|
|
Post by kite on Jul 22, 2013 16:14:21 GMT
Possibly, though multiple occupancy of platforms is permitted, with certain safeguards. I look forward to the RAIB report with interest. Platform 4a and 4b. Has caught several people out at Southampton when they come and get on the wrong train and find themselves heading towards Portsmouth  |
|
|
|
Post by kite on Jul 22, 2013 16:20:09 GMT
And what will Mr C define as "porn"? |
|
|
|
Post by kite on Jul 22, 2013 16:59:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Yami on Jul 22, 2013 20:02:51 GMT
Should of gone to Burger King for that  So the Royal Baby has been born and it's a boy ^_^ www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23413653So lets play the name guessing game. I'd chose Arthur...or Sherlock  |
|
duoinchains
kami
Posts: 893 
Favorite Anime: 5cm/s, Garden of Words, Time of Eve, Girls und Panzer, Kids on t'Slope, Usagi Drop
Favorite Manga: Banana Fish, Bunny Drop, 5cm/s, Two of Hearts, Seven Days, Kurosagi CDS
|
Post by duoinchains on Jul 22, 2013 20:36:47 GMT
And what will Mr C define as "porn"? And therein lies the problem. Most porn filters are too lax and too strict at the same time. So they might allow some explicit content through, yet block educational or medical resources (STDs for example, or LGBT Youth information/support). What should be the right to choose for each individual (over the age of consent) becomes yet another right usurped by the 'nanny state' because too many people (including parents) nowadays fail to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no issue with cracking down totally on child pornography, but the wider filtering of porn in general.. it cannot work, it won't work and will be yet another waste of public funds. Bah. /rant |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Yami on Jul 22, 2013 20:52:45 GMT
And what will Mr C define as "porn"? And therein lies the problem. Most porn filters are too lax and too strict at the same time. So they might allow some explicit content through, yet block educational or medical resources (STDs for example, or LGBT Youth information/support). What should be the right to choose for each individual (over the age of consent) becomes yet another right usurped by the 'nanny state' because too many people (including parents) nowadays fail to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no issue with cracking down totally on child pornography, but the wider filtering of porn in general.. it cannot work, it won't work and will be yet another waste of public funds. Bah. /rant Yeah this plan of his makes me so mad I could shake my fist... ... But yes I get tackling the problem of child pornography but this just seems like a stupid idea it almost reminds me of this - The issue at hand shouldn't be stopping the spread of child pornography but rather putting a stop to child pornography. Of course stopping the spread is good to but lets stop it altogether. |
|
|
|
Post by Shadowcat on Jul 23, 2013 10:21:47 GMT
And what will Mr C define as "porn"? And therein lies the problem. Most porn filters are too lax and too strict at the same time. So they might allow some explicit content through, yet block educational or medical resources (STDs for example, or LGBT Youth information/support). What should be the right to choose for each individual (over the age of consent) becomes yet another right usurped by the 'nanny state' because too many people (including parents) nowadays fail to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no issue with cracking down totally on child pornography, but the wider filtering of porn in general.. it cannot work, it won't work and will be yet another waste of public funds. Totally agree with that statement  Now.. I must make this comment.. My personal concern for this is not the fact we could loose porn, not the fact it is a stuped reasoning behind it, but due to the FACT! Perants will feel the internet is SAFER due to this filter. IT IS NOT! The internet will never be "safe" for minors! If people arn't going to educate there child on safe use of the internet. There WILL be more problems!!! Porn isn't the problem, education is! |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Yami on Jul 23, 2013 10:39:16 GMT
So what you're saying is more porn less education; let that be the slogan for fighting this  Also still want to name the Royal baby Arthur and it seems I wasn't the only one Seems like everyone is trying to get in on this Royal Baby business - www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-23417708EDIT: Man I love this guys way of telling the news ^_^ |
|
|
|
Post by kite on Jul 23, 2013 15:48:14 GMT
And therein lies the problem. Most porn filters are too lax and too strict at the same time. So they might allow some explicit content through, yet block educational or medical resources (STDs for example, or LGBT Youth information/support). What should be the right to choose for each individual (over the age of consent) becomes yet another right usurped by the 'nanny state' because too many people (including parents) nowadays fail to take responsibility for their own actions. I have no issue with cracking down totally on child pornography, but the wider filtering of porn in general.. it cannot work, it won't work and will be yet another waste of public funds. Totally agree with that statement Now.. I must make this comment.. My personal concern for this is not the fact we could loose porn, not the fact it is a stuped reasoning behind it, but due to the FACT! Perants will feel the internet is SAFER due to this filter. IT IS NOT! The internet will never be "safe" for minors! If people arn't going to educate there child on safe use of the internet. There WILL be more problems!!! Porn isn't the problem, education is! Ban something and it will seem more attractive to kids -------- Amazon are bringing back delivery charges for some items if you spend less than £10, I see a slow return to the "no free-delivery unless you spend over £x" policy. After-all, what other competition is there? |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Yami on Jul 23, 2013 21:41:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by noodle on Jul 23, 2013 22:06:32 GMT
Or maybe, only rob from cubists and surrealists. Noodle. |
|
|
|
Post by Dark Yami on Jul 24, 2013 10:20:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by noodle on Jul 24, 2013 21:51:47 GMT
Or maybe just say mimes because who are they going to tell? That's an interesting way of looking at it but are you going to stand there while they count out imaginary money while they pretend to cry?. How about going after those living statues instead?, but avoid the ones in the bearskins outside Buckingham Palace as they have guns. Noodle. |
|
|
|
Post by kite on Jul 25, 2013 16:11:22 GMT
 From the sounds of it, going too fast for that section of track
|
|
|
|
Post by Dark Yami on Jul 26, 2013 12:40:08 GMT
F**k, that's just...wow....I mean how does something like that happen? Whats the dead total up to now last I heard it was at 80. So quick change of subject; a Chinese firm will be in charge of the planned Porn Filter: www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-23452097 And it's bullsh*t really saying its to protect children; this whole thing reminds me of an episode of American Dad "A Smith in the Hand". Anyway back to the train crash story: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23465992 |
|
