aesmael: (tricicat)
aesmael ([personal profile] aesmael) wrote2009-02-24 11:26 pm

Sometimes I think

when government or other organisational members speak of wishing to block 'child pornography' online what they mean is 'pornography from being viewed by people under the age of 18' (and in at least this context, everyone else too, as well as a whole lot of other material).

Edit: To follow up the above, under the proposed scheme everything rated MA15+ or above would be subject to mandatory blocking from everyone in Australia using the internet. You can see what that means here or look at the classification guidelines directly here. For easy reference, it is similar to prohibiting everyone from being able to access material with a US 'R' rating.

[identity profile] lost-angelwings.livejournal.com 2009-02-24 03:21 pm (UTC)(link)
*rescues you* :|

[identity profile] laura-seabrook.livejournal.com 2009-02-24 08:58 pm (UTC)(link)
At best, what the government should do is offer a voluntary form of filtering for those who want it. As we all know, involuntary forms can easily be got around by those determined to do so.