Why not just opt out of the filter? Or use one of the many smaller ISPs who don't implement the filter in the first place? You don't need plugins/extensions.
Not all ISP cover all of the UK.
You also assume that the person wanting to bypass the ISP filter is the same person controlling the connection. So, say a 16yo wants to explore homosexuality, but is not ready to discuss this with parents who simply didn't bother opting out because they simply didn't think it was necessary.
Plenty of cases for using this extension, especially in the UK when we are routinely lied to about the scope of laws, and mission creep is universally denied, while it happens. For example, anti terror laws used by local councils to investigate fly tipping. We know that sooner or later other subject areas will be blocked by this distopian nut job government. Anything they feel is not in the public good will be considered and possibly censored. Make no mistake, this is the thin end of the wedge. We also know that it was originally dreamed up by the previous Labour government, so we wont get any changed even if we boot this lot out. Anything that bypasses these vile thought control freak nanny filters, and exposes the technical impotence of them is welcome. Remember, we dont have freedom enshrined in fundamental law. Its a granted privilege here, not a right. Oh, Human Rights act. Yup, this government wants rid of it. If Americans think their freedoms are under threat, the threat in the UK is many factors higher.
If they use BT Wholesale backhaul then their coverage is exactly the same as BT Retail.
ID Net, A&A, Zen, many others will give you as much coverage as the big boys even in Market 1 exchanges ( only BT Wholesale provision ).
If you're in a Market 2 or 3 area ( lots of competing backhaul ) then there's basically no restriction to how many ISPs from which you can choose.
Regardless of the child's sexuality, I'm sure 90% of parents think their teenagers are innocent pure darlings for years after their sexuality appears.
HAH! I had a friend one day in tears because her bf had some porn on his laptop. She was shocked, outraged etc.
She owned a dildo.
Some people have horrific double standards, unless people make a stand against censorship (unlikely) or their desire for porn (even less likely). This is only going to get worse.
That does happen. The likes of "Nuts" or "Zoo". Most of those lads mags are as pornographic.
The double stardard is that if a straight woman has lots of sex, she's a slut who should be ashamed; yet if a straight man has lots of sex, he's a stud and should be congratulated.
Nuts and Zoo and what have you have photos which are intended to be sexually enticing, ergo they're [soft] porn.
Generally the demos can control [via the government, to an extent] the production of works intended to be pornographic but not the private use of pornography.
There are also reasons to believe that watching porn might in some scenarios affect the viewer in negative ways that abstract sexual fantasy does not.
Reasonable people can of course disagree to the scope and accuracy of the above objections, but I'd consider neither fundamentally unreasonable.
Masturbation on the other hand is almost universally considered a normal and healthy part of adult sexuality.
Basically just because someone might find porn degrading to women or morally objectionable, doesn't mean they in any way oppose sex and their own sexuality.
I'm sure there is pornography created by people who want to make it. I'm less sure there are dildos created by anyone who wants to be making dildos (the actual workers, not the boss).
I'm sure some people would find a wife using a dildo as degrading to the husband and morally objectionable. Probably most of the middle east. That certainly doesn't give me the right to call it bad, though.
Also, BT are going to or are blocking proxy and proxy info sites. Why would any one want to opt in to that? Clearly this the beginnings of mass censorship, which I see no logical end to.
All this coming from the party which claims to be about personal choice and responsibility.
We all know that, at some point, the status of some poor schmucks ISP filter is going to be used as supporting evidence of their lifestyle against him or her in court.
Come on, seriously are you saying you can't imagine why?
If you don't block proxies then you may as well not block anything. Regardless of whether you think not blocking anything is the better way - surely you can see why people would want to block porn on their internet connections?
You have no obligation to filter your own network, but you can if you want.
(A satisfied customer)
He should me 24 hour ping latency graphs once, the network quality looked great.
it's possible that openreach will be doing the filtering eventually, A&A have no say.
You clearly do. But you said "Many". Can you cite any others?
He's not the Andy Mabbett level of trolling arse, and he's no MI5guy, but he does have notoriety.
I asked this last time A&A were mentioned, still haven't found an answer, just curious?
Even if the ISP is a member they don't have to implement the blocklist. ID Net is an example of this, I had an interesting exchange with one of the execs when I was a customer a few years ago. They were a member in order to 'monitor' trends but didn't use the blocklist. I don't see them listed as a member any more.
https://www.iwf.org.uk/members/member-policies/url-list/test...
which presumably explains why some previous 'observer' members are no longer members.
Again, though, IWF membership is not mandatory for any organisation.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/abu...