British Telecom Blocks Access to Child Porn Sites
 

so there you have it. a government authority is going to use that authority to block sections of the internet to an entire country. while i don't disagree with this specific move, it opens a broader spectrum of questions: is it okay for a governmental authority to prevent free access to citizens, or would it be considered better to depend on those citizens to make the right call. could a move like this be expanded to blocking hacking, warez, p2p, or even mainstream pornography? your intelligent opinions are appreciated.

BT isn't a governmental organisation anymore, twas privatised in the 80's.

The case in point I wholly agree with, but have reservations about how useful it'll be... The problem wont go away, it'll be reduced and the devotees will move into other technologies/methods of disseminating their filth.

Time will tell, but it could be a case of better the devil you know...

apoligies. my knowledge of the british power structure is tenuous at best.

Don't see how this should solve the problem, it is just a move to score political goodwill points.

On the other hand even though i am against child pornography i don't see how censorship would have any effect on it. They will only find another way to obtain it.

It is a bit like opening Pandoras box. If you can censor one thing you can censor another thing and all of a sudden the internet isn't a democratic tool. It becomes the worlds largest propaganda machine that tells us what is "normal".

Even though they go after the right badguys they are using the wrong way to do it.

I would love to be able to say that anything that helps to rid the planet of Child Pornography is a good thing, however, this is a can of worms that will be tough to close.

Are they going to do any tracking as to who might be going to these sites? Are they going to track your internet usage?

Child Pornography is illegal. OK. But instead of censorship, wouldn't it be better to go after those committing the illegal activity? Shut down the websites themselves?

Good move as far as I'm concerned.

The thought of someone developing such a tracking and blocking ability scares me. Sure, they are developing it for good reasons, but how many other things were developed for good reasons and then used by governments for things they were never intended and for purposes very different to that designed for...

This is a bad step, albeit one for a good cause.

Whilst I hate any infringement on the internet...I would rather they block this sort of material. Better yet, I would rather they use the net to hunt down these particular brand of bastards and slam them in the klink for the rest of their misery causing existence.

We do this sort of thing in the states, whereas local law enforcement, and I think moreso by the FBI, tracks down pedophiles by posing as kids and allowing themselves to be "seduced" by these bastards-set up a meeting and then "whammo" they get busted.

Internet cons, frauds and kiddie porn traffickers are the new law enforcement frontier. There will be growing pains. Although I'm fairly sure that the extrapolation of our Bill of Rights would cover the freedoms of the net.

But alas, I think the days of anonymity on the net are numbered. Nowhere in our society do we have freedom without responsibility. I'm all for accountability on the net. I think, much like this place, it would serve to remind those whose manners may be suspect.

I'm concerned it might force them deeper into whatever hole they bury themselves in to avoid detection and all that Justice jazz.

I am all for this move. I hope they do this in Canada as well.

It frightens me that with just a few tiny changes, they can begin compiling a list of people accessing various sites.

I understand that their motives are honorable, but the means can and will be used for despicable purposes faster than you can say "thoughtcrime".

I think it's a band-aid on the problem, and a step in the wrong direction. Granted, they're blocking access to something that is, in their country and most others, illegal, but they're only blocking a small amount of the traffic, not enough to dent the site's income and put them out of business. Going after a small segment of the consumers and not the producers just doesn't make sense. Sure, denying access to something as clearly illegal and harmful as child porn is hard to argue with, but I see the slippery slope...

It's kind of a moot point, since the technology is already out there, but the potential for abuse is frightening. Considering the number of consensual sexual activities that are still illegal in some states (fornication, sodomy, fellatio, use of sex toys) one could easily see fundie zealots in the U.S. applying this approach to block access to a lot of content.

I don't specifically disagree with the blocking of child porn, but having _ANY_ agency blocking a wide range of websites is bad in my opinion

The CP peddlers will just find a new way. They'll have normal site names and avoid common CP keywords, they'll turn to freenet and other anonymous means of distro. I think this is just a gateway to things we don't want.

Good concept, but in practice it opens a floodgate of censorship and restriction on the masses based on the will of a few.