Cameron still thinks he can police the Internet
They say stupidity is not when someone makes a mistake, but when they don't learn from it.
Since Cameron made his ill advised pledge about curbing access to a wide range of adult material on the Internet as a way to combat child abuse and thereby (wrongly) linking pornography in general with paedophilia, albeit indirectly, he has been widely criticised for not understanding the problem or how the Internet worls. Today with Google and Microsoft announicng they are to block search results being displayed for up to 100,000 terms linked to child abuse he is warning that if they don't carry this through properly he will still consider legislation!!! So did the myriad of legal experts telling him legislation was unenforceable and ultimately ineffective due to the way the Internet works not get through to him??? Seemingly not! He also seems to think that Google and Microsoft doing this is a huge step to curbing online child porn and paedophiles in general. Firstly the online issue is far more about hidden search engines, the deep web etc. I seriously doubt there are many people stupid enough to use Google or MS to search for illegal material especially given Google's penchant for 'inadvertently' recording all sorts of data about its user base that it shouldn't! Secondly preventing access to these images whilst fundamentally a good idea does not get to the root cause of their production, in fact arguably it makes that task harder. I think once again we see the PM as wanting to be seen to be doing something rather than paying attention to exactly what it is he is doing! A trait of his time as PM frankly! |
I see you don't take our illustrious leader serious, Surely he he did enough last time around when he asked us to (lol>>) 'boycott' those bad websites. surely one man can do no more than that in a single lifetime!
He's a complete wanker who is so out of touch with reality that it's not even funny. |
This^^^^^^
Especially the last sentence. |
Maybe he'll take a leaf out of China when it comes to internet censorship. Perhaps this 'pornography' censorship is a back door to wider censorship and control policy which might lead to the monitoring of every individuals' access to the internet.
|
Sign of the times, people want o hear what they want to hear, doesnt mater if they know its crap or not.
If we want to sort out the economy once and for all then putting up taxes and reducing spending is the only way to do it. Problem is if a political party said 'were gonna put up income tax by 2% and solve the countries debt in 3 years' would anyone actualy vote for them. Even though we know its the only way to solve the problems we have no one would. Our whole political system is broken. |
I think it's purely to send out a message, set down a precedence
What else could it be? |
Originally Posted by Tidgy
(Post 11267918)
Sign of the times, people want o hear what they want to hear, doesnt mater if they know its crap or not.
Exactly right. They are doing the same with coming influx of Romanians and Bulgarians, talking as if they can somehow limit the numbers coming.:wonder: They can't...but it doesn't seem to stop them saying they will.:mad: What when they DO come? Lie about the numbers? Oh...wait...been THERE before! |
I read not long ago that he was asked a few questions about cost of living etc. and he was asked a simple question which was something along the lines of "How much is the average loaf of bread" to which his answer was nowhere near the correct figure.
His excuse was that he doesn't buy a loaf of bread as he has a bread maker at home... What a ****ing nobber. |
BBC Breakfast was quite interesting this morning. A guy who worked in child protection explaining that DC appears to have been mis-advised as to how it works and he went on to say that the people that look for these images don't use google or microsoft products.
The fit blonde on the sofa kept saying but isn't it a good idea and the he said well yes but it won't stop those that actively seek this material. It will only likely stop accidental viewing of the images. |
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 11267798)
Firstly the online issue is far more about hidden search engines, the deep web etc. I seriously doubt there are many people stupid enough to use Google or MS to search for illegal material especially given Google's penchant for 'inadvertently' recording all sorts of data about its user base that it |
Sorry Edd, just noticed you said exactly the same thing doh.
|
Originally Posted by Scoobydoo Ste
(Post 11267991)
I read not long ago that he was asked a few questions about cost of living etc. and he was asked a simple question which was something along the lines of "How much is the average loaf of bread" to which his answer was nowhere near the correct figure.
His excuse was that he doesn't buy a loaf of bread as he has a bread maker at home... What a ****ing nobber. |
Originally Posted by neil-h
(Post 11268044)
Go on then, what's the average cost of a loaf of bread? And no you're not allowed to Google it (not that I would know either way).
|
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 11268048)
I don't think that is the point he is making. It's not the fact he doesn't know what it is, it's that he is trying to purvey an image of himself as being 'down with the commio man' and then instead of just saying 'I don't know as I don't get to the bakers that often these days' he comes up wth some sh1te about having a bread maker!!!
I also can't say I see the problem with saying he has a bread maker, it's not exactly an expensive luxury item. Now if he said he had a man slave called James who hand bakes an artisan loaf for him every morning, then fair game. |
Originally Posted by neil-h
(Post 11268053)
Then on that basis most people aren't 'down with the common man' because I doubt many people could state the price of a loaf when asked at random.
I also can't say I see the problem with saying he has a bread maker, it's not exactly an expensive luxury item. Now if he said he had a man slave called James who hand bakes an artisan loaf for him every morning, then fair game. If you don't know you are out of touch with the hard working man on the street simply put. Bread between 80p and £2 per loaf milk approx 50p per pint (-; |
Originally Posted by neil-h
(Post 11268053)
Then on that basis most people aren't 'down with the common man' because I doubt many people could state the price of a loaf when asked at random.
Originally Posted by neil-h
(Post 11268053)
I also can't say I see the problem with saying he has a bread maker, it's not exactly an expensive luxury item. Now if he said he had a man slave called James who hand bakes an artisan loaf for him every morning, then fair game.
Anyway we are getting away from the topic in hand! |
Originally Posted by Adam@SC
(Post 11268057)
If you don't know you are out of touch with the hard working man on the street simply put.
What does it prove not knowing how much stuff costs? |
Originally Posted by Wurzel
(Post 11268063)
I am a common man in the street and I have no idea how much a loaf of bread or pint of milk costs. I just go to the supermarket and throw them in my basket then pay for them.
What does it prove not knowing how much stuff costs? |
I don't have a breadmaker but there was a strange noise coming from somewhere recently so it could be a James but I really am not planning on going to find out :D
My bread does seem to last an awful long time so anything is possible :D |
Originally Posted by Wurzel
(Post 11268069)
I don't have a breadmaker but there was a strange noise coming from somewhere recently so it could be a James but I really am not planning on going to find out :D
My bread does seem to last an awful long time so anything is possible :D |
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 11268071)
Well if an artisan loaf appears on your worktop ... you may have a James;)
http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-artisan-bread.htm |
Originally Posted by Wurzel
(Post 11268072)
|
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 11268075)
LOL at this thread now.... talk about diverting from the original subject :lol1: :lol1:
|
Originally Posted by Wurzel
(Post 11268077)
What was the original subject? :D
|
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 11268079)
Dunno, I'm too busy reading the artisan bread link to care :D
|
99% Percent of people dont understand how the internet works and only know of google for searching, so its just a publicity campain
|
In a previous job I was tasked with finding a way to identify inappropriate images across a large public sector network.
It was fairly simple look in all archive files for files with known image type file extensions. Some bespoke software was written to inspect all the images whether in archives or not for flesh tones. These images were copied and tagged with the user account where they were stored or created. The threshold started at 90% and worked downwards to around 30%. There were lots of inappropriate images recovered, but nothing illegal was found. I can't remember how many thousand images of Kylie Minogue were found, but she topped the popularity list. It can't be so difficult to have plugins or filters that work in the same way. |
Originally Posted by f1_fan
(Post 11268075)
LOL at this thread now.... talk about diverting from the original subject :lol1: :lol1:
|
Originally Posted by RA Dunk
(Post 11267840)
He's a complete wanker who is so out of touch with reality that it's not even funny. |
Originally Posted by neil-h
(Post 11268227)
Is it wrong that I'm quite impressed how off topic I managed to send that discussion with just 1 post :lol1:
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:17 AM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands