Old dude
0
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6333673.stm
Im utterly disgusted by this. This is going to be so counter productive its a joke.
Ive long been doing things for child safety online.
I dont know weather or not the government know its pointless, or if its being suggested on purpose.
I have my suspicions. Firstly, its a knee jerk response to make it look as though they are doing something about the 3 blokes recently caught planning a rape of 2 young girls online.
Secondly, if it went through (which is stupid beyond belief) then they could say that xxxx amount of funds is being used to tackle sex offenders online.
As many people know, its a pointless gesture. If someone has to be monitored online, then they shouldnt be given access at all. And even then there is internet cafes, and I somehow doubt they check that they dont have a computer all the time.
They can even easily do it on a mobile phone.
Its another joke in terms of defending children online, from when that stupid organisation along with that silly moo Carol Vorderman shut down the MSN chatrooms and said it was a great victory. Evenyone with a bit of expirence with the internet knew it was a bad idea, simply driving the kids to less moderated sites.
So is this to make them look good, or simple stupidity?
The simplest and by far most effective way for a child safety online is drilling into them never to give details out, and keeping the computer in the living room.
Im utterly disgusted by this. This is going to be so counter productive its a joke.
Ive long been doing things for child safety online.
I dont know weather or not the government know its pointless, or if its being suggested on purpose.
I have my suspicions. Firstly, its a knee jerk response to make it look as though they are doing something about the 3 blokes recently caught planning a rape of 2 young girls online.
Secondly, if it went through (which is stupid beyond belief) then they could say that xxxx amount of funds is being used to tackle sex offenders online.
As many people know, its a pointless gesture. If someone has to be monitored online, then they shouldnt be given access at all. And even then there is internet cafes, and I somehow doubt they check that they dont have a computer all the time.
They can even easily do it on a mobile phone.
Its another joke in terms of defending children online, from when that stupid organisation along with that silly moo Carol Vorderman shut down the MSN chatrooms and said it was a great victory. Evenyone with a bit of expirence with the internet knew it was a bad idea, simply driving the kids to less moderated sites.
So is this to make them look good, or simple stupidity?
The simplest and by far most effective way for a child safety online is drilling into them never to give details out, and keeping the computer in the living room.























