Presumed guilty until proven innocent. If you can afford it.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

I'll pass. But the mention of teens brings up a relevant point: what the heck are families supposed to do when their teen goes on a piracy binge.

Anyone wonder why I advocate denying children access to the internet until they turn eighteen?

[anamardoll]

...I really hope you're not serious. In our society, that could be a huge disadvantage.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Y'know, paying £20 in court costs hardly sounds like a tremendous burden.

To me, the bigger issue is that it sounds like the bill has some issues with due process; i.e. the accused ought to be given a chance to defend their actions before a punishment is applied.

Then again, I don't know how broadly those concepts apply in British law. Considering that it's apparently undergone a court challenge, I'm guessing it's legal, though probably still not a great idea.

The only other crime that gets punished upon accusation is terrorism. Maybe someone in power actually believed all those Hollywood adverts that said internet piracy funds terrorism?

[teh603]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

...I really hope you're not serious. In our society, that could be a huge disadvantage.

Lessee, it'd cut off one of the main sources of bootlegged research papers, keep them from spending all their computer time on facebook or stupid flash games, keep them from using most of the features of their mobile devices and MP3 players when they're supposed to be paying attention in class, cut off maybe a fifth of the computer viruses that come down the pipe, make conspiring against teachers and principals more difficult, deny them access to adults' personals sites thus preventing icky situations, make parents actually responsible for them learning about... certain facts of life, make gang communication a bit more difficult... and if they need to do some legitmate research, they can get their parents to help them like parents are supposed to do.

I'm afraid I don't see much of a problem.

[anamardoll]

No, I can't imagine how it would hurt them at all, considering that we live in a country where, if you want to live above the poverty line, you have to be able to fluently use both a computer and the internet.

Nor would I imagine that walling them off from the internet would at all affect their ability as adults to discern facts from lies online in the way that many unfortunate older members of our society have been unscrupulously preyed upon.

And, of course, all parents teach their children about sex education and safe sex, which is one of the many reasons why our beloved Texas has the highest teen pregnancy rate in the nation.

I do believe you have perhaps not thought through how incredibly crippling -- a word I do not use lightly -- it would be to completely wall a child off from the internet until they leave home.

[teh603]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I do believe you have perhaps not thought through how incredibly crippling -- a word I do not use lightly -- it would be to completely wall a child off from the internet until they leave home.

Because of my day job, I see children at their absolute, positive worst.

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

Shame the Daily Wail didn't tell their readers all this before the law was rushed through, then it might have made a difference.

It's also a shame that people take that newspaper seriously.

Actually, in its entirety, the Mail story isn't all that bad. It's just that the factual last few paragraphs of the article are basically the opposite of the headline.

The Guardian's story is no page-turner, but likely more accurate:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology...al-economy-act

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Y'know, paying £20 in court costs hardly sounds like a tremendous burden.

And it's not like anyone is going to pay it. All that is going to happen is that you get a warning letter. And if you ignore it, all that happens is you get another one. And another. There's no reason to waste the £20 on an appeal.

It's true that supporters of the upheld law hope it is a first step:

Provision is also made for the possible, future introduction of obligations on ISPs to take technical measures limiting or even suspending individual subscribers’ internet access in appropriate circumstances – to be laid down by ministers, and fleshed out by Ofcom, again in a code.

I'd make it like a parking ticket. You can appeal, but given the low penalty it might not be worth it. Under that kind of system, there still will be lots of scofflaws, but most people will play by the rules.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by teh603

Because of my day job, I see children at their absolute, positive worst.

Hard cases make bad laws.

[Kali Yuga]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

what the heck are families supposed to do when their teen goes on a piracy binge.

Oh, I dunno, let me think, hmm.... How about pay attention to what their kids are doing on the computer, especially after getting a few warnings?

Your kid, your network, your responsibility.

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Oh, I dunno, let me think, hmm.... How about pay attention to what their kids are doing on the computer, especially after getting a few warnings?

Your kid, your network, your responsibility.

Karma 4U

Originally Posted by anamardoll

No, I can't imagine how it would hurt them at all, considering that we live in a country where, if you want to live above the poverty line, you have to be able to fluently use both a computer and the internet.

I'm of the opinion that the ubiquity of computers has done virtually nothing to improve computer literacy. Most of the people I meet use a computer much like any other appliance that they would find in their home or at the office. It does not take 18 years of intensive self-training and certainly does not take 24/7 access to the Internet to impart those skills.

Originally Posted by Kali Yuga

Oh, I dunno, let me think, hmm.... How about pay attention to what their kids are doing on the computer, especially after getting a few warnings?

I think that you forgot to read the fine print on the manual that came with your child.

[ignacio ferrer]

Originally Posted by BWinmill

I'll pass. But the mention of teens brings up a relevant point: what the heck are families supposed to do when their teen goes on a piracy binge. Let's face it, piracy isn't exactly an easy-to-catch crime and even the most technically inept teen is going to have a network of friends who will aide and abet these activities. Something tells me that these companies would benefit far more from driving piracy so far underground that it ceases to be a socially acceptable activity.

What the heck are families supposed to do when their teen start steeling, bullying, lying, running up phone bills, [edited for language - mod], whatever - that would not be easily detected either ...

[ignacio ferrer]

Originally Posted by teh603

Anyone wonder why I advocate denying children access to the internet until they turn eighteen?

Yeah, I - what do you think exactly changes?

[Chi Cygni]

I think that neither complete cut off nor total freedom is good. First you need to work on your relationship with the child so at least they will consider and have at the back of their minds that what you say of dangers of internet may have some truth to it, plus develop early enough interest in other areas. To teach them morally right from morally wrong. And as a mock rule of Lenin says "believe but verify nonetheless". I would never ever allow my son (who is 4 now) later on to spend 12 hours per day in front of computer like his 12 year old half brother does. All weekend, from crawling out of bed until 9 pm with breaks for food when he keeps us waiting when everything is on the table (facebook, shooting games, whatnot). It is a computer addict in the making. Yes he was offered alternatives but it falls on deaf ears.

I do not believe (ok I don't have all the experience in the world) children are bad by nature. It is in a big part what the adults make of them in the long run, by neglect, lack of tough love and explaining the world. I sound like a frigging expert but I'm far from. It is a day to day work in which I succeed or fail but carry on.