|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hesod Adee
Turalyon Plus
42
   |
Posted - 2013.07.22 08:16:00 -
[1] - Quote
How the web prevents ****
2006
Online Pornography Helping Lower **** Incidents, Study Says
2009
Legalizing Pornography: Lower Sex Crime Rates? Study Carried out in Czech Republic Shows Results Similar to Those in Japan and Denmark
2010
In short, easy access to **** reduces sex crimes. Thus banning it again will increase them. And there will be people who will be unable to access **** because they don't want anyone to know they look at it, thus they won't ask their ISP to turn the filter off. |
Hesod Adee
Turalyon Plus
42
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 09:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
Zimmy Zeta wrote:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16497122
In short, consumption of online p0rnography is a valid predictor for future compulsive/problematic internet use in adolescents.
I am all for free speech and free internet, but the average age where children come into contact with online p0rn is 11 years nowadays IIRC- but maybe the solution isn't a censored internet but better parenting here.
Censorship for everyone is not a solution to bad parents.
I also note that the study only does not call **** consumption the cause of problematic internet use. Only a way to predict if problematic use will occur. Meaning that banning **** will just hide the problem.
Most parents will react to finding out their children view ****, probably in a way that reduces the child's access to the internet. But how many will react in a helpful way to a skinner box F2P MMO ? |
Hesod Adee
Turalyon Plus
47
|
Posted - 2013.07.22 23:44:00 -
[3] - Quote
From 1967, but still relevant. |
Hesod Adee
Turalyon Plus
54
|
Posted - 2013.07.24 01:04:00 -
[4] - Quote
Graygor wrote:Emigrating was the best thing i ever did.  Even with safe search on, japanese google images is filled with adult content.
Do I want to know what you get if you turn safe search off ? |
Hesod Adee
Turalyon Plus
57
|
Posted - 2013.07.25 03:18:00 -
[5] - Quote
Slade Trillgon wrote:They did not keep us from p0rn when its only forms were magazines and VHS. What makes them think it can be stopped now 
Especially when the ISPs are being forced to do the filtering at their own expense. Which means they will go with the lowest cost solution.
If I were one of the ISPs, I'd probably go with blocking everything on the grounds that:
- Any traffic I don't inspect could be used to bypass the filter
- I don't have the money to buy the processing power to inspect all traffic
Therefore I must block all traffic to make sure that nobody goes to the forbidden sites.
If a customer has a problem with that, they could always opt out of the filter. |
Hesod Adee
Turalyon Plus
62
|
Posted - 2013.07.26 21:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
News that should surprise no-one: UK **** Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs Reveal
Quote: itGÇÖs hardly encouraging to discover that even when TalkTalk subscribers turn filtering completely off, their traffic is still routed through HuaweiGÇÖs system.
I wonder which sites critical of China or the UK will be 'accidentally' blocked, even on people who turn off all the filters.
Or how long it will be before someone takes out all internet in the UK by attacking Huawei's system. |
Hesod Adee
Turalyon Plus
66
|
Posted - 2013.07.29 02:35:00 -
[7] - Quote
Zhula Guixgrixks wrote:As expected , Cameron's Great Firewall extend to more than just p0+ôn. Long live comrade Cameron !
Is comrade the right term here ?
We are talking about China here, not Russia. |
|
|
| |
|