The tech behind the UK filter is a steaming hot pile of S anyway.<p>oh sure it'll filter po.rnhub.con but reddit.com/r/nsfw nope. I suspect a horny 16 year old can figure that one out<p>Also...the whole "type your credit card number into this sketchy looking barebones site" tactic for verification just screams amateur hour
"Making sure the children in our society do not regularly stumble upon damaging material while browsing the internet, is something we can all get behind."<p>Well I can't. Most boys get their first exposure to pornography at maybe 10-12? It's natural and doesn't cause any problems. It's crazy that sex is so vilified in our society. And I don't think anyone even understands why.
In 30 years, this law will look as silly as the censorship of Clockwork Orange and the likes.<p>In the meantime, somebody will make money in VPN services.
I understand why you would require only adults to produce porn. Child porn is exploitative and destructive and one of then worst things in digital spaces.<p>But what is the reasoning behind limiting porn consumption to adults. This seems like an odd restriction that is taking away agency from children and families.<p>The age limit and type of porn varies significantly among parents that I know. None restrict porn of their 17 year olds. Everyone has a story of blocking their 10 year old.<p>The sheet cost of checking everyone’s id on a big section of the Internet seems to dwarf any expected benefit. It would be cheaper to hand out free pihole devices for every parent in the UK that just black holes porn and give an 800# for parents to get tech support.<p>In my country some places passed laws requiring grocery stores to check everyone’s id for alcohol purchases. It adds 10-30 seconds to every grocery trip and every incentive in a while causes a frustration. A friend’s 80 year old mother was denied being able to buy cooking wine because she didn’t have her id. It is so frustrating and an example of how society could improve, even in a small way, lives of citizens.
Interesting that the article mentions GDPR, and then launches into behaviours that are forbidden by GDPR<p>> But how could it be cheaper? well here is where it starts to get interesting. The second professional could, for example, employ a cheaper way to get your ID sent to them, maybe it gets sent via a third party. Another way to cut costs is advertising, they could get your consent to use your drinking habits for marketing purposes. Now we can just replace “shopkeeper” with “online porn publisher”.