool. I did not know that. Guess I'll never stop learning. Still... the original point still stands.thaluikhain said:Actually, I'm led to believe that United Stateser is commonly used by people in other parts of the Americas to refer to USAliens.Trillovinum said:Actually this is not technically true... it is accepted to call people from the United States 'Americans' simply because there isn't such a word as UnitedStatian or UnitedStater. (Then again, I know you probably spoke in jest dear fellow carbon-based life form.)Weaver said:This is kind of like asking Canada if they're happy electing Obama now that his second term is coming to an end.
To be fair, the only people whose reputation for stoicism exceeds that of the British is that of you Swedes.Atrocious Joystick said:Funny thing, I was unaware the UK was going to be enforcing a porn filter in Sweden. I would have thought that such a thing would have stirred up more controversy, being a massive breach of national sovereignty and all.
Or did you mean to write Brits where you wrote Europeans? Don´t generalize me bro.
Your profile picture is so amazingly appropriate for this comment.JoJo said:Hasn't been extended by my family's ISP yet but even if we opt for the filter, I couldn't care less. It's as easy as hell to get around, just fire up a proxy based in a foreign country such as most TOR exit nodes and you're free to go. A waste of money enacted by middle-aged people who don't understand the Internet in my opinion but whatever.
I did see a few people post about it coming up for BT customers, but maybe they just decided to be ahead of the curve. I hope so. I don't want this damn thing passing without as much as a fuss. Fuck it, do the london riots again, burn shit, burn fucking Cameron this time, he can't be allowed to impose a filter that would block essentially whatever that little shitbag wants to block without having to pay for it dearly.Binnsyboy said:To be fair, the only people whose reputation for stoicism exceeds that of the British is that of you Swedes.Atrocious Joystick said:Funny thing, I was unaware the UK was going to be enforcing a porn filter in Sweden. I would have thought that such a thing would have stirred up more controversy, being a massive breach of national sovereignty and all.
Or did you mean to write Brits where you wrote Europeans? Don´t generalize me bro.
OT: As has been mentioned, I believe it's for people signing up with new broadband plans. That said, I'm not sure it's actually gone through because even though Cameron proposed it, backed it and burned a lot of taxpayer's money on a North Korea-esque filter system, the bill still has to go through the House of Commons and the House of Lords. I'm fairly certain it hasn't as there has been no coverage on it since the initial proposal.
If anything has happened, it hasn't affected my viewing of heinous pornography in any way.![]()
I think of it the same i think about any internet filter - it shouldnt exist to begin with.MetalMagpie said:Random side-thought: How many people think a whitelist-locked browser would be a good/useful idea? What I mean is, a browser that will only visit specific domains (configured by a password-holder). Parents could decide what sites they're comfortable with their child using (Wikipedia, Facebook, Neopets, etc.) and only allow those.
what? How can they justify blocking all pagan things? Are they also blocking all Christian/ Muslim / etc. sites?Rellik San said:, what worries me is the fact this is opt-out not opt-in, which suggests to me, that anyone with what our government deems esoteric interests (as yes it also blocks those "unsavoury" sites about LGBT and Paganism), is now going to be on some kind of watch list and ready to flag any time a sexual assault occurs within a few miles of them... especially concerning as my mother is a practising pagan so we will have to opt-out so she can talk to others of her faith that's mostly about respecting nature and others.