Sunday 22 December 2013

Failed Porn filters? Not Really - It's all Going to Plan for Cameron

There has been a lot of frenzied Internet activity over past few days about the Newsnight story about porn filters failing to block porn sites while blocking sex education and information sites. This is seen as a failure. The solution, according to Women's Aid and some other posters in Twitter is better, more sophisticated filters. This is of course impossible. Getting a group of humans to distinguish between something that is tawdry and something that has artistic merit is hard enough. Expecting a computer program to understand these distinctions is so much beyond current technology that when it does happen we will have to consider whether we need to give human rights to computers. It will be the age of manga style cyborgs when that can happen.
My view is that Cameron predicted that the filters would fail. This is actually helpful to his current agenda of redesigning the Internet so that it is regulated and controlled by big media companies. Remember the days when you needed a lot of money to get something typeset, printed and distributed ? Or how, of you wanted to get something released on video you would have to pay hundreds or thousands of pounds to get it certificated by the BBFC- costs out with the capabilities of most people.
Now of course anyone, including me writing this blog can get my work put not the Internet for the cost of a few amps of electricity.
BUT NOT FOR LONG!
Cameron wants the interent to operate like the high street with the public protected from anything that might be unsuitable for them. The BBFC ( an organisation that is finding its purpose coming to an end and which needs a new role) and ATVOD ( a highly funded body that has only received about 6 complaints from the public in 3 years and is a pointless parasite on Internet TV) are both vying to become the regulator of the Internet. Cameron has repeatedly said of porn 'If you can't get it in the high street you shouldn't get it on the Internet'. He wants to apply this maxim to the whole of the Internet. He wants unregulated news sources and commentary stamped out and an Internet in which most citizens only get what comes via Murdoch and company.
I've been blogging on Internet censorship for the past 6 months and everything I have said has turned out to be correct so this is my prediction for 2014- a Cameron controlled Internet.
Fight it now or repent at leisure.

14 comments:

  1. I think you being a bit paranoid (no offence)

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/officials-claim-mobile-phone-firm-o2-misleading-public-gay-internet-blocks010114

    ReplyDelete
  3. in my view its more of a cheap publicity stunt also Cameron to stupid to regulated the internet and even if he did that there would be outrage and can you tell me out having crap filters that don't work actually help him agenda of redesigning the Internet

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Establishing the principle that the Government can lean on ISPs to filter people's Internet is a huge step towards Internet censorship. It would be politically impossible to do this in U.S.A. and an attempt to it in Australia met with huge political resistance.

      Delete
    2. by using a filter that dose not work? and can be easy bypass? i have already heard there going to scrap it also they all ready have filter out illegal file sharing sites for years

      Delete
    3. One of the people commenting on the recent story in the Guardian posted that she felt afraid to turn the filters off because she works in a job in which she has to pass a Police check. She said she was afraid that she would go onto a list of people who have turned their filters off.
      She is of course being a bit paranoid and overly cautious but then many people are afraid of stepping out of line - so the fact that the filters can be turned off or easily bypassed does not mean that won't act as a barrier to that section of the population who are worried about being watched and judged by authorities.

      Delete
  4. Cameron controlled Internet? they cant even win a election! I think your just Fear mongering please come back when you have facts ok

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually they have won an election. By forming a coalition with the Liberal Democrats they have been able to achieve the most radical Tory Government since Mrs Thatcher and achieve a much more right wing agenda than they would have with a minority Government or a slim majority.
      There is kore than one way to gain political control of a nation and many ways to control the media.

      Delete
  5. No offence taken anonymous. My views are based on a number of things David Cameron has said repeatedly in public about making the Internet the same as the high street. They are also based on positions taken by regulatory bodies like BBFC and ATVOD who want to maintain owner and influence. They are also based on the fact theta there is strong financial incentive by big business to regain the control they have lost over media ownership since the arrival of the Internet. The relationship between media owners such as Rupert Murdoch and British politicians across the political spectrum is week documented elsewhere.
    It would seem in my opinion to be unlikely that those vested interests would not seek to use a moral panic to regain some of the control they have lost.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. but that does not prove anything he said his opinion like your saying your opinion (tho he is wrong of course) also how do you know he wants unregulated news sources and commentary stamped out? he said If you can't get it in the high street you shouldn't get it on the Internet' he never said anything about unregulated news sources and commentary and that would break EU LAW! also you never have links to where your getting this information but its your opinion
      http://www.eucharter.org/home.php?page_id=18

      Delete
  6. well its your opinion but you keep acting like your opinion is fact

    ReplyDelete
  7. Purpose of blog is to write opinions and speculation not to be a primary source of news. I could make it clearer exactly what the basis is of all my arguments but then that would make it a more authoritative written piece.
    I am also doing academic writing on this subject and that will be fully referenced with accurate citations and probably less dramatic conclusions.
    However, this is just a speculative essay.
    I am not the only person reaching similar conclusions, however. The Guardian recently published a piece which strongly put forward the idea that the present moves are thin edge of the wedge for censorship.
    Speculating on what politicians are up to involves a certain amount of joining dots and reading between lines. If the proof was readily available then it would be yesterday's news.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. also sorry if I offended you or was rude

      Delete
  8. Not at all. It is good to get some feedback. Over 500 people read one of my other posts but only 2 people left comments. On reflection I have reread the posting and think now that I went a bit OTT on a few points so I am going to edit the post later- so thanks.

    ReplyDelete