UK Porn Block

[Easy-X]

It's coming...

Yes! Yes!

It's definitely coming...

Oh yes! Bebe!!!

It's still coming...

YES! Almost there!!!!

It's gonna be a while longer, soz

Seriously, WTF?!
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter

[Ribenapigeon]

[-]

[Easy-X]

Well worth the wait
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter

[lazy12]

[lazy12]

[Easy-X]

I posted a quick guide on Page 2 of this thread.
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter

[Im-a-Ridah]

[Riejufixing]

Well, they've given up on that idea, and they're groping around trying to think up another.

[Nobby the Bastard]

[Im-a-Ridah]

[Polarbear]

Yey, I can still watch smut.
____________________
Triumph Trophy Launch Edition

[owl]

Spectacular f*ckwittery from our fearless leaders once again

[Sister Sledge]

It was doomed to fail from the start. Experts warned them. I wonder how much it cost tax payers for the whole farce?
____________________
CCM 404 DS

[BTTD]

Does anyone want the government to censor the internet?
Shouldn't government be there to serve the people, not control them?

[-]

[Im-a-Ridah]

This is the latest in the long line of bills. We have previously discussed the RIPA, DRIP etc on here.

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) Part III
Critics claim that the spectres of terrorism, internet crime and paedophilia were used to push the act through and that there was little substantive debate in the House of Commons. The act has numerous critics, many of whom regard the RIPA regulations as excessive and a threat to civil liberties in the UK. Campaign group Big Brother Watch published a report in 2010 investigating the improper use of RIPA by local councils.[3] Critics such as Keith Vaz, the chairman of the House of Commons home affairs committee, have expressed concern that the act is being abused for "petty and vindictive" cases.[4] Similarly, Brian Binley, MP for Northampton South has urged councils to stop using the law, accusing them of acting like comic strip detective Dick Tracy.[5]

The Trading Standards Institute has been very critical of these views, stating that the use of surveillance is critical to their success (see TSI press release).

The "deniable encryption" features in free software such as FreeOTFE, TrueCrypt and BestCrypt could be said to make the task of investigations featuring RIPA much more difficult.

Another concern is that the Act requires sufficiently large UK Internet Service Providers to install technical systems to assist law enforcement agencies with interception activity. Although this equipment must be installed at the ISPs' expense, RIPA does provide that Parliament will examine appropriate funding for ISPs if the cost burden became unfairly high.


Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014
To allow the security services through the Secretary of State to retain the powers to require a public telecommunications operator to retain communications data in line with the purposes of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.[14]
The creation of a new privacy and civil liberties board to act as an independent watchdog overseeing the security services' use of these powers.[15]
To enforce the annual publication of a report of the amount of data intercepted under the regulations[15]
To restrict the length of time such data can be held to 12 months[15]
To ensure that the relevance of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 is reviewed biennially[15]
To reduce the number of public bodies that can access the data collected under the legislation[15]
To limit the data which can be accessed under the regulations to only data that is relevant[15]
To provide for fresh legislation to supersede this legislation in 2016[15]
To ensure that such data can no longer be gathered solely for the interest of the UK economic wellbeing[15]
To appoint a diplomat to negotiate data transfers of such information with the United States.[15]

Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (Snoopers charter)
introduced new powers, and restated existing ones, for UK intelligence agencies and law enforcement to carry out targeted interception of communications, bulk collection of communications data, and bulk interception of communications;[35][36][37][38]
created an Investigatory Powers Commission (IPC) to oversee the use of all investigatory powers, alongside the oversight provided by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament and the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. The IPC consists of a number of serving or former senior judges. It combined and replaced the powers of the Interception of Communications Commissioner, Intelligence Services Commissioner, and Chief Surveillance Commissioner;[39][40]
established a requirement for a judge serving on the IPC to review warrants for accessing the content of communications and equipment interference authorised by a Secretary of State before they come into force;[41]
required communication service providers (CSPs) to retain UK internet users' "Internet connection records" – which websites were visited but not the particular pages and not the full browsing history – for one year;[42]
allowed police, intelligence officers and other government department managers (listed below) to see the Internet connection records, as part of a targeted and filtered investigation, without a warrant;[43]
permitted the police and intelligence agencies to carry out targeted equipment interference, that is, hacking into computers or devices to access their data,[44] and bulk equipment interference for national security matters related to foreign investigations;[45]
placed a legal obligation on CSPs to assist with targeted interception of data, and communications and equipment interference in relation to an investigation; foreign companies are not required to engage in bulk collection of data or communications;[32]
maintained an existing requirement on CSPs in the UK to have the ability to remove encryption applied by the CSP; foreign companies are not required to remove encryption;[32]
put the Wilson Doctrine on a statutory footing for the first time as well as safeguards for other sensitive professions such as journalists, lawyers and doctors;[32]
provided local government with some investigatory powers, for example to investigate someone fraudulently claiming benefits, but not access to Internet connection records;[32]
created a new criminal offence for unlawfully accessing internet data;[32]
created a new criminal offence for a CSP or someone who works for a CSP to reveal that data has been requested

[Ste]

[Riejufixing]

Ste: "The four companies behind the judicial review - AgeChecked Ltd, VeriMe, AVYourself and AVSecure - are arguing the secretary of state only had power to choose when the scheme came into force, not scrap it in the form passed by Parliament"

Wow, they're grasping. I wonder whether they will get any "compo". Looking at this:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-10-17/debates/C743945F-9F9F-48E5-9064-707189D07846/OnlinePornographyAgeVerification

I suspect not.

[Easy-X]

And in other news: foxes band together to sue farmer for access to the hen house
____________________
Husqvarna Vitpilen 401, Yamaha XSR700, Honda Rebel, Yamaha DT175, Suzuki SV650 (loan) Fazer 600, Keeway Superlight 125, 50cc turd scooter

[Sister Sledge]

Hang on.
People can do rude consensual things with each other at age 16 (in the UK) but not watch it on a screen until they're 18?
Does that mean 16 and 17 year olds need to close their eyes when doing it??
____________________
CCM 404 DS

[Im-a-Ridah]

[Riejufixing]

[Im-a-Ridah]

[Ste]