It is a terrible “anything is better than nothing” approach to the issue. Accidental views of child pornography do not harm anybody, and the suggestion that it turns people into pedophiles is insulting. The harm of child porn is done at the time of production. If we can’t shut down production, or can’t think of steps towards being able to shut down production, then doing something useless instead is not a substitute. Waste of time and money.

Agree with you Random

At last, a sane reaction to this proposal.

Tom S, Jeroen Bos , Random
I am beginning to see how this plan will have larger consequences
than just stopping the viewing of child porn….
I don’t want to swear but these f**kers just play games all the time .
We always have to be Steps ahead of them .
Nothing is black and white.Just like the austerity measures and the household tax etc .
These seemingly simple measures are ”just the shrimp to catch the mackrel”
Now I have a headache :) …

The problem there is Paddy is how do you shut down a site that is hosted in the arse end of no where? Some countries in fact have no legislation whatsoever for child pornography so the traffickers can just move their servers there. A lot of those countries are also open to corruption and while I’m not overly technical minded I would imagine that setting up a new server and site wouldn’t take too long.

I fully support you on your second point and this would be a worry of mine also. I think that there is universal agreement on finding a way to stop child porn and the last part of this motion does allow for transparent oversight of the proposal. I think that if this was implemented then there shouldn’t be a problem.

Now, this is the other side of the coin. I agree with where you’re coming from, but the Government have never threatened to block things they ‘don’t like’. They’ve threatened to block things that are against the law. Big difference.

Where are the servers ? Interpol are always chasing down servers .
Wasn’t this how they tracked all the people here who were paying for child pornography
several years ago ? The celebrity chef and the District court judge ?…
It is an ongoing exercise and with a reduction in recruitment and all of the retirements
in the Gardaí it is unfair to say that laziness or lack of will is at fault . Block the sites .

Yes there are countries where it is difficult but not impossible to remove such content. However it’s easier to setup a new IP and web address to beat any block that may be in place. It’s must harder to escape some handcuffs. By only blocking content it’s letting these filth peddlers run free about the web, hopping from domain to domain, surely hunting them down and locking them up is better for society.
Even the ISPAI agree that block is less effective than shutting down the sites: http://www.siliconrepublic.com/new-media/item/26010-removing-child-pornography/

Paddy
Of course handcuffs and prison sentences are the solution ,however like drug dealers , as soon as one is caught there are others out there to take their place . A combined effort on the part of all police forces world wide is what is needed , and that is ok say in countries where there is stability and laws protecting children ,but there are so many other places the rats can run to … For now it seems blocking it is the answer

Where are the servers? There are no centralised servers. They don’t use web sites. Sorry, but anyone who thinks they do is utterly clueless. The creeps who view and distribute child porn use an anonymised peer-to-peer technology dubbed “dark net”. The computers they use for viewing the child porn are also those used to distribute it. Dark nets are also (legitimately) used by dissidents in China to get around the Great Firewall, so that can be taken as an indicator of how successful ISP filtering will be in stopping the distribution of child porn.

Tom: This specific legislation does seem to have more to do with stopping people from stumbling upon child pornography on the open web.
You’re right in saying that those that seek such content use darknets (one Irish made darknet, Freenet, is quite popular), however these networks also have legitimate uses i.e. acting as endpoints/storage for dissidents in other countries.
So to your point, this legislation will be pretty ineffective if passed as it targets neither the supplier nor the consumers of child porn, only those who accidentally stumbled upon it through porn aggregators and popups.

Exactly. You need look no further than the Australian experience to see where this is ultimately heading.

BTW I do understand the process of law before anyone jumps down my throat.

Please god protect us from this filth!

It is a brainer, using child pornography as a test case to introduce blocks for everything else. One case can lead to state copyright blocking and stunt ecommerce development and freedoms of internet. It will have no impact on cases in court as unless somebody is caight in the act, that is internet turned off, witness that person was on computer, equipment removed with evidence, everything is deniable.

I’m sorry Frank but I can’t agree with you. Anything that stops the abuse of children is, IMO, a necessity. I can see your point – but I think comparing copyright infringement to child abuse images is slightly missing the point. If you use a sight to view the latest stateside releases you are not sitting down to watch a child being abused. If you download a song the action of downloading it may be illegal but the listening to it is not.
I personally can’t understand why there is not an eu wide block. We can be dictated to about health insurance, farming methods etc. but such a block cannot be implemented? Let’s use our powers for good rather than evil?

Neicy this will not stop abuse and you’re very naive to think it will.
I’m totally against child abuse as should everyone be but this will be a forerunner to future censorship. nothing more.

@neicy i would agree that a joint eu wide ban would have a impact.control would be broadened to many countries and not open to abuse of interest by one. but my issue is that if you remove the emotion in protecting children. The law would hand censorship control to the state for future items to be added. If anyone thinks this is not a problem, try using a school computer to conduct any legal business, you will find it impossible because everything is blocked through a state proxy server, which is great for protecting children and employees accessing non work related sites, but for the rest of us no.so it is feasable that with the current goverment record that i would have to petition to have a site unblocked so i could buy a tshirt saying vote no.

Aydo – I don’t think it will stop child abuse and I do believe that people who want to access such information will still do so. I think as a country we should do our utmost to protect children. Then again given the legislation required regarding the rights of the child.

I agree Niecy but this is not the way. If they can see theres certain sites with the filth then then they can go after those people who access the sites and the sites themselves.
A censorship tool is a step backwards.

Frank I would genuinely hate to live in a nanny state where blanket IP blocking was the norm. I do feel – however that when it comes to child abuse images anything that can be done should be done. I would hope that it would not lead to further unjustifiable blanket blocking. And as you say given our governments’ (past & present) ability to turn back in their promises allowing it once for this is not to say it wouldn’t happen again. However, I would have to say I am still in favour of it.
I understand that emotion needs to be removed when discussing many issues but the abuse of children (and adults) IMO is not one of them

Aydo, sorry i just don’t see blocking child abuse images as ‘censorship’. I think we will have to agree to disagree. :)

I think it should be debated. Any time censorship is involved, knee-jerk reactions should be avoided and the legislation should be carefully formulated and scrutinised. I agree, children need to be protected, but so do the freedoms of our society, as that is what our children will also inherit.

Yes, a no-brainer indeed, you couldn’t have put it better. Sometimes it helps to engage the brain, even for something that seems a no-brainer. Child pornography is not distributed using web sites that anyone can casually access. These perverts generally employ dark net technologies that are practically impossible to block. Those same technologies are used by dissidents living under regimes that employ mass-filtering of the sort that any government subjecting its people to widespread austerity to save the skins of the bankers would love to employ.

This is not about ultimately about protecting children. It is a trojan horse. If you want an example of web-filtering that ostensibly started as a measure to protect children but which has ended up having much wider implications, look at the Australia’s censorship measure, dubbed the “Rabbit-Proof Firewall”.

Aydo its not as simple as that, a lot of seemingly legit porn sites are a cover for child porn sites, they use file embedding. The ones that are discovered are monitored to see if the children or abusers can be traced, if they can then charges are brought. But there are way more sites that have not been discovered and the number is increasingly daily. This is making it virtually impossible for police world wide to keep track, and some countries effectively either turn a blind eyes or havent got the resources to fight it. as it says this will not stop child abuse but it will slow down the uploads and give police an opportunity to step up their
monitoring. I think we can as adults cross the censorship bridge when we come to it but these children have no way to defend themselves and this problem is getting out of control.

This is the type of law which the technically illiterate propose in order to exploit the knee jerk reaction of approval from those who approve of any measure aimed at stopping child pornography. While I can certainly approve of the sentiment, I don’t have the benefit of ignorance in technology to think this would do any good at all. One only has to look at countries that are currently trying to stop political dissent through similar methods to those that are proposed here to see how ineffective it would really be to anyone with an ounce of determination. There is a reason that they systems they are using are going further and further (they recently blocked SSL in Iran), because the methods they deploy are quickly circumvented.

Which is why this law is dangerously naive, it will drive the paedophiles underground, away from the prying eyes of the police, making it harder for them to be tracked and stopped. In the end laws like this will do more harm than good to the cause it purports to triumph. This law is terrible without even considering the slippery slope argument of the other uses that it would likely be put to, not that it matters, there is no more effective way of getting laws passed than pretending that they will protect kids.

@John Horan, I couldn’t have put it better myself. Knee jerk reactions get these laws past but they also create more damage than they were supposed to prevent.
Little by little they will throw these herrings at us to have a knee jerk reaction to support it under the guise of protecting children while they erode internet freedom and implement the censorship they have been looking for to stem dissent or anti-government communication mediums.
Child abusers will always find other methods to communicate just like dissidents or those communicating under a state block out. This will do nothing to change this. It will however be open to further censorship and filtering on a state level across the entire web.

Fiachra O R
Don’t be so hard on yourself , I am coming round to thinking that as it will be a first form of censorship and that we
should not allow it . The government are using the emotive issue of child pornography to introduce censorship .
Read my above posts and the replies I got from some very patient people who explained briefly what it would mean
if these censorship measures were to be introduced.
I am dead against child porn and pedophiles and any forms of depravity But…. I have to say I am now of the same opinion as yourself .” restrictions that could amount to censorship of otherwise legitimate discourse.” Spot on Fiachra .

Yes but you don’t have a leg to stand on if you go onto them via an ip block.(not that they really do in the first place but still).

Also I know loads of people that wouldn’t really know how to do an ip block.

It’s to help block access to people who may access it accidentally, if you actually read the article and UNDERSTOOD it.

How this is up for debate is beyond me!

I would be interested to see all those against this, and their reason for not backing it.

You think people can get to child porn “accidentally”? That’s brilliant.

Sorry for the speeding officer, me foot slipped onto the accelerator by accident. righty ho, if it was an accident off you go.

LoL Pani!!

Pani
Then any one looking at these images
after getting around the blocks are easier to trace and track and catch .

Actually Eileen they are not. The whole idea behind getting around these blocks is to pretend that your computer is based outside of Ireland altogether so it is in fact harder to find them.

Brian
I didn’t know that was possible ! Then this is what is meant about changing IP address ?
(Every day is a school day ) That makes things way more complicated then for the Gardai .
I still think anything to do with this awful activity should be blocked.

Eileen, I appreciate not everyone is techy so I’ll try to make it clearer. This is the equivalent of sticking a lollypop stick in the sand to stop the sea coming in. So why do it? “Oh, anything helps” well, yes possibly, but the “thing” in this instance is so stupid as to be completely worthless in doing. And my view is not borne out of some sort of “anti-censoring” stance, doesnt bother me one way or the other. I work in IT so I know how futile this is, lads are shaking their head at this in the office this morning. Have to question how much they paid consultants who advised them to do this.
for those who say they dont how to get round an ISP block? please /tsk/ its just something that you havent googled yet.
I say again, Child porn does not come down accidentally, you have to clickclickclick to get it.

Pani
Thanks for that
I have been reading Tom Sullivan’s comments too and John Horan’s and
I am beginning to see where this censorship plan is as Tom Sullivan said
a ”trojan horse”
. I am certainly not a techy ,but I am not one easily given to knee jerk reactions and I am afraid .
this is how I reacted to this story today. I gave a knee jerk reaction .I accept too that to get to any of these sites takes effort ,so what other option is there apart from blocking them / having the cops run around like idiots ( which they are not).
As I have said ,my instinct still is to block them .

@Eileen
Another way of looking at it outside the tech field is to draw a comparison between it and antibiotics. Antibiotics were an incredible advancement in medicine, allowing many operations which were once serious to become almost mundane (like removing your appendix). Antibiotics are also incredibly versatile and effective (which is more than I can say for this law, but stick with me) and so our heavy reliance on them is pretty understandable. But due to our over-realiance (you can get antibacterial soaps and even washing powder) and misuse (many people stop taking their proscribed antibiotics when they feel better rather than completing the course), we have been promoting the evolution of bacteria towards those that are immune to antibiotics. You are increasingly hearing of bacteria like streptococcus(strep) and other bugs being immune to our drugs. Unless there are some pretty amazing breakthroughs we are quickly heading towards an post antibiotic future and a huge step back in medicine.

Which is the same thing we would see with things like this. There would be a positive effect, but people would very quickly find ways around it (certain “strains” already have when it comes to political dissent) forcing us into an arms run which we cannot win and in the end it would make combating the whole thing much harder. I’m just making up figures here, but imagine our current approach is 50% effective, we are much better off sticking with it than taking the more extreme option which would yield a 90% effect for a short while and then drop to 10%. Misuse and overuse of antibiotics was beneficial, but only for a while and in the long run it is going to cost us.

John H
Thank you , I absolutely agree with you . I understand exactly where you are coming from.
We can not protect ourselves all of the time in the unlikely event of getting hurt /sick etc …
I have kids and at some stage each of them had to start doing things on their own and if I had prevented that then what was the point in teaching caring or educating them…. At some stage we have to let go of that small hand and allow them to get on ….
I am annoyed that the Government would use such an emotive issue to install prohiobitions and at the same time I am very angry that their are monsters out there who can not be stopped except through CONSTANT awareness and efforts on all our parts.
Thanks again John.

When it comes to ideals and child abuse, eh, get stuffed.

I would say people care more about living breating children and protecting them. The acta and sopa wouldnt affect this as they are about copyright and intellectual property, I dont think child pornography comes into either of those brackets.

Ideals and Child abuse in the same post? There are no words

Paul Mc
” I’m obviously in favour of any measures that fight child pornography, but…..”
BUT ! But what Paul ?
There should be no question about blocking it .
BLOCK it and be done with it .
Child protection at all costs end of story.

So I take it you are all in favour of theft?

I’m not talking about child pornography, I’m talking about the act of blocking ANYTHING outright via ISPs. Illegal is illegal, so surely blocking theft of intellectual property is the next step?

Now, I have no problem with this development whatsoever – in fact I’d also welcome measures to stop copyright theft. I’m just interested to see what the fellows in the Guy Fawkes masks think. If they somehow deem this to be more or less illegal than theft, then that’s somewhat revealing of their motives.

Paul Mc
” In favor of theft .”
What a ridiculous come back .Shallow ,that’s it.Shallow.
Arguing for the sake of arguing is ridiculous.
Child pornography should be outlawed at any cost.There is nothing at all to argue.
Theft of a childs innocence ,theft of a childs sense of security and well being, it just does not bear thinking that people are worried about freedom of speech and freedom of internet rights .Block the damned stuff .

.

Paul MC I see where you are coming from and I would be against censorship per se. However, child porn is illegal in this state whereas music/film/software is not. If I download music from the internet over a torrent without having paid for the music itself is not illegal however if I download child porn then the file itself is illegal as is the act of downloading it.

To put it another way, if I import OTC drugs from Spain like painkillers for instance that are legal here but I don’t pay for them then that is simple theft but not a major crime as the drugs here are legal. If on the other hand I import a kilo of cocaine from Spain that is a major crime as the material is illegal here. On the first scenario most people wouldn’t be overly bothered but in the second scenario virtually everybody would be in favor of blocking your ability to import that illegal material.

Ah yes. Gotcha, Brian. That’s the answer I was looking for. Cheers!

A lifeboat of sense in an ocean of nuttiness…

Who are my “buddies” exactly, Eileen? I’m not trying to ‘get at you’. I just raised the issue over whether this constitutes censorship. Asking questions is fundamental to democracy.

Paul Mc
arguing again !!!
Calling people names is just bad manners Paul . So Please
yet again stop bothering me . Take up another hobby !

There is a difference between arguing and asking questions. However, I’m beginning to understand that you make no such distinction.

Couldn’t agree more. They are a waste of space!

Brian, the proposals won’t stop anything coming into the state, except maybe (later on) opinions that our misrepresentatives and their troika masters don’t like.

Except Eircom cannot block you from illegally downloading music files.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2009/0129/1232923373331.html

That is not file blocking.

Eircom blocked access to one torrent site that has now gone legit. That is not the same as blocking the downloading of illegal music.

As I’ve said above, perhaps it is wiser to engage the brain for issues like this, as they implications far beyond what the purport to have.

Tom Sullivan
I read your posts above and I am not very clever about
computer technology ,and words like ‘dark net technologies ‘
are above my current understanding , but I get that they are
dangerous from your comments.
I also understand when you say that your concerns are that
this plan to block child porn sites is in effect to do with SOPA and ACTA
neither of which I understand fully , but get that it is a form of censorship .
If this is the case then the powers that be are playing on our emotions , about children and the abuse of them.This is a very serious situation. I wonder who suggested this plan to block the sites ? Or was it suggested by some one with good intent and then taken up by the government to be used as you suggest as a ”trojan horse” . I am beginning to understand what you mean about engaging the brain . However it is an emotive issue especially when it comes to children and their welfare.It is a rock and a hard place ,but my instinct still is to go with blocking it …

Eileen, just to make it clear, I’m not having a go at those who don’t understand technology. I’m simply suggesting that it is wise for citizens to inform themselves to the greatest extent possible so that they make good decisions and not put all their trust in a legislature that has a tendency to lie when it suits their purposes. When it comes to any issue that allows the state to have greater control over our lives, there is no such thing as a ‘no-brainer’.

Dark nets, like any technology, are neither good nor bad, but instead can be used to circumvent oppressive government censorship on the one hand and to clandestinely distribute child porn on the other hand. One thing I know for sure is that it is not possible to ‘casually’ encounter child-porn on the web. I’ve been using the internet almost daily since the mid-90′s and have yet to encounter any such site. So if child-porn is not so easily found on the web, mainly because it is not hosted on the web, but rather distributed direct from one pervent’s computer to another, then what is this proposed legislation REALLY about? I’m suggesting that this proposal is a trojan horse based on what resulted from similar proposals elsewhere.

Tom Sullivan
I appreciate your time and your comments .
I am concerned that this situation can be used to
get a form of censorship passed , based on what you say and on what is an emotional issue .
The fact that it can and will have far reaching effects on ” mass-filtering of the sort that any government subjecting its people to widespread austerity to save the skins of the bankers would love to employ.” to quote you .
You and Brian W and John H have certainly given me something to seriously dwell on .
Thanks again Tom S .
Like I said every day is a school day :)