I have noticed in the press that BT have started blocking Child porn sites.
WELL DONE hope I hear you all cry, However how long will it be before
sites such as this start to be frowned on. I have noticed today the SWING2US
site is currently being blocked.....is Big Brother out to get us all?
or maybe there's thing I just don't know!
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
BT blocking?
last reply
23 replies
1.3k views
4 watchers
0 likes
Orgasminator
It's not blocked 
Orgasminator
Well it works fine for me, are you sure it's a BT blocking page?
I find it doubtful that BT will be able to block "swinging" sites. Blocking child porn I can understand totally .... but swinging happens between consenting adults and isn't illegal.
No idea why you would be getting swing2us blocked but I can only imagine that there is something perhaps within the coding that leads the BT block to think that .... however sussexguy can get on there (presumably with BT) this obviously can't be the case.
No idea why you would be getting swing2us blocked but I can only imagine that there is something perhaps within the coding that leads the BT block to think that .... however sussexguy can get on there (presumably with BT) this obviously can't be the case.
There is a BBC news article about this here:
The problem is that they are not blocking actual child porn sites, they are blocking sites that the "Internet Watch Foundation" (an unelected body with no legal powers) tells them to block.
I've never heard of swing2us until now, but if there is no kiddy porn there (and I'd be very surprised if there was) they should get a lawyer straight away, and sue the f*** out of BT and the IWF for falsely accusing them of activities. I suspect there are many internet freedom charities that will support them.
The problem is that they are not blocking actual child porn sites, they are blocking sites that the "Internet Watch Foundation" (an unelected body with no legal powers) tells them to block.
I've never heard of swing2us until now, but if there is no kiddy porn there (and I'd be very surprised if there was) they should get a lawyer straight away, and sue the f*** out of BT and the IWF for falsely accusing them of activities. I suspect there are many internet freedom charities that will support them.
A BT spokesman added: "It could be that one dedicated pervert is making hundreds of attempts to get on websites each day."
This conjures up some pretty strange images - like some sort of pervert call centre, full of people beavering away trying to access illicit websites. Why do even the BBC insist on using stupid phrases like this?CM
Quote by ChairmanMiaow
A BT spokesman added: "It could be that one dedicated pervert is making hundreds of attempts to get on websites each day."
isn't that a contradiction? shurely its only perverted the first time, shouldnt this person be called a commited enthusiast? Bloody BBC (and they always get the time checks wrong)
Well since there is no child activity on this site, and we only allow adults / images of adults I cant see why they would be blocking this site. A note from the IWF own site indicates that:
is all they are looking for, and before anyone worries here is a note on the Obscene Publications Act 1959 (also from their site)
I doubt anything on SH would fall into that category, so they should have no grounds to do anything. Although I also noted while there was a lot on how to report a site, there was nothing on appealing against a decision, or even anyway of seeing if you are on the block list.
While I support the attempt to stop child abuse I am also worried about a 3rd party company deciding on what should be blocked, equally I don't think I would trust the goverment. What we really need is a 3rd party independant goverment funded body, with an appeals procedure and backed by the courts, I think I could go with that.
The worry is this is the slippery slope, 10 000 hits were reported towards blocked sites, how many of these were add banners on other sites? How many were redirects from spyware or virused machines, who knows. Now BT have said they are not recording where their users go, but how long before headlines like that, even not backed up technically, push them into keeping tabs, and the police start raids.
Ok no one has a problem with Child Porn being wiped out, but what of a normal PC user with a virused homepage that keeps going to a blocked site, you wont be impressed when your PC is impounded. Even found not guilty no one will trust you again...
Slippery slope, who knows, lets hope it stays a good idea, we get some form of appeals procedure, and it sticks to this one area and doesnt spread to other 'objectionable' materials, e.g. general porn, adult groups, news sources that 'may' have a terrorist link, etc ...
Contain images of child abuse, anywhere in the world.
Contain adult material that potentially breaches the Obscene Publications Act in the UK.
Contain criminally racist material in the UK.
is all they are looking for, and before anyone worries here is a note on the Obscene Publications Act 1959 (also from their site)
The law on obscene publications is difficult to define in everyday terms, and it is for a court to decide what is obscene. As a guide it would be images featuring extreme acts of sexual activity such as , non-consensual sex or extreme torture.
This act makes it an offence to publish, whether for gain or not, any article whose effect, taken as a whole, is such, in the view of the court, to tend to "deprave and corrupt" those likely to read, see or hear the matter contained or embodied in it.
I doubt anything on SH would fall into that category, so they should have no grounds to do anything. Although I also noted while there was a lot on how to report a site, there was nothing on appealing against a decision, or even anyway of seeing if you are on the block list.
While I support the attempt to stop child abuse I am also worried about a 3rd party company deciding on what should be blocked, equally I don't think I would trust the goverment. What we really need is a 3rd party independant goverment funded body, with an appeals procedure and backed by the courts, I think I could go with that.
The worry is this is the slippery slope, 10 000 hits were reported towards blocked sites, how many of these were add banners on other sites? How many were redirects from spyware or virused machines, who knows. Now BT have said they are not recording where their users go, but how long before headlines like that, even not backed up technically, push them into keeping tabs, and the police start raids.
Ok no one has a problem with Child Porn being wiped out, but what of a normal PC user with a virused homepage that keeps going to a blocked site, you wont be impressed when your PC is impounded. Even found not guilty no one will trust you again...
Slippery slope, who knows, lets hope it stays a good idea, we get some form of appeals procedure, and it sticks to this one area and doesnt spread to other 'objectionable' materials, e.g. general porn, adult groups, news sources that 'may' have a terrorist link, etc ...
Well done BT I say, if they're blocking sites with these sick illegal pictures. Reckon I'll ask my ISP when they're going to do the same thing. But I do agree with tallnhairy that it's slightly worrying that the IWF is completely unanswerable to anyone and there's no appeals process. It could probably be organised and run in a more open/accountable way, but until then better to have the IWF and BT's effort than having nothing at all.
Orgasminator
Quote by JudyTV
Posibly your firewall , has it been reset at all? Try turning it off and reset it yourself. Make sure you turn it back on straight away though.
The buffer overflow crack that can infect your pc doesnt need more than about 20 seconds un-fettered access to crack your pc... unless you have all the latest wonkdows updates installed.... one of the few times that you dont need to run something downloaded to get infected.
I've seen friends so often re-install the OS, log on to the internet to get the latest patches only to find they have to start all over again... the crack comonly causes the pc to re-boot after a couple of mins... that was not its intention, but rather a bad job at coding the crack.
Orgasminator
Quote by ChairmanMiaow
A BT spokesman added: "It could be that one dedicated pervert is making hundreds of attempts to get on websites each day."
This conjures up some pretty strange images - like some sort of pervert call centre, full of people beavering away trying to access illicit websites. Why do even the BBC insist on using stupid phrases like this?CM
It also doesnt make it clear if its "hits" or summary counts, ie 1 IP accesses a site 100 = 100 Hits, etc.
As someone eles pointed out... there is also re-directs, virus's, false banner links etc.
Also while I am in agreement that blocking child porn sites is on the face of it a good thing, it does open up issues of what hapens if the IWF decide that a site showing erotic fetish S/M depiction should be blocked, or sites like this becuase the IWF feel this site is im-moral or likely to cause offence?
Besides which... does anyone really think that child porn sites are not being tracked at the main routers buy various government departments anyway... blocking the access in an un-recorded way could actually lead to hiding some pedophiles from the major police agencies... how does anyone think that the big undercover raid earler this year was done... by IP tracking, and credit card checks combined. Big brother is out there watching you, just not as in your face as in the book 1984.
Ok I'm in here every lunch time.
I have to go to an iinternet cafe as my firm frown on personal internet usage.
SH site is fine but I have tried other contact sites and this internet cafe server won't allow it either.
As for porn, be it adult or kiddie then forget it.
But Yes I agree with BT policing the kiddie porn market. If the sites are blocked then the paeds can't access the sites. Drawback being if they can't see it in their own homes then they might go outside looking to pick up more kids.
I have to go to an iinternet cafe as my firm frown on personal internet usage.
SH site is fine but I have tried other contact sites and this internet cafe server won't allow it either.
As for porn, be it adult or kiddie then forget it.
But Yes I agree with BT policing the kiddie porn market. If the sites are blocked then the paeds can't access the sites. Drawback being if they can't see it in their own homes then they might go outside looking to pick up more kids.
Orgasminator
As the old (tho probably incorrectly quoted expression goes)
Theres lies, damned lies, and then statistics!
And I have to say that the "try again" to a site being assesed at only 2 goes is far wrong, most people I know will hit the refresh button at least 5 times before deciding that a site is really down... If the site is slow then they leave far more quickly than a "web site not found" first refresh is just incase they got it wrong, third attempt is by re-typing the address manually just incase, then another refresh. Finally a couple more "f5"s just to be safe... then off to check another site incase its their internet conection and all the sites are down, then back to the site... then another f5, then they go sod it... but will usualy check every hour or so just to see if its back yet.
The only true measure of "hits" is by IP address linking to the global URL (not via html/jpeg/etc) and only counting once during any 8 hour period.... use that formular and the "hits" goes down a huge amount.
My site gets between 400 and 3,000 "hits" a day... reduce that to thier IP to my IP in an 8 hour period and that goes down to about 10-100 visitors a day. while that is a small quantity, concidering i've never spammed, and the site is quite slow, its not a bad turn arround... over a six month period I would say I've about 30-60 "regs" that are obviously checing for updates, 6 web crawlers, and about 400 ocasional visitors, and 400 + new visitors. Very low quantities, but hey "3,000" hits a day sounds good, lol.
The only sites that are always going to have huge numbers are thoes that send out bulk spams, active sites with frequent "community/message board" visitors, and sites with frequent updates (ie daily) so thats is always going to be "porn" or sex related, or very topical (ie a TV program) or major players like BBC/MS/ et al., because of the frequency of updates. Most of the "hits" to porn sites end up with no sales anyway... lets face it, if the preview is good enough you dont need to get the credit card out, and it its crap you dont get the CC out, lol.
Theres lies, damned lies, and then statistics!
And I have to say that the "try again" to a site being assesed at only 2 goes is far wrong, most people I know will hit the refresh button at least 5 times before deciding that a site is really down... If the site is slow then they leave far more quickly than a "web site not found" first refresh is just incase they got it wrong, third attempt is by re-typing the address manually just incase, then another refresh. Finally a couple more "f5"s just to be safe... then off to check another site incase its their internet conection and all the sites are down, then back to the site... then another f5, then they go sod it... but will usualy check every hour or so just to see if its back yet.
The only true measure of "hits" is by IP address linking to the global URL (not via html/jpeg/etc) and only counting once during any 8 hour period.... use that formular and the "hits" goes down a huge amount.
My site gets between 400 and 3,000 "hits" a day... reduce that to thier IP to my IP in an 8 hour period and that goes down to about 10-100 visitors a day. while that is a small quantity, concidering i've never spammed, and the site is quite slow, its not a bad turn arround... over a six month period I would say I've about 30-60 "regs" that are obviously checing for updates, 6 web crawlers, and about 400 ocasional visitors, and 400 + new visitors. Very low quantities, but hey "3,000" hits a day sounds good, lol.
The only sites that are always going to have huge numbers are thoes that send out bulk spams, active sites with frequent "community/message board" visitors, and sites with frequent updates (ie daily) so thats is always going to be "porn" or sex related, or very topical (ie a TV program) or major players like BBC/MS/ et al., because of the frequency of updates. Most of the "hits" to porn sites end up with no sales anyway... lets face it, if the preview is good enough you dont need to get the credit card out, and it its crap you dont get the CC out, lol.
