Photo.net blocked for nudity and obscene content...

[rapyke]

<p>Yesterday, at a McDonalds in central Sweden, I tried to surf into photo.net for some light reading to go along with my gourmet lunch... Their free WiFi blocked access declaring that photo.net was an adult-only site, which contained nudity and obscene material.</p>

<p>WTF?!?</p>

<p>Is there a section of the site I am missing?</p>

 

[joshroot]

<p>There are nudes in the gallery. Some internet "net nanny" services are going to call that "adult content". Such is life. I wish I could change it, as nudes are a very small part of the overall site. But I doubt there is anything I can do.</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>The P.net <a href="../info/terms-of-use">Terms of Use</a> requires registered users to be over 18 years of age, presumably because the site contains adult content? </p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<p>That, and it's a partially advertising funded site, and there's a for-sale section, and in many jurisdictions, minors are not allowed to contract sales.</p>

<p>Ron just needs to bookmark a proxy or two for next time. ;)</p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>I was at an Apple store this weekend and their computers also won't allow access to PN.</p>

<p>Nudes are treated as a separately-classified status right here on PN, and other organizations do the same. </p>

[joshroot]

<p>That's funny Fred, Jeff was at an apple store recently and told me the exact same thing. Perhaps the ghost of Steve Jobs hates us.</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Strangely enough, I have never tried to access Photo.net from either a Swedish McDonalds (say it ain't so) or an Apple store. I have got into PN from a Barnes and Noble bookstore coffeeshop (Starbucks).</p>

<p>I think it's all those Classic Manual Camera people calling their shots of their Wackerphot B80, camera P O R N.</p>

[john_tran14]

<p>Maybe there are kids at Macdonald eating who should be protected</p>

[MichaelChang]

<p>I've had no trouble accessing PN at McDonald's using a tablet through their free Wi-Fi. Their kiosk computer terminals might be s different story, though. </p>

[john_h.1]

<p>The real question is not why photo.net is blocked in a McDonald's in Sweden, it is why you were in a McDonald's in Sweden?</p>

[joseph_wisniewski]

<blockquote>

<p>Maybe there are kids at Macdonald eating who should be protected</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I quite agree. Healthy, home cooked food is definitely better for them. Although I'm not quite sure how this ties into photo.net.</p>

[joshroot]

<p>All joking aside, the most useful thing that anyone running into blocking can do is to try and figure out what net-nanny company the place is using. If we know that, I can see if there is anything we can do to get us off the "bad" list.</p>

[Mike Howard]

<p>It probably has nothing to do with the nude galleries. You were in a McDonalds...it was probably Lupo's gourmet food pictures which are banned. Pop one of those beauts up in a Mickey D's and you could have a riot.</p>

[jimadams]

<p><em><strong>"Perhaps the ghost of Steve Jobs hates us."</strong></em><br /> <em><strong><br /></strong></em>The ghost of Steve Jobs hates <em>everyone</em>.</p>

[david_herman4]

<p>I had a young teen and his mom come into my store today to inquire about printing some of his photos, (quite good for a 14 y old) .We got into a discussion about photography and I recommended this site, 1x, and Flickriver for inspirational viewing.I totally forgot about the nude content and sincerely hope his mom doesn't find out and get outraged that I turned him on to some of the inappropriate content presented openly here! </p>

[Norma Desmond]

<p>Inappropriateness is in the mind of the beholder. What nudity has to do with inappropriateness, in a world where teenagers play increasingly violent video games and are subject to immoral and unnecessary wars every day of their lives, is beyond me. One man's inappropriateness is another man's prudishness. My opinion would be that it's likely though not absolute that if you see nudity as inappropriate, it's because you have inappropriate thoughts or desires about nude people or, more precisely, pictures of nude people.</p>

<p>Now, that having been said, PN is a business as are Apple and other places that may want to deny access to nudity. They have made the monetary-driven decision, not a moral one, to ban nudity in order to placate a buying public which feels that nudity of all things is inappropriate. I can respect a good business decision by a business (such as PN has made by allowing filters to block access to the nude forum). And I cannot really understand what I perceive as the patently absurd morality of a society so put off by or afraid of photographs of nude bodies.</p>

<p>________________________________</p>

<p>By the way, if the mom ever complained to you for recommending the site to her 14-year-old son (who has likely seen much more blatant stuff than what appears on PN), you could tell her that it's her responsibility as a parent to monitor what her son's activities are and to check out web sites, movies, and video games she allows him to engage with. It's not the world's responsibility to censor itself for the sake of parents who aren't doing their jobs.</p>

[sknowles]

<p>Interesting and why my iPad has both wifi and 3G communications, because wifi isn't everywhere I go and because some business in the area require enrollment or subscription to use their wifi. Starbucks here tried a subscription service through a carrier and dropped it, and several other businesses want to know more about to use their wifi. Using 3G means the only filter is me.</p>