BEDROCK Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Leading search engine companies Google and Microsoft have agreed measures to make it harder to find child abuse images online. As many as 100,000 search terms will now return no results that find illegal material, and will trigger warnings that child abuse imagery is illegal. PM David Cameron has welcomed the move but said it must be delivered or he would bring forward new legislation. Child protection experts have warned most images are on hidden networks. In July, Mr Cameron called on Google and Microsoft's Bing - which together account for 95% of search traffic - to do more to prevent people getting access to illegal images. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24980765 About time but I cannot see this being at all successful as there are dozens more search engines out there and unless internet service providers do something major by default then there will always be loop holes. They should also be bringing in some kind of Megan's Law that they have in the USA, name and shame people, that will soon make them stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aliceBB Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 And your evidence for that is...? All that naming and shaming does is bring out the lynch mobs. I'm glad that the ISPs are doing something, but I think we may be overestimating what effect it will have. BTW, it's a good idea to use quotatation marks or italics when you are reproducing something you didn't write yourself. Like most of your post, above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 They should also be bringing in some kind of Megan's Law that they have in the USA, name and shame people, that will soon make them stop. You might want to look up Operation Ore, especially the aftermath when it became clear that many people had been wrongfully accused of accessing child pornography. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Hans Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I thought you couldn't get them on Google anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dosxuk Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I thought you couldn't get them on Google anyway. Excuse me, do you mind pi**ing on Cameron's bonfire. He's spent ages stoking it up and it's just started to look good for him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 About time but I cannot see this being at all successful as there are dozens more search engines out there and unless internet service providers do something major by default then there will always be loop holes. Given that most child porn users share images via peer to peer filesharing systems, a good idea though this is its impact isn't going to be that great. They should also be bringing in some kind of Megan's Law that they have in the USA, name and shame people, that will soon make them stop. There's absolutely no evidence that it would 'soon make them stop' though, although it does bring a risk of innocent people being killed, as others have pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angos Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Its a great idea, because when pedophiles can't view children on line, they will stop thinking about children and children will be much safer, or maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeMac Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Given that most child porn users share images via peer to peer filesharing systems, a good idea though this is it's impact isn't going to be that great. There's absolutely no evidence that it would 'soon make them stop' though, although it does bring a risk of innocent people being killed, as others have pointed out. I think the intention is that it removes the chance of accidentally accessing these images via normal channels. That gives an element of protection to most internet users and removes a defence from the paedophiles. If you can't stumble upon this stuff, you must have accessed it deliberately. ---------- Post added 18-11-2013 at 22:54 ---------- Its a great idea, because when pedophiles can't view children on line, they will stop thinking about children and children will be much safer, or maybe not. Do us all a favour and try to post at least one coherent post per day:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 I think the intention is that it removes the chance of accidentally accessing these images via normal channels. That gives an element of protection to most internet users and removes a defence from the paedophiles. If you can't stumble upon this stuff, you must have accessed it deliberately. ---------- Post added 18-11-2013 at 22:54 ---------- Do us all a favour and try to post at least one coherent post per day:rolleyes: Have you or has anyone you know ever accidentally come across child porn images? I haven't, nor has anyone I know - I wonder how often this actually happens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpikeMac Posted November 18, 2013 Share Posted November 18, 2013 Have you or has anyone you know ever accidentally come across child porn images? I haven't, nor has anyone I know - I wonder how often this actually happens? I doubt that it happens often. I guess that it is frequently used as a defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.