devnuller
join:2006-06-10
Hollis, NH
2 edits | Options are good. Blanket Censorship is NOT.
Not sure how many commenting have children, but the option for better user controlled censorship is beneficial.
I do like that my Tivo's require passwords to get to certain show ratings (or blocking unrated shows). I don't see a problem with a common film-style rating system for websites (as long as unrated is an option).
Once kids get old enough to work around these systems, then perhaps they are old enough. But until then I would like some better and more consistent controls in the unrequested pop-up web-world we have today. |
|
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| "unrequested pop-up web-world"?
Maybe the web was that way 10 years ago. You could go to www.SeeminglySafeSite.com and have nude photos pop up repeatedly. (Had that happen during my first month of work once when I went to barnesNnoble.com instead of barnesANDnoble.com.) However, most recent browser versions (FF, IE6 on XPSP2, IE7) contain pop-up blockers. So you shouldn't have to deal with out of control pop-ups. If you do, either you A) are using a very old browser (time to upgrade) or B) are infected with spyware (time to clean that PC).
Yes, I have kids. Yes, I like having user-controlled options for blocking content. No, I don't want the government to block that content for me and/or tell me what content my kids should/shouldn't be able to see. Whenever politicians say they want to block content "for the good of the children", I get wary.
--
-Jason Levine
Support a children's charity. Buy a calendar and/or a photo book. Shooting For A Cause |
|
devnuller
join:2006-06-10
Hollis, NH
| said by Jason Levine  :No, I don't want the government to block that content for me and/or tell me what content my kids should/shouldn't be able to see. Whenever politicians say they want to block content "for the good of the children", I get wary. Not sure you read the article, but the proposal is not to censor the Internet it is to "create a film-style rating system for websites". I would expected "unrated" to be an option. It also wanted ISPs to have a level of service which a user could subscribe to which honored that rating system. The latter is a bit much, but as people claim "monopolies" perhaps this is helpful.
Didn't a similar uproar happen when TV ratings and V-Chip came out about 10 years ago? People should try not to go to extreme thinking before they understand the details. I personally like options as long as I get to make the decision.
... and yes my browsers are up to date. And yes my family PCs are in public areas, but pop-ups still happen and young children tend to follow "click me" links. |
|
DarkLogix
join:2008-10-23
Baytown, TX | Your computers need a good scan then
I never get pop-ups and I use IE so if your getting pop-ups then you must have spyware
and someone must be doing the rating and if only 10% is rated then its usless |
|
NetAdmin
CCNA
join:2008-05-22
| reply to devnuller
said by devnuller :Not sure how many commenting have children, but the option for better user controlled censorship is beneficial. Absolutely. Instead of trying to use government funds to create and deploy filtering lists that are mandatory, the government of UK would probably be much better served on simply educating the public on filtering products. I don't know how many times I've had people ask me if there was a way to filter out "objectionable" material only to be surprised by the number of products that exist that they did know about.
--
"This is a bus. You know how big a bus is?" |
|
Corydon
Cultivant son jardin
Premium
join:2008-02-18
Denver, CO
clubs:
 ·Comcast
| reply to devnuller
According to this article, he also said "some content should not be available to be viewed."
Sounds like Internet censorship to me.
--
"2 Strangers + 1 20 minute ceremony + $50 + 10 shots of tequila = Holy Matrimony and 1st Class Protections Under the Law… now that’s crazy!" |
|
badtrip
East Bay
Premium
join:2004-03-20
Albany, CA
 ·Unwired Ltd
·Comcast
| reply to devnuller
I have a 14 year old son. My parental censorship is as follows:
1. I realize that teenagers are going to actively search out violent, sexual, drug addled, etc. content on the net and elsewhere no matter what parents say. Hell, I was looking at Oui, High Society, Penthouse and many other magazines when I was in grammar school.
2. Be open and completely honest about my feelings about the subject(s) in question when talking to my son about anything that he asks about (or in the case of sex/drugs even if he doesnt ask).
3. That's it.
When my son stumbled across Goatse for the first time a few months ago and ran into the living room yelling he's never going to look at pics on the internet again, I calmly explained to him the history of Goatse. I then told him that the guy in Goatse looked like he was a willing participant in the picture and he may or may not have had medical issues (etc, etc). I followed that up with a warning about going to websites to look at pictures that on-line friends may direct him to. He promptly calmed down, largely because I helped him put his experience into perspective.
Or I could have flipped out and bought tons of worthless filtering software, bitched at my congressperson, threatened the host of the goatse file, yanked the power cord of the computer out of the wall and we all could have shoved our heads in the sand as a family while we beg the government to help us not see/hear/think unmoral things. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
 ·Skype
| reply to devnuller
said by devnuller :Not sure you read the article, but the proposal is not to censor the Internet it is to "create a film-style rating system for websites". I would expected "unrated" to be an option. It already exists, but it's voluntary. »www.w3.org/PICS/ This -is- a government attempt to make a system that is less voluntary.
said by devnuller : It also wanted ISPs to have a level of service which a user could subscribe to which honored that rating system. The latter is a bit much, but as people claim "monopolies" perhaps this is helpful. Where competition exists, there is plenty of room for ISPs that filter. There are dial-up internet services that promote their filtering as a feature, and nobody is concerned about their filtering because there is plenty of consumer choice available.
We're only having this Network Neutrality debate because competition has evaporated. Restore service provider competition and the NN concerns fade.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon -- KJ7RL
What you do at Christmas does not matter so much; What counts are the Christmas things you do all year through. |
|
