The up in arms being led by the computer-illiterare

[DracoM]

I know very little. so please help me:

Ref the PM's rhetoric about filters in computers to block child abuse images................is this actually feasible?

And will it not stop browsing perfectly legit subjects like 'breast cancer'?

And FGS, what are these 'terrible' words that will get anyone using them into deep trouble? If we don't know what such words might be, then how do we avoid them?

And am I wrong in suspecting that there is a serious problem in starting down this road? Why does it feel like China and its attitude to the internet?

Totally confused, but genuinely worried about what strange new world we are about to sleep-walk into. Or am I being alarmist?

[Petrushka]

I share your confusion and alarm but cannot see how blocking pornographic images can be feasible. There are hundreds if not thousands of sites that provide such stuff and it seems an impossible task to try to police them.

I have a great deal of sympathy with some attempt at trying to prevent children accessing such images, after all they lose their innocence soon enough, but really can't see how it can be done by the internet providers.

The PM's rhetoric may be an easy vote winner that proves impossible to achieve.

I know even less than you so could equally do with some help in understanding the feasibility or otherwise.

[Bryn]

The first thing that struck me when he announced that simulated rape would be a target was that films like A Clockwork Orange would be for the chop. It smells distinctly of base populism with no hint of thinking the issue through. Yes, track down and deal with the abusers, but with funding of those charged with tracking them down having been severely cut, this looks like nothing more than disingenuous window dressing.

[Barbirollians]

It is designed as a bit of populist meat to please the Daily Mail and will change little other than people may be prompted to turn filters on .

If he is truly worried about what kids can see then how is he going to address porn on smartphones ?

The Daily Mail so memorably described by Russell Brand on Desert Island Discs yesterday as purveyors of " convenient packages of idiocy"

[Flosshilde]

It is designed as a bit of populist meat to please the Daily Mail

:ok:

and will change little other than people may be prompted to turn filters on .

No, the filters will be turned on by the 'search engines' - ie Google etc. Individuals will have to turn them off. It's simply Government censorship of something that is legal for adults, done ostensibly to protect children even though most households are childless.

[gingerjon]

The current google filters do the job adequately well. In fact, they do it so well that they filter out the Sun's page 3.

You know, the page 3 that Cameron says is a consumer choice.

(And it does strike me that the purveyors of this filthy idea are deliberately mixing the concepts "child porn" and "porn children can see" to create an idea that they are stamping down on something terrible rather than making an ideological stand against something they happen not to like.)

[Dave2002]

I know very little. so please help me:

Ref the PM's rhetoric about filters in computers to block child abuse images................is this actually feasible?

And will it not stop browsing perfectly legit subjects like 'breast cancer'?

I can't quite remember the details now, but a few years ago I was looking for help for my mother. I tried searches for "nurses" or something similar, and was very surprised at what pages came back.

[Flay]

I can't quite remember the details now, but a few years ago I was looking for help for my mother. I tried searches for "nurses" or something similar, and was very surprised at what pages came back.

My youngest when at primary school had to draw a jug. So he searched for "jugs." What a surprise he got! :yikes:

[Dave2002]

My youngest when at primary school had to draw a jug. So he searched for "jugs." What a surprise he got! :yikes:

Priceless!

I won't repeat the experiment.

[Flosshilde]

Just try looking for information for a trip here - http://www.thisisscunthorpe.co.uk/home - & see how far you get under Big Brother Dave.

[MrGongGong]

Just try looking for information for a trip here - http://www.thisisscunthorpe.co.uk/home - & see how far you get under Big Brother Dave.

Quite

It's impossible to access the National Gallery website in many schools because it contains images of nudity

[burning dog]

..and I've just launched

Dave Sexton never managed Arsenal or Scunthorpe.com :-(

PS.
It seems films with a certificate are OK (last nights Newsnight), so realistic simulations of rape get the nod while obviously "role playing" ones don't

[VodkaDilc]

Quite

It's impossible to access the National Gallery website in many schools because it contains images of nudity

Is that true - or a joke? It's difficult to tell these days.

[Flosshilde]

As others have pointed out it will have 'colateral damage', especially in relation to sex education. For most young gay people the internet is the only place they can find information, education & contact with others. Can you imagine a gay (or lesbian) teenager asking dad or mum to switch off the filter so that they can access sites that will allow them to contact & talk to other gay or lesbian teenagers, or to find out about safe sex, or simply how gay sex works? Or how about a teenager at a Catholic school, wanting to find out about contraception & having to turn to the internet because their school certainly isn't going to tell them.

If it's passed it will be like Major's dangerous dogs act (that was Major, wasn't it?) - badly thought out, pushed through to please tabloid hysteria, full of unintended consequences, & not doing what it was supposed to do.

[Resurrection Man]

Quite a lot about the technicalities etc on this site http://www.nap.edu/netsafekids/pro_fm_filter.html

and on how easy it is to bypass all of this can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interne..._circumvention

which adds fuel to the idea that Cameron is being populist regarding this.

AS for actual words that might be blocked.....I'd offer Guardian, Blair, Milliband, Monbiot ;-)