S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
 ·Comcast
| reply to NOCMan
Re: Ridiculous
Listen, I only said I understood why they did it, I didn't condone it. The way I see it is it gives non-tech parents and businesses, that can't afford or are to stupid to deploy a filter system themselves, the false sense of security that they won't have to monitor their kids or employees. Supposedly, the ISP will do it for them.
Thats where the problem is. It's not the job of the ISP to be a "parent". And just who draws the line in the grey areas that will arise from such a blatantly stupid regulation?
Like I said before, more problematic than it's worth!~
--
Let's pluck 'im and see if he's ripe!"
- Larry (MEN IN BLACK, 1934) |
|
NOCMan
Verizon Fios User
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Flower Mound, TX | reply to ackman
And who's responsible when it's discovered that filters are blocking someone's business despite nothing indicating it should of been there in the first place.
The Australian legal system is going to be overwhelmed with lawsuits. |
|
Hellrazor
join:2002-02-02
Abyss
| reply to S_engineer
Then buy your own filtering setup. All the crap big brother pushes on the providers will make everyone pay more. Let those that want the service pickup the cost or run it themselves.
Easy solution: Big brother designs filtering s/w and you install it. |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to ackman
I can appreciate the premise, I don't see the application being well thought out. There are small businesses as well as homes that don't want to be bothered with trying to monitor what people are doing. But I see this as more problematic in other areas than it's worth!
--
Let's pluck 'im and see if he's ripe!"
- Larry (MEN IN BLACK, 1934) |
|
ackman
join:2000-10-04
Acworth, GA | So ISPs will be liable for unfiltered content? Who will decide what is "acceptable" content? Censorship is a slippery slope, even if it is begun with the best of intentions. |
|
