  PhoenixDown-- Wants FIOSPremium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1 | It doesn't matter Its not like the adult sites would stop using their .com domains.
--
Mass Transit Sucks! | |
|
 | | | Re: It doesn't matter Yeah I would've thought the Federal Mafia and Watchdog groups would love to see these type of sites on one domain. It would be easier to keep and eye on some of these sites.
--
Sometimes I suffer from Advanced Delusionary Schizophrenia with Involuntary Narcissistic Rage..
| |
|
| |  nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: It doesn't matter said by GoD of KaOs:Yeah I would've thought the Federal Mafia and Watchdog groups would love to see these type of sites on one domain. It would be easier to keep and eye on some of these sites. You presume that such sites would move, and, if they did bother to register .xxx TLDs, that they'd abandon their other TLD registrations.
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. | |
|
| | | said by PhoenixDown:Its not like the adult sites would stop using their .com domains. Then we would need legislation about redirecting since those same .com sites would merely redirect to .xxx sites.  | |
|
| | fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | Re: It doesn't matter As long as religion has a hold of part of government and others in this country, we won't see things that make sense. It's always "about the children" but when something comes up to make sense, we don't do it.
Having an .XXX TLD would "further promote sex" on the web.. And???? What's the problem?
But, they have no problem pushing an abstinence only program that has done no good at the expense of the tax payer. Last time I checked, this is a free country and people have a right to express their self as they see fit especially in the privacy of their own home.
This new world of all about the children is more sickening that those who abuse them sexually.. now they are just abused all around including politically.
--
"Complaining is the least path of resistance for the self-reitchous and lazy ... those who also never take the time to point out a good fortune when the opportunity presents itself. It says a lot about one's moral character." - Unknown | |
|
| | | | | Re: It doesn't matter Sarcasm escapes you. 
I was merely pointing out (as have others) that most websites would still have a .com address to redirect them to the .xxx address.
Look at www.whitehouse.com. Think you are going to find 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue there? It used to be something else.
All the .xxx domain would have done would point people (kids included) to the right direction for finding porn. Plain and simple.
The .xxx domain will not solve anything. | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Bright House
| said by PhoenixDown:Its not like the adult sites would stop using their .com domains. Well, I only read the first post and decided to reply, so it might have been said already, but... Even though I don't have any kids, I can already imagine myself at age 13-17 if the .xxx domains existed. Free previews anyone??? Why make this even easier for the children by labeling it a specific block? I don't think we should concede to EVERYTHING when it comes to domains. .tv is understandable, .biz .gov .edu .com. and .net are also, but .xxx is not a good idea.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. | |
|
| | PhoenixDown-- Wants FIOSPremium
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY
kudos:1 | Re: It doesn't matter .tv is actually a country code... its a coincidence that it happens to be the same abbreviation as television.
--
Mass Transit Sucks! | |
|
| | |  MaggsPremium
join:2002-11-29
Woodside, NY | Re: It doesn't matter The island of Tuvulu is .tv | |
|
 N3OGHYo Soy Col. "Bat" GuanoPremium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
kudos:1 | .XXX expand porn on the internet?? You've GOT to be kidding me. The internet is all ready TEEMING with porn. A .XXX domain isn't going to change that.
From both perspectives, I don't see where the .XXX domain is all that big an issue. Unless all porn sites were forced to migrate to .XXX (not gonna happen), all this does is open up more URL's for porn sites that for the most part all ready exists.
While interesting news, I don't see where this has any kind of major impact for the average internet user.
--
FCC, PLEASE KILL THE MERGER BEFORE THE MERGER KILLS SATRAD! | |
|
| nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: .XXX expand porn on the internet?? said by N3OGH:You've GOT to be kidding me. The internet is all ready TEEMING with porn. A .XXX domain isn't going to change that. From both perspectives, I don't see where the .XXX domain is all that big an issue. Unless all porn sites were forced to migrate to .XXX (not gonna happen), all this does is open up more URL's for porn sites that for the most part all ready exists. Why do you think a registry company would want this, then? Couldn't be that it's an almost guaranteed income stream as each of the porn sites duplicate registers to the new domain? And, if only the proposing registry had rights to manage .XXX, that registry would make some serious bank.
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. | |
|
 yockTFTCPremium
join:2000-11-21
Miamisburg, OH
kudos:3 | Show me the money! I have news for Focus on the family, the multiple billions of dollars being spent on internet pornography does more than anything else to legitimize it. Requiring them to use one unified TLD might actually help their cause. Then, you can't reason with fanatics. I get the distinct impression that their mission is to remove such content from the web entirely.
--
Laughter is the closest distance between two people. --Victor Borge
"The opposite of war isn't peace, it's creation." | |
|
|  RobIn Deo speramus, God Bless the USAPremium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:2
1 edit | Re: Show me the money! said by yock:I have news for Focus on the family, the multiple billions of dollars being spent on internet pornography does more than anything else to legitimize it. Requiring them to use one unified TLD might actually help their cause. Then, you can't reason with fanatics. I get the distinct impression that their mission is to remove such content from the web entirely. Some even say that the Internet became so popular because of all the pornography. The mere fact that people could go online, in the privacy of their own home, and watch pornography and feel "anonymous" at the same type was why it's so popular.
But I'm more concerned that maybe it was these two U.S. based groups that forced ICANN to reject the .xxx TLD. It's stories like these that gets foreign countries upset that the U.S. has so much control over the Internet. So what if two U.S. based family groups got their panties in a twist. | |
|
| | ecoPremium
join:2001-11-28
Wilmington, DE | Re: Show me the money! On the surface I'd probably agree with you, but I've been following this issue pretty closely and it seems that ICANN itself and the porn industry were the ones that really ended up getting it rejected. The porn industry didn't want it because it could end up creating an internet red light district or ghetto where the government forces content they don't like to register their domain and then filters can just block the whole TLD. ICANN didn't want it because of the same reason. They were afraid the government would force them into the content enforcement business, making sure porn sites only have .XXX domains, which is well beyond their current government mandate and what they have the capability to do right now. Not only that, but who decides what constitutes porn? There are US government websites about breastfeeding that have actual photographs of bare breasts. Would that be porn? You'd have to set up a whole censorship board, which eventually would get thrown out by the Supreme Court anyway. | |
|
| | Too bad Because that would have completely solved forever the pressing problem of people looking at other people without any clothes on the intertubes. Parents would have been secure in the knowledge that their perfect little snowflake kids would never ever have to pollute their little eyes by looking at those horribly nasty sinful bits of flesh that happen to be growing from between everyone's legs or in the middle of some people's chests.
Why does ICANN hate our children so much?
Why does ICANN insist on making parents tear themselves away from American Idol and actually check on what their offspring are doing? Don't they realize that just because someone gets pregnant and pops out a kid or three, it's not the parent's responsibility to actually raise them?
ICANN needs to step up and accept their responsibility for everyone else's children soon, before we end up with an entire generation of parents that are forced to take an active role in their children's lives.
And no one wants that.
--
Burrow owl...burrow owl... | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
·ProLog
| Re: Too bad said by CrazyFingers:ICANN needs to step up and accept their responsibility for everyone else's children soon, before we end up with an entire generation of parents that are forced to take an active role in their children's lives. And no one wants that. LOL | |
|
bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA | Here is a thought If porn sites were required to use the .xxx TLD and they were allowed to redirect their multiple .com addresses to a .xxx, wouldn't it be easier for people, businesses et al to block the .xxx TLD?
I know there are a lot of ways around it and who is considered porn and then there is the first amendment but they would be allowed their free speech, just regulated like they are now. Anyone required to have a 2257?? would be required to be on the .xxx TLD.
This should be an ICANN requirement.
--
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly... | |
|
|  pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Here is a thought I think a big part of the problem with an XXX domain is that porn laws vary from country to country (and even from locality to locality). Legal adult entertainment in one country might be totally illegal in another country. There's going to be no way that ICANN can very that every XXX domain-named website will be in compliance with local laws.
A more minor problem is that many non-adult entertainment oriented businesses are going to have to stake claims to XXX domains which are the same as their trademarks. You open up a whole new area of squatter/extortion problems with such domains.
A responsible parent can find any number of ways to ensure his/her child does not access inappropriate content online. Segregating legal porn sites is not something that ICANN, or any government at all, should be concerned with.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. | |
|
| | axus
join:2001-06-18
Washington, DC | Re: Here is a thought Maybe you don't think there should be top level domains at all? Typing .com gets so redundant after a while... | |
|
| | |  tschmidtPremium,MVM
join:2000-11-12
Milford, NH
kudos:5
 ·Fairpoint Commun..
 ·Hollis Hosting
| Re: Here is a thought said by axus:Maybe you don't think there should be top level domains at all? Typing .com gets so redundant after a while... We need to rethink Internet naming conventions. TLD's were intended to facilitate easy to remember names and translate them to IP addresses. By design they provide rather coarse granularity, by country or public vs private enterprise. They were never intended to be part of a companies intellectual property portfolio and image.
There needs to be an even higher layer of abstraction - today that is mainly provided by search engines such as Google. Personally I rarely directly type in a URL. I do a Google search first, then go to the companies site.
/Tom
| |
|
| | | said by bigjimc:If porn sites were required to use the .xxx TLD and they were allowed to redirect their multiple .com addresses to a .xxx, wouldn't it be easier for people, businesses et al to block the .xxx TLD? Required by whom? Enforced by whom? Monitored by whom? There are hundreds of different countries, wtih differing attitudes about adult content. US laws don't apply in France or China or Tuvalu. | |
|
| | bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA | Re: Here is a thought As I said. ICANN. Monitored by anyone who wishes to report a porn site not using .xxx
As far as the hundreds of different countries. Duh....ICANN is international. That's why I said ICANN not the US or EU or any one nation.
The cost of monitoring would be covered by fees collected for a .xxx TLD The Fee should be $35 per year per name (with $25 to ICANN). That would generate enough additional revenue to pay for monitoring. People would submit .com porn to ICANN's Porn Monitoring Center and it could be checked. If a site is porn and not redirecting to .xxx then the .com should be shut down immediately. The 2257 statement (I guess that's what it is) is a good sign that tells people what is porn.
What could it hurt to require .xxx TLD? I guess it makes too much sense to implement it. So did seat belts. | |
|
| | | | | Re: Here is a thought Moving to .xxx would make it easier on the child filters. Until they do that I don't buy that they are trying to protect the children. They complain that is all over the place and the same ones complain when you try to put it on a single domain for easy blocking. I am sure they would complain if someone came up with a technology that would show porn but you could only see it if you were like 18 or older. | |
|
| | | |  BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Here is a thought said by CrzyCrakr:Moving to .xxx would make it easier on the child filters. Until they do that I don't buy that they are trying to protect the children. They complain that is all over the place and the same ones complain when you try to put it on a single domain for easy blocking. I am sure they would complain if someone came up with a technology that would show porn but you could only see it if you were like 18 or older. Filters do an excelent job now if one isn't to retarded. Fact is no child is "accidently" typing in analsex.com. Besides if a child did want to see porn on a blocked .xxx all he would need to do is find out what the IP address is on that site and type that in. How's a filter going to block that? | |
|
| | | | | bigjimc
join:2003-04-21
Middleboro, MA | Re: Here is a thought A good filter should do the domain resolution and block it.
I am also thinking of the inadvertent URLs out there that would be typed too. Some may not remember whitehouse.com used to be an adult site. And if someone in a school types a .xxx site they can't say it was an accident or ignorance.
I agree that if the computer is located in the corner of the family room and parents do their parenting then this shouldn't be an issue, it is just that looking forward five or 10 years, it may be necessary but unable to be implemented due to sheer internet size. The Internet is expanding beyond Moore's Law.
--
Just my 2 cents...Flame Lightly... | |
|
| BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by bigjimc:If porn sites were required to use the .xxx TLD and they were allowed to redirect their multiple .com addresses to a .xxx, wouldn't it be easier for people, businesses et al to block the .xxx TLD? I know there are a lot of ways around it and who is considered porn and then there is the first amendment but they would be allowed their free speech, just regulated like they are now. Anyone required to have a 2257?? would be required to be on the .xxx TLD. This should be an ICANN requirement. The whole point is that ICANN doesn't want to be nor should they be in the content regulation business. Also by the way 2257 is an AMERICAN law. One that non-american sites do not have to abide by. So how that requirement works you need to explain. Over 50% of the porn comes from OUTSIDE the US. people need ot stop think everyhting on the net comes from America and can be ruled by American laws. | |
|
| nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | said by bigjimc:I know there are a lot of ways around it and who is considered porn and then there is the first amendment but they would be allowed their free speech, just regulated like they are now. Anyone required to have a 2257?? would be required to be on the .xxx TLD. If my company is located/headquartered outside of the US and employs models only outside the US, I could easily ask, "what's '2257'?".
--
Everyday, thousands of new cars are delivered to their new owners with poorly-selected radio station presets. | |
|
| | BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | Re: Here is a thought said by nixen:said by bigjimc:I know there are a lot of ways around it and who is considered porn and then there is the first amendment but they would be allowed their free speech, just regulated like they are now. Anyone required to have a 2257?? would be required to be on the .xxx TLD. If my company is located/headquartered outside of the US and employs models only outside the US, I could easily ask, "what's '2257'?". EXACTLY.
By the way it's law pertianing to keeping records of models real names and adresses so the FBI can verify if they are in fact over 18.
Let's face it if some German site with German girls hosted in Germany had girls someone in the US thought was under 18 there's nothing they can do and they can't make that site follow 2257 rules and the FBI can't go to Germany and ask for documents proving she is. | |
|
| | Good... ..because it would end up being just another vanity domain like info which served little purpose other than to mostly let companies dual/triple/quadruple/quintuple register. While MAYBE providing a few short keywords to a few sites that can just as easily be on .com.
Here is my question. People talk about porn sites dual registering on .com. But what about .com companies dual registering on .xxx. Will disney be able to register www.disney.xxx? If not is there a minimum amount of pornography required? Would art sites be able to register on .xxx? How about non-nude magazimes like Maxim?
Would be funny if one day it passed and we ended up with a committee policing a required level of indecency.
"We're sorry. But we can't approve your site until you post some spread shots." | |
|
| | Does ICANN and parents alike... ...Actually believe that the disclaimer on adult websites that says you MUST be 18 to enter STOP kids from entering porn sites. Are people really that naive? This would help parents control what they're perfect little angels are viewing on the computer, no doubt about it. I beleive there is NO surefire way to stop kids from looking at porn. Except maybe not having a computer; BUT this would help parents out. Just my 2 cents. | |
|
| | | Re: Does ICANN and parents alike... The last thing we need is another domain.
How many kids click the Yes I'm 18 button to get into a site
anyway? There's no real verification, it's bullcrap.
I don't think porn is the problem to be honest.
The problem is the porn sites and scammers using email
to cheat people. You get crap in your email box you
don't want, didn't ask for, and have to deal with.
I think the problem is spam. Users don't have enough control
over their mailboxes. I get messages like "Hi" and it's
"hey visit www.yoursexsitehere. com oppsy delete space before
com". It's become a game of cat and mouse.
Since spammers and porn sites send out so many millions of
spam a day, here is an idea to reduce it.
1 email from an ip, server waits 1 second before sending it.
2 emails within specified time: server waits 2 seconds.
3 emails within specified time: server waits 3 seconds.
The spammer's email machine would grind to a halt in a
short matter of time. The only drawback to this is places
that send emails to a bunch of subscribers, like a
magazine or an organization like the ARRL.
Spammers say people want this crap, and the porn sites
keep churning it out. This year alone, I've reported
close to 200 yahoo email addresses that have sent spam
to my box. I have no answer, but a .xxx domain makes sense
in that one can block all email from the .xxx domain and
never have to deal with it. People that want it, get it.
People that don't don't. Simple all the way around.
--Deeply Shrouded & Quiet | |
|
| | | | Re: Does ICANN and parents alike... Bet you thought that's original huh? It's called a tar pit, almost every legitimate email server implements them already. The problem isn't legitimate email servers, it's the millions of zombie pc's out there that the spammers set email servers up on and send out the spam from there.
So who are you going to blame, the owners of those PC's? Microsoft? or the Spammer? You wanna stop spam? Prosecute spammers and put them in jail, also prosecute those companies or individuals that pay the spammers. Once all the spam is originating outside the US (currently over 90% originates from the US, even if it's released from a zombie in another country) it becomes much easier to block those countries that don't prosecute spammers (like Russia). | |
|
| | | | | Re: Does ICANN and parents alike... said by rahvin112:Bet you thought that's original huh? It's called a tar pit, almost every legitimate email server implements them already. The problem isn't legitimate email servers, it's the millions of zombie pc's out there that the spammers set email servers up on and send out the spam from there. So who are you going to blame, the owners of those PC's? Microsoft? or the Spammer? You wanna stop spam? Prosecute spammers and put them in jail, also prosecute those companies or individuals that pay the spammers. Once all the spam is originating outside the US (currently over 90% originates from the US, even if it's released from a zombie in another country) it becomes much easier to block those countries that don't prosecute spammers (like Russia). Well, it WAS original when I thought about it back in the
80's when BBS's were still popular.
The problem is, people don't have control over their inboxes
the way they should. Yahoo has finally implemented domain
blocking, something I've been talking about for years.
wanadoo.fr comes to mind....
Since I don't know anyone in France, blocking the whole
domain makes sense. Same with Russia and any other country
outside the USA. First time I get spam from a domain, I block it. I think in time, the list will be quite long
unfortunately, but that's the way of the net I guess....
--Deeply Shrouded & Quiet | |
|
| | | There are a number of surefire way to prevent you children from looking at pornography.
1. You could remove your child's genitalia. After all, if they don't have sexual organs they won't be curious about them.
2. You could give them hormone injections to suppress their sexual development until they are 18 so that they won't be interested or curious.
3. You could actually educate your children about sex instead of lying to them about it, or denying it exists because of your own embarrassment and inability to discuss it calmly and rationally while answering the child's questions honestly and completely.
Or you could be an Adult and accept that if your Child is intent on looking at pornography they will be able to (heck I saw my first porn at 8 years old and the first PC's were years away from construction). It's not the worlds fault that it will happen, its solely the responsibility of you and your child. And in such acceptance it's better to be sensible and educate your children fully about sex and structure their morals such that THEY won't want to see porn. Frankly its all about your child moral structure, and personality. It's always been silly to me that a wild child that grows up and has a few kids suddenly thinks that their child can't possibly be wild, and becomes the same irate parent they had which drives them even harder to the behavior. Children exhibit similar personality traits and similar childhood behavior as their parents experienced. So if you looked at porn and were the class giggalo, expect your child to be as well. | |
|
 TechieZeroTools Are Using MePremium
join:2002-01-25
Gibsonton, FL
·Verizon FiOS
|  Reverse The Concept
»forums.fark.com/cgi/fark/comment···=2706708
COMALite J
As I posted in another forum on this subject, why not reverse the concept? Instead of “.xxx” (or “.sex” etc.), why not “.kids”? Existing child-oriented domains on other TLDs can open redirects or mirrors on the .kids TLD, such as, oh, say, ToonDisney.kids, at little expense. Parents who want to keep their little darlings protected can simply block access to everything except .kids on the logins that they set up for their offspring. Anti-porn laws could be strictly enforced on this .TLD. All content on it must not only be kid-safe, but kid-oriented. Also, anyone convicted of any form of child abuse would be forever barred from even pinging a site on .kids, as that would count as a new offense.
Perhaps there could also be a “.teens” or “.youth” domain for older youth, with somewhat looser content restrictions, but a similar restriction against convicted abusers. | |
|
 GooberPremium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
kudos:4 | Parents or simply knowitalls? I' mnot knowledgable enough about this issue to express my preferences either way. But, I find it interesting that all the parenting tips come out during these discussions.
My question is, of all the people spouting off all their good parenting tips, how many of you are really parents? I'd bet a good amount of you are pimply faced nerds that haven't come closer than a CRT or LCD from a woman and have no clue about parenting.
The thought of taking parenting tips from the ultra-liberal tech crowd here is laughable. | |
|
|  WarzauPremium
join:2000-10-26
Naperville, IL
kudos:1 | Re: Parents or simply knowitalls? Now that is funny and true. | |
|
 jhboricuaExMod 2000-01
join:2000-06-06
Minneapolis, MN | I got a better TLD. How about .CUM?
 | |
|
DK23
join:2003-08-05
Texas City, TX | Adult industry and family groups on same side? From what I've read elsewhere,porn groups didn't like the idea either and was against it. | |
|
|
|
