Is this what passes for normal over in Merry Olde England? While it wouldn’t surprise me that some carriers might have parental censor software in the US I’ve never heard of anyone ever buying a phone with it turned on by default. Seriously, never.
shrug I grew up in the Internet era too and I have no idea how to do it; I’ve never had to. I’m sure some will figure it out, but not all.
Fuck off with the Merry Olde England, makes you sound like a total arsehole. 
Seriously, don’t do that (I don’t live in England).
On your actual point, I think that became the default when smartphones got cheap enough and widespread enough that bairns had them. It was irritating though - I’d just got my new upgrade and it was hobbled out of the box, even though I’d had an obviously adult relationship with Vodafone for over ten years (credit card etc).
I can only speak for the USA, but here, the other media have to be regulated because there is a limited bandwidth. There is no such limitation with the Internet. They are regulated for content mostly because they are broadcast, and public. And if that amount of regulation for content is on shaky grounds constitutionally. Cable channels are much less regulated. And internet is more like a library than a channel.
[Jock Translator] That’s a child, for those wondering. [/JT]
Not what zombie children eat?
…*and *what dyslexic zombie children eat.
You need to opt in. So the ISP will have lists of people who have opted in. These lists are not going to stay a secret for long. A few years from now a MI5 guy is going to forget his briefcase and laptop on a train and the list will be made public on the Internet, and people can go and lookup their neighbour, girl they’re flirting with, or the guy coming in for a job interview. Perhaps it’s going to be used in court cases: some guy is accused of rape, the evidence is flimsy, but he’s on the pervert list so he’s probably guilty.
Anyway, it’s unworkable. How on earth are they going to classify what is smut, and keep such lists up to date? There are some pretty ugly pictures on Wikipedia, page-6 girls in newspapers, porn on Reddit, tumblr, blogspot, and VK, and lingerie health sites have naughty pictures, Amazon has 50 Shades of Grey, etc. It’s going to be a full time job for a thousand bureaucrats just to keep the naughty site list up to date.
The ISPs already know who is looking at porn.
NSFBK isn’t just a Snopes meme?
:dubious: Why is that a thing worth protecting?!
By checking to see if the performers’ paychecks bounced.
Funny, I always thought the US was supposed to be the one with the bizarre hangups about sexuality. Also, I am reminded of this story of the man who tried to sue Apple because it made devices that showed pornography. I guess he should just move to the UK?
What country do you live in, where the government regulates and censors print media?
Hasn’t this train already left the station? All you have to do is think about Jamie Bulger and realize that the UK has bigger issues than kids looking at titties.
But the ISPs don’t care.
In order to be smut it must have no redeeming social importance.
So, that’s a review-average of two hard cocks or less on the standard one-to-four scale?
I thought that was the one by the title, too, but he gave us Naked Kate Winslet (hallowed be her boobs) and that doesn’t fit with the OP. Maybe this Cameron wants to reduce access to photos of the Naked Duchess of Cambridge and her Royal Cooch, which is a crime on the level of what Hitler would do. (Mussolini, being normal and Italian, would plaster imperial fascist paintings and sculptures of her all over the place, while Stalin would just kill her. That boy had issues.)