how-to block ads
|
Comments on news posted 2007-02-07 15:44:02: Techdirt takes a look at two new bills being introduced in the Senate, both aimed at protecting the tots. The first (the "Safety Act" pdf) imposes data retention requirements on ISPs and would put ISP employees in jail for up to a year if they de.. ..
| |
 
Fire_Emblem
join:2002-01-18
Rowland Heights, CA
| This sounds familiar... This is very interesting. I'm curious whether this will pass this time. Regarding the cartoon portion of this article, I thought it was already proven unconstitutional in a supreme court case I heard about before? (Something about if it had literary or artistic merit, it would have been fine.) | |
| 
Toguro
join:2003-10-23
Ottawa, IL | Intresting article Like I always say you can lead a politician to water but you cant get him to think  | |
| 
tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI
| If monitoring VoIP traffic isn't enough. News Flash.. DON'T LET YOUR TOTS ON THE INTERNET.
I have 3 kids, 15, 13, 10. They all have internet access or access to PC's that do in my house. I have the system locked down pretty good and each kids PC is given enough rope for the age level. If they just so happen to get past the security zonealrm offers as far as filtering goes, I monitor every thing they see, type or go to. As a parent, it my job, not congress's or any other do gooder group to police what my kids watch, read or see on the net. The ISP is not my babysister nor do I want them to be. It's the dumbass parents who can't be bothered to spend a few minutes a day or week to monitor what their kids are doing that has caused this then go running to their elected offical and say "oh my gawd.. little johnny just seen some girls privates on YouTube". As long as the kids are tucked away in their rooms, not bothering said parent, everything is ok. I'm the only "big brother" my kids need and we don't need the govt telling us we suck as parents. That's the bottom line. | |
| | ltship
join:2002-08-11
Sturgeon Bay, WI
1 edit | Re: If monitoring VoIP traffic isn't enough. only problem is TC1, most parents do not have the knowledge on how to lock down their system / network in the manner you have for your family. Children now can run circles around their parents when it comes to computers and the internet. I see it daily in my job as tech support for a area ISP.
Semper Gumby (Paratus) - "Always Flexible"
SCPO, USCG(ret) | |
| | |
tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI
2 edits | Re: If monitoring VoIP traffic isn't enough. Here lies the problem... Parents don't have a clue or don't want one, therefore, they lash out at what they don't understand and are the first to jump to the head of the line when "their" children get "threatened" by content or free access. Most of these parents wouldn't dare leave a gun cabinet unlocked at home with small kids around and if they did, and something happened, we have laws to punish this negligence. So, why not apply this to the internet? It might make some get educated real fast. All one has to do is read the instructions, like me. I didn't get tech savvy by eating the food on the mess deck. It came by learning, doing and applying. If parents took half as much energy to be part of their kids life instead of trying to avoid it, we wouldn't need our govt telling us how to protect and raise our kids or putting more libility on our ISPs. But instead of going after ISP's or the content providers, we need to go look in a mirror. I don't consider it control, I like to call it parental responsibility. Something today's parents don't seem to know much about either. 
On another subj.. how's the weax up in SB? Was on the Mobile Bay years ago. Nice place, SB.. Was planning a trip up there this summer to spend a few nights at Sherwood Pt. Lighthouse.
TC1 (ret/99) | |
| GhostDoggy
join:2005-05-11
Duluth, GA
| Police the Parents, and more Every child has either a parent, legal guardian, or is a ward of the state. Makes no difference which case this is, but all three scenarios should require the safety of the child at all costs. As a society, we do a terrible job. I even rank this right up their his displacement of the elderly (thrown-away parents).
But this concept is a band-aid solution. It unfairly places the parenting responsibility onto ISPs for someone else abuse a child to support a subculture. If a child is being abuse to generate child-pornography then the child's legal suitor is the problem and needs to be dealt with appropriately.
ISPs cannot possibly come up with the capital resources to monitor every TCP packet to recombine the content in order to determine A vs B in order to tag one of their subscribers for the law enforcement to address. And how does one handle false-positives, cases in which someone hacks into a subscriber's WAP to perform their dirty deeds (another sub-culture)?
Additionally, even if only a fraction of the TCP packets are kept at any given time we are talking about millions of subscribers generating trillions of TCP packets every hour of every day. And to what effect? Ok, so you find some targets and hand them over to the law enforcement and this is ice politics because a positive 'spin' can be brewed. Does it solve the problem? H3ll no!
There are way too many brains in this sub-culture that build on the last idea for generating, storing, and redistributing the content this effort jokingly thinks its resolving. And the moral majority has the biggest hand that will take the gray-area and turn it into a convenient hit-list all to better their political cause.
While not ignoring the topic at hand, this is only an effort worth promoting because its a political ticket to someone else's misbehavings. Until you hold address the origins of the problem (and its not the Internet), then the government will ultimately put a lot of Internet Service Providers out of business. Too bad no one intelligent enough in Washington, D.C. is competent enough to understand basic money figures. | |
| | 
Chivalry
Premium
join:2005-02-10
Chula Vista, CA
| Re: Police the Parents, and more Politicians are still living in their own little world in which unenforceable, socially irresponsible laws are plausible.
Privacy concerns aside, requiring private businesses to retain data and spy on their customers is just absurd. We aren't here to serve the government---they're here to serve us. Stop including private businesses in the big brother agenda. Until Speakeasy, Covad, Verizon, AT&T, and innumerable other ISPs have a big "Police Station" sign above their doors, they don't exist to enforce laws.
Secondly, the nature of such laws is absurd to begin with. Unless someone actually goes out and starts molesting children, they haven't committed a grevious offense, so why do we have laws "protecting" people from acts that haven't occurred? It's policing thought, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the beginning of the end, folks. Don't think anything ill of the government, or you'll be fined more money than God has in his piggy bank and sent to prison for 15 lifetimes.
Lastly, someone save the inanimate, non-sentient cartoon children. They're going to be crying animated tears over the injustices they've been dealt. | |
| | |
Chivalry
Premium
join:2005-02-10
Chula Vista, CA | Re: Police the Parents, and more By the way, this was a mistake on my part, G.D.
I meant to post this to the main thread. | |
| 
Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23 | A fantasy isn't a felony --or is it?
Another self-evident truth out the window 
--
"tick...tick...tick..." »www.jtf.org/ | |
| 
NEP1611
join:2002-03-27
Northford, CT | Same Sausage, Different Day Two words: Ripped Condom. Anyone who thinks this will make a bit of difference is a fool.
Sorry, that's the facts. | |
| 
tauzinger
Be concise.
Premium
join:2006-07-30
Hillsborough, NJ
1 edit | Philosophy versus implementation . | |
| | | |
|
