Do the woman that made this law know that there's a psychological

Is this technology?

How insecure is that old hag theresa may?
Makes me glad Clinton never won the election.

>on a commercial basis

So basically all free porn is safe then?

>'Are you over the age of 18?
>'Yes'

even a 17 year old could outwit it

>>61433922
>Think of what you would have been like once you hit age 17 if you had no prior exposure to naked women
I'd still be doing gay shit with my friends. Literally, gay shit.

Porn saved my life.

>>61433922
Why is the UK so backwards?

>>61433922
pseudoscience
baseless claims
kill yourself

>>61433922
>Shit would hit the fan HARD and you'd be fucking the first 5/10 chick you could get your hands on.

Like what is happening in euroland on a daily basis?

>>61434058
yeah i guess. most those guys probably don't have access to the internet do they?

>>61434086
didnt have during their upbringing i mean

>>61434022
https://arstechnica.co.uk/tech-policy/2017/07/age-verification-porn-digital-economy-act/
Other sources say they'll require a credit card.

File: e026ebd8-d821-43bd-947b-0c3564b53130.jpg (18KB, 500x275px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 500x275px

>>61434058

Let me know if you ever find a 5/10 or higher British woman.

Does the UK have net neutrality?

I see the conquered territory that was once the UK is going to slowly ease its way into sharia...

>>61434153
They'll get rid of it once they're out of the EU

>>61434121
I don't know about UK but not everyone has a fucking credit card.

>>61434121

Does the UK not allow you to buy a prepaid credit card without an ID?

Guide to watching porn without government surveillance and tyranny

First, you need to download the Tor Browser. Contrary to the popular opinion, using Tor is perfectly legal, for now at least. You should disable Javascript for more security or you can leave it on, a trade between security and usability. More information regarding what you should do while using Tor will be linked at the bottom of the homepage of the Tor Browser.

Normally, Tor connections can be blocked by government officials on the basis of preventing censor circumvention. In order to circumvent such measures, Tor has a module called Pluggable Transport. What Pluggable Transport does is obfuscating traffic between a Tor node and a Tor Browser instance so government officials cannot censor this connection. Here is an official guide regarding Tor and Pluggable Transports.

https://bridges.torproject.org

Good
porn is haram
men and boys may just have sex with the english lassies

>>61433922
The UK's firewall will give China a run for its money one of these days.

I woukd have been a jihadist teen.

More dumb tory bullshit
It's clear that they don't know a single thing about how technology actually works if they think they can just ban or restrict everything
This bill in particular also raises the maximum imprisonment time for piracy to 10 years, but you don't hear about that too much in the media either

File: 1489784803133 (1).gif (1MB, 150x113px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 150x113px

>>61434393
>waaah tories
you have to be 18+ to use this website

>>61434420
A true englishman hates the tories but votes for them anyway. It's just a shame none of them understand the internet and modern tech.

>set up a couple porn sites
>credit card info and private info starts flowing in from the UK
>'accidentally' leak the database
>over and over again until the privacy related issues here are clear to everyone

>>61434420
>you have to be 18+ to use this website
Not in a literal sense, but soon might be for the UK.

>>61434475
People who vote for the tories are almost as stupid as the retarded students that constantly whine about them.

>>61434524
>Not in a literal sense
>>>/global/rules/2

>>61434558
I wonder about reddit with /r/gonewild and all their other amateur porn boards.

>>61434558
It's a rule but do you think it stops anyone?
Soon it will, in the UK.

>>61434240
I don't remember them being in supermarkets when I lived there but 12 year olds can get debit cards at a bank

How come you only have to be 16 to have sex but you need to be 18 to watch porn?

>>61433922
That's not true though. I went 5 months doing nofap to prove to myself that I could and my libido was the same before, during, and after.

>>61435469
nofap AND no porn? or were you still edging to porn? Because I've done no porn or looking at attractive women and only allowing myself a release without lustful thoughts and the passion definitely did build up.

>>61433922
>the woman that made this law
>signed by digital minister Matt Hancock

omfg stop whining

>>61434604
As someone who was 16 when websites thought they might actually have to enforce the Communications Decency Act in the US, it wasn't that hard to get porn.

>>61433922
Look at South Korea for an example of a society where porn is outlawed.

>ruled by devil worshiping, fetus cannibalizing feminists
>also Samsung

I wish I was making this up.

File: 1496579577699.jpg (232KB, 979x832px) Image search: [Google]

232KB, 979x832px

>>61434558
>complain about them - you're an idiot
>support them - you're an idiot

>>61435544
No porn, no masturbation. I even stopped using websites with questionable content.

>>61435639
No

>be a whiny student extreme liberal bitch(male) who hates all white people
>(you're retarded)

>be a whiny student extreme liberal bitch(male) who hates all white people but has slightly more money
>(you're retarded)

>>61435652
>I even stopped using websites with questionable content.

Except 4chan, porn central.

>>61433922
>you'd be fucking the first 5/10 chick you could get your hands on.
This is a bad thing. Masturbation and porn in moderation are good, not releasing now and then is pretty bad, you start thinking with your dick instead of your brain and might do all kinds of stupid things just to get your dick in a whore.

>>61433997
Ideologically, May was the trump of the election. Also, trump is worse for Internet freedom. See: net neutrality being majorly supportes by Democrats and rejected by Republicana

>>61435607
South Korea is a highly developed country though from its shit recent underdeveloped beginnings

>>61435805
Net Neutrality is bad for freedom. It consolidates more power under the already too large FCC. If it's a matter of competition, that's up to the FTC, not the FCC.

>>61435993
>consolidates more power under the fcc
All they'd do is say "treat all traffic equally" and enforce that. That's it. There's no more meddling than that. Saying it's giving them more power is misleading

>>61436007
That's what they're saying they want to do. I'd rather not give an organization like the FCC power over the internet.

>>61436025
>le ebil gubmint doesn't exist to serve the people and wont do what it says it does even though what it does is clearly set out and it will face legal attacks if it does something else

ugly women hate porn because it gives you an easy way out of having to play their game. It's like sex economics where they want to create artificial scarcity on something that nobody wants

ugly women especially hate pretty women and this is like everyone being able to quickly get one or at least in a way so that they can replace the ugly woman.

anyway you need to stop paying attention to pseudo proposed legislation, you simply can't regulate the internet. Even if they did it would only be the simplest ways of getting it ie through a web browser since they have no idea how anything else works. You could always get it some other way.

>>61435993
>being this retarded

>>61436056
You're saying that like you don't think it's true. FCC is a big part of why TV and Radio are shit these days.

>>61436070
That's *not* an argument

>yfw Brexit was just a way of getting rid of EU's regulations so they could turn the UK into a literal police state

British refugees not welcomed, by the way. Get fucked.

>>61436097
Nobody wants to leave Britain you dafty

>>61436058
>80% of all women think the same thing

You're a dumbass.

>Think of what you would have been like once you hit age 17 if you had no prior exposure to naked women and porn on the internet between the ages of 12 and 16. Shit would hit the fan HARD and you'd be fucking the first 5/10 chick you could get your hands on.
Uhm, no I didn't? Are you a negro or Muhammadan by change?

>>61433922
maybe the british men will go out and take their country back now.
They should start in londinstan and work their way to scotland in a clockwise spiril

>>61435905
Because there's going to be more whites than Asians soon

File: 1499653310418.gif (280KB, 420x234px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 420x234px

>>61433922

>Woman who ran the home office wants to make a database of people and the porn they watch, including present and future politicians

>>61436385
This, what the fuck? This was a fact for most white Europeans crowing up before the late 90's and there sure as hell wasn't rapey party everyday.

>>61433922
>punishing the use of bots to snatch up scores of concert tickets
okay now I am angry

>>61435993
this anon does have a point, even if he's drinking the Ted Cruz kool-aid.

net neutrality should be enforced by the network itself, not by a single entity. it should be outright impossible to offer preferential service.

>>61436322
Give it ten years and you'll see.

>>61436883
I don't really care for Ted Cruz. I'd rather see a true decentralized network, rather than a centralized network with a gummint authority that we're supposed to trust.

>>61433922
> and you'd be fucking the first 5/10 chick you could get your hands on
It's either this or muslimes will dominate, so I understand they may want to restore a brit population.

>>61433922
>muh men are animals meme
Way to fall for their propaganda, dipshit.

>>61436993
give it ten years and it'll be the racial holy war and leaving will be punished by death

This is like sponsoring sexbot research.

>>61434236
well, no porn for you then

>>61435993
That's what the two uncompetitive ISPs in my area say as well.

>>61434236
>not everyone has a fucking credit card
not having one is a crime here

>>61433922
UK is a mistake. Hitler should have destroyed shitland before losing the war

>>61437184
Why are they non-competitive? Because of government regulation. That's how these monopoly's exist. You can't fix shit by piling more shit on.

>>61437241
> Because of government regulation
Mind to explain that?

File: .jpg (201KB, 470x595px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 470x595px

>send email to bong gov
>>I'd like to let you know that the website 4chan.org serves pornographic content here 4chan.org/gif/
>>Please add it to the list of pornographic website
>Instantly improve 4chan quality by denying access to all the underage bong faggots
>mfw

File: 5.jpg (55KB, 555x555px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 555x555px

>>61437285
let it happen

It's just vapourware politics, it'll never happen and if it does it'll be woefully inadequate at providing even the most basic functionality the same way UK ISPs are required to block pirate sites, turns out they're DNS-based and even using HTTPS beats it.

We're dealing with a generation who grew up around the internet in a different way to millennials, how can they possibly prevent a generation of horny tech-savvy teens from viewing porn when their parents can't operate even basic technology let alone manage their son/daughter on the internet. It won't work and if it does work the younger generation will find a way around it.

For reference credit cards are only issued to 18+ in the UK, debit cards can be issued to 12 and up but no credit. Discussing the method of authentication is irrelevant though because the hardest thing to implement would be forcing these companies to give the UK special treatment when they've been operating successfully for years.

>>61433922
>Shit would hit the fan HARD and you'd be fucking the first 5/10 chick you could get your hands on.
It's more likely you'd develop an imagination

>>61437395
> UK ISPs are required to block pirate sites, turns out they're DNS-based and even using HTTPS beats it.
They do not enforce blocks because there's no punisment for that, I believe. Otherwise, blocking 50K domains with Squid is easy-peasy.

>>61437273
I can't be fucked to write up a whole thing
http://archive.is/EwroO

>>61436076
>tv and radio

>>61438602
What did he mean by this?

>>61433922
The poor kids will have to go back to jerking it to underwear catalogs and swimsuit ads like how it was back before the internet. They'll be better off for it too, free easy porn broke my dick by the time I made it to college.

>>61437195
lmao the jews own you even more than they own the americans

>>61436007
Impossible to enforce, literally just another power grab

>>61441231

No, they'll just find their way around UK site blocks.

Alternatively, people with used up vanilla visa gift cards could post the CCNs online for people to use it as a form of fake ID. After all, the requirement isn't for people to pay money with said CCN, but for it to be a valid CCN.

>>61434125
Life in Britain is pain

File: IMG_3449.jpg (95KB, 600x411px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 600x411px

>>61433922
>you'd be fucking the first 5/10 chick you could get your hands on.

Wasn't that the plan all along?

>>61434011
Commercial basis = doing it for money
They don't have to get the money from directly charging consumers. If they have ads and are free to use they are still money making and still classed as commercial sites

4chan and Rebbit will fall under these rules

File: 1483905725228.jpg (64KB, 736x682px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 736x682px

What if I make a website which acts as nothing but a mirror to adult websites? I am not providing any adult content, and seeing as I'm not based in the UK, I won't need to identify myself to fetch the adult stuff.

>>61435805
>net neutrality
It's not even a real thing, it's a buzzword.

Net Neutrality, as Obama would have had it, would have entailed a lot more than passing packets from Netflix. It would have enabled Internet censorship, allowed companies to dox people who 'offend,' and it was all around a horrible piece of shit.

If and when you Googlebama shills can come up with a fucking decent net neutrality plan which doesn't fuck over the consumer, please try to get it passed through congress.

Ramming a fucking 'rule' which has the force of law up the backdoor through the FCC isn't how you do it.

>>61433922
I like the idea, honestly. Porn is bad mm'kay and and people needing to show ID would cut down on it's viewership. It won't work though, people will just move to illegally watching it to save face.

>>61443041
>It would have enabled Internet censorship, allowed companies to dox people who 'offend,'

If you have a citation for any of this I'd be interested to read it.

>>61443172
You can feel free to read the 90 page long, tiny print """rule""" which Trump threw out if you wish. If you weren't lazy you'd have done so already

That's the citation, Reddit. I refuted you, time to go back.

>>61443344
Okay. I asked that in good faith momentarily pretending you based your post in facts, but I can see you're just parroting what you heard in your echo chamber.

Calling me reddit because I wanted to read more about your viewpoint was a nice touch, though. You'll convince a lot of people like that.

>>61443468
>parroting
I'm afraid you're the parrot here CIA.

If you're unwilling to read the rule which was repealed, how can you have a profitable conversation on the issue?

You prefer not to understand, and I'm certainly not going to waste time holding a shill's hand and providing citations and stuff while you ignore them.

This is 4chan, not Reddit, and we're all quite familiar with your little shill games.

Read the fucking rule or get the fuck out of this thread. Once you've read it, you will find it impossible to be in favor of it unless you're a kike.

You don't want to read about my viewpoint, you want to attempt to 'refute' me because I'm not providing citations and such.

It's such a tired old game, so inherently Jewish, that it is giving me and the rest of us here a rash.

Please, I implore you, go back to your safe space. It'll be much more comfy and you'll encounter and endless stream of mental midgets who are more than happy to give you citation after citation even though it is clear you're not interested in reading them.

Read the rule and come back, or get the fuck out of the thread, shill.

>>61443701
You're asking me to read 90 pages of fine print from somewhere to prove to myself a statement that you've put forward. That's a little unreasonable. You're clearly familiar with the rule itself and I'm likely to pass it by while skimming over it, so, if you want people to come around to your way of seeing things, pointing to the censorship and doxxing clauses in it would help.

However vague it is, I'm not interested in debating you, I'd just like to see where people are sourcing this kind of information from. You aren't the first person of seen say things to this effect on /g/ or /pol/, but no one else has backed anything up either.

>>61434236
Debt card works too.

>i dont have a bank account
okay, why are you using the internet?

>>61435805
>trump is worse for Internet freedom
Trump withdrew from the TPP though. The TPP was terrible for internet freedom.

>>61444133
>The TPP was terrible for internet freedom.
That wasn't the reason he opposed it, though.
He was against liberalizing trade. He (or his supporters) didn't want US subsidies and tariffs dismantled. You guys would be getting cheap, high quality foods now. Instead, farm products subsidized by your taxes will continue being dumped on world markets.

>>61444515
Yeah, and local agricultural industry would be dead. I want globalist shills to leave.

>>61437285
DEVILISH
E
V
I
L
I
S
H

>>61444515
Scrapping the TPP protects more local industries than the admittedly undeserving agricultural sector. Our food is plenty cheap anyhow.

>>61444554
US agriculture is pure centralized economics; those parasites live off nothing but handouts. They won't be going anywhere no matter what happens.

>>61436058
t. ugly man

>>61444515
fuck TPP and fuck you for even trying to defend it. this entire website would be shut down if that shit had been kept

File: 1500409424459.jpg (134KB, 786x1024px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 786x1024px

>>61443701
really, can you just post it? makes it hell a lot easier because if this is true, its a valid point.

or you can contiune to be an ass and tell people to search for a 90 page document and fine this "tiny fine print"

File: 1500409460026.jpg (99KB, 858x1024px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 858x1024px

>>61443945
>You aren't the first person of seen say things to this effect on /g/ or /pol/, but no one else has backed anything up either.
yeah so have i. even on reddit i've seen a few state this but never the proof. it wouldn't surprise me as obama, who campaigned against bush doing shit like this, ended up just increasing all the spying crap bush did. but i never herd about this part until recently from unknown, unbacked sources.

File: 5.jpg (54KB, 555x555px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 555x555px

>>61437285

>>61444780
>>61444780
Shill have been spreading misinformation for awhile now. I've seen tons of people talking about NN that don't even know what its truly about

File: 1485207965667.jpg (59KB, 680x510px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 680x510px

>>61435993
is this what americans truly believe ?

I do not support this law, but
>>61434236
>not everyone has a fucking credit card
You have to be pretty much financially innumerate (or habitually unemployed) to be an adult without a credit card or two. Using a debit card online is a really risky and stupid thing to do, and it implies you live a fairly boring life since it's quite difficult to book hotels/car hire without a CC.

>>61434240
Sure there are prepaid cards, but merchants can easily distinguish them from real credit cards if they want to.

File: Screenshot_2017-07-19-01-01-21-204.jpg (346KB, 809x730px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 809x730px

>>61435993

File: 96663d027d1114fcf77bf8680159c6675b34ed68babe003abe9c5f3f67c4e51d.jpg (133KB, 2000x1333px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 2000x1333px

>>61443701
Nah you're the cunt here, the burden of proof is on you if you put forward an argument.

>>>/pol/

Not sure why you think that OP.

I think my fetishes would be less "severe" if I had never discovered internet pornography. The more frequently I masturbate the more extreme it gets.

>>61443945
>I don't need to provide sources. Just google it you JOO
>What are you, lazy?

Ironically, it's a very reddit tier thing to not provide sources(read proof) for your arguments. It's a trend that was very popular on t_d.

>>61437241
ITT: People who don't know how expensive it is to run an ISP.

>>61433922
>you'd be fucking the first 5/10 chick you could get your hands on

You do anyway if all goes well for you.

Young teen male minds will find the porn. I have no doubt about this.

>>61434558
Speaking as an American, I really don't see anything wrong with the tories and the things I see posted about them, on 4chan of all places, reminds me of how democrats in the 00's and earlier would always go
>voting for reDUMBlicans
>ever
And then never explaining why they were a bad political party besides a quote of a republican senator saying global warming was not settled science. Also speaking as an American, all of Britain's political parties are shit because all of you worship the queen and government even when they're searching your house, and those who don't instead worship brown people or are brown people. I'm not even sure europeans even know what it's like to be free from all that shit, because if they did their posts would look a lot more different. The foundation of the nation-state of Britain is anathema to a citizen of Britain's freedom. This is why America was made.

File: anathema.jpg (37KB, 257x245px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 257x245px

>>61449122
>anathema

Didn't know that was a real word

>>61436337
That's the case.
1 in 5 women is an outlier, either thanks to her entourage, being an outcest to other women, or because very rarely she actually is a smart individual.
Every other woman is a clone with a herd mentality that appears to look different by their position in space and unique look only.
Which is why they shouldn't be allowed to vote.
Even the outlier women agree on this, it's not worth it.

>>61436025
And I'd rather not let a company like Comcast have more power than they already do.

>>61442831
>Less yuropoors on /o/
That's great