Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

internet content watchdog

2»

Comments

  • #32
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Scotty P wrote: »
    I do think that you should have to prove you're over 18 to have a certain level of access to the internet. I don't have kids myself, but wouldn't want my nephews and nieces having access to everything online that an adult currently has access to, that's for sure.

    I understand that kids will most likely find a way around restrictions, as I did when getting my hands on Over 18s films when barely a teenager myself, but still think the best effort should be made to have some sort of age restriction in place.

    Why, exactly?


  • #33
    Scotty P
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 42 ✭Scotty P


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Why, exactly?

    Have already said why.
    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    Its not about legal age. Its about responsibility , How do you propose the ISP implement this age check ?

    You act like it is not possible. Some ISPs in Ireland already do it.
    If you don't want them watching stuff on TV you don't call the TV provider and demand they block TV shows by default for everyone do you.

    Watershed.
    They tried blocking content in Australia and it was broken in half an hour by a 16 year old and posted on social media for all the other young people to use that method.

    I have addressed this point already, indeed, I was the one to make it. Of course kids will find a way, I did myself when young when trying to get my hands on Over 18 flicks, but so what? Kids will also find a way to purchase alcohol, smokes etc etc, but that doesn't mean we throw our hands up as a society and say 'what's the point' and allow a free for all and so it should be with internet access.


  • #34
    Potatoeman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,655 ✭✭✭Potatoeman


    Scotty P wrote: »
    Have already said why.



    You act like it is not possible. Some ISPs in Ireland already do it.



    Watershed.



    I have addressed this point already, indeed, I was the one to make it. Of course kids will find a way, I did myself when young when trying to get my hands on Over 18 flicks, but so what? Kids will also find a way to purchase alcohol, smokes etc etc, but that doesn't mean we throw our hands up as a society and say 'what's the point' and allow a free for all and so it should be with internet access.

    The best control is parental sepervision.

    As for the watershed, it always seemed like a heavy handed approach. A TV is not a babysitter and many adults have to work early and cant stay up late.


  • #35
    RoboRat
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,558 ✭✭✭RoboRat


    Faceboards and twitting are too unregulated, they need to be monitored.


  • #36
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,356 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Scotty P wrote: »
    I have addressed this point already, indeed, I was the one to make it. Of course kids will find a way, I did myself when young when trying to get my hands on Over 18 flicks, but so what? Kids will also find a way to purchase alcohol, smokes etc etc, but that doesn't mean we throw our hands up as a society and say 'what's the point' and allow a free for all and so it should be with internet access.

    Can I ask, why is it societies problem in the first place?


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    seamus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 68,173 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    This all boils down to the issue that some parents don't want to have to take responsibility for their child's welfare and would rather someone else did it.

    "I don't need to worry about the internet, the government's got my back".

    Even the most technically inept parent can protect their child by doing a few simple things. Namely, computer(s) only allowed where there is no privacy and only when a parent is about. No smartphones and if you're going out or away and leaving the child behind, take the router with you. All routers can be plugged out and then plugged back in without even needing to be literate.

    Once they're 16, they need less protection, they're fairly capable of handling most online content.


  • #38
    Stavros Murphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭Stavros Murphy


    Tzardine wrote: »
    Here you are

    http://www.losebellyfatreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/man-boobs.jpg

    I stand corrected. Boobs, on the interweb. Who knew?? I'm off to write a letter of complaint to Bill Gates. I believe he owns this portal of iniquity.


  • #39
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,356 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    seamus wrote: »
    This all boils down to the issue that some parents don't want to have to take responsibility for their child's welfare and would rather someone else did it.

    "I don't need to worry about the internet, the government's got my back".

    Even the most technically inept parent can protect their child by doing a few simple things. Namely, computer(s) only allowed where there is no privacy and only when a parent is about. No smartphones and if you're going out or away and leaving the child behind, take the router with you. All routers can be plugged out and then plugged back in without even needing to be literate.

    Once they're 16, they need less protection, they're fairly capable of handling most online content.

    Oh how behind the times you are Seamus! With UPC you need to take the tv box :P


  • #40
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Scotty P wrote: »
    Have already said why.



    You act like it is not possible. Some ISPs in Ireland already do it.



    Watershed.



    I have addressed this point already, indeed, I was the one to make it. Of course kids will find a way, I did myself when young when trying to get my hands on Over 18 flicks, but so what? Kids will also find a way to purchase alcohol, smokes etc etc, but that doesn't mean we throw our hands up as a society and say 'what's the point' and allow a free for all and so it should be with internet access.

    That does nothing sending an email to get adult content on your smart phone. Most people would jail break their phone.


  • #41
    Scotty P
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 42 ✭Scotty P


    Dravokivich wrote: »
    Can I ask, why is it societies problem in the first place?

    Because society should protect the vulnerable, as it already does in many instances.

    Or do you think we should let kids buy cigarettes? Or let them into Over 18 films at the cinema?

    I fail to see how it's fine to restrict some things over here but once someone suggests that there should be a similar restriction when it comes to accessing unsuitable material in cyberspace.. that seems to be a step too far, and if the the parents fail to prevent it from occurring.. tough shit.

    I of course believe parent's have the ultimate responsibility here, but that shouldn't be the be all and end of all of protecting children from accessing unsuitable material online, for the simple reason that some kids have assholes for parents.


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Caliden
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,981 ✭✭✭Caliden


    Scotty P wrote: »
    Because society should protect the vulnerable, as it already does in many instances.

    Or do you think we should let kids buy cigarettes? Or let them into Over 18 films at the cinema?

    I fail to see how it's fine to restrict some things over here but once someone suggests that there should be a similar restriction when it comes to accessing unsuitable material in cyberspace.. that seems to be a step too far, and if the the parents fail to prevent it from occurring.. tough shit.

    I of course believe parent's have the ultimate responsibility here, but that shouldn't be the be all and end of all of protecting children from accessing unsuitable material online, for the simple reason that some kids have assholes for parents.


    Do you actually believe that no kid under the age of 18 has ever been sold cigarettes / got into an 18+ movie?


    You're making the wrong comparison also, it should be akin to holding the newsagent responsible when a child sneaks a peak at the nudy mag...


  • #43
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,356 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    Scotty P wrote: »
    Because society should protect the vulnerable, as it already does in many instances.

    Or do you think we should let kids buy cigarettes? Or let them into Over 18 films at the cinema?

    I fail to see how it's fine to restrict some things over here but once someone suggests that there should be a similar restriction when it comes to accessing unsuitable material in cyberspace.. that seems to be a step too far, and if the the parents fail to prevent it from occurring.. tough shit.

    I of course believe parent's have the ultimate responsibility here, but that shouldn't be the be all and end of all of protecting children from accessing unsuitable material online, for the simple reason that some kids have assholes for parents.

    But you are looking for the removal of responsibility from parents. :confused:

    A child is not vulnerable on the basis of being a child either.


  • #44
    darkpagandeath
    Closed Accounts Posts: 24,461 ✭✭✭✭darkpagandeath


    Plenty of software out there that is really easy to setup and will take care of the problem till say the kids are into the teens. People either have some dilution that it's really hard to setup or don't even know about it. If your able to go online and shop your able to setup the software pretty much just ticking boxes. My major issue on this as well is creating any filter on the internet slows that down for everyone using it. Like diverting a sea into stream only so much can go through. It’s stupid that the government even considers it. Ireland provides 12.5 percent of online services. And they want to create bottlenecks ....


  • #45
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Scotty P wrote: »
    Or do you think we should let kids buy cigarettes? Or let them into Over 18 films at the cinema?

    Cigarettes cause directly measurable, provable, statistical harm. Sexual content, as far as we know, does not.
    For the record, I for one don't approve of film censorship anyway.
    I fail to see how it's fine to restrict some things over here but once someone suggests that there should be a similar restriction when it comes to accessing unsuitable material in cyberspace.. that seems to be a step too far, and if the the parents fail to prevent it from occurring.. tough sh!t

    Government, if given any control whatsoever over the Internet, will abuse it. Therefore regardless of good intentions, there are those of us who will fight any and all such control. Previous attempts at censorship around the world on the basis of protecting kids from predators have also blocked everything from lgbt support groups to "obectionable" political blogs - government simply cannot be trusted with that power. The Internet is one of the best chances we have today to take control away from the establishment and give it back to ordinary people - allowing them a foothold in controlling it would negate that.
    I of course believe parent's have the ultimate responsibility here, but that shouldn't be the be all and end of all of protecting children from accessing unsuitable material online, for the simple reason that some kids have assholes for parents.

    Who defines unsuitable? The government? :rolleyes:


  • #46
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,798 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Scotty P wrote: »
    Have already said why.

    Actually you haven't. You've said that there are things on the Internet that you don't want kids seeing without going into any detail at all about specifically which things you mean.


  • #47
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Bunch of idiots. If you dont want your children wandering to the shops you dont get the government to set up checkpoints along every road. You prevent them from leaving the house yourself. Simple software installed can solve this issue. I actually have an idea of how to implement some software that would solve nearly every issue with children and computers.


Advertisement