Quasar: "I wanna make sure that every new computer sold in this country after I'm president has installed on it a filter to block all pornography and that parents can click that filter to make sure their kids don't see that kinda stuff coming in on their computer."

Old and busted: magic underwear
New hotness: magic computer technology

And I want to see the lovely lawsuit free speech advocates bring against the administration that proposes that.

That kind of filter already exists. It's called "Being a parent and watching what your kids do on the computer" and "Kids don't have their own laptops in their rooms".

Seriously, we had this same technology back when it was TV, cable or VCR. You didn't let a kid have TV with cable in their room because of certain channels, and you most especially didn't let them have a VCR!

It's not like parental responsibility without government mandate involved is an old conservative concept here!

Republicans please continue to say and do things like this so I may see more of these headlines:

Rove: Obama has the electoral college lead

MyRandomName: Liberalism, for mandatory seatbelt and helmet laws laws that save lives, against voluntary porn filters laws that enforce somebody's personal religious morality.

FTFY.

Well those SFW, MSpaint-censored porn pics are pretty amusing.

Serious Black: jso2897: 9beers: adamgreeney: I can't wait until those of us 35 and younger take the reins. This type of shiat won't fly with us. A politician who spouts this stuff will be laughed at because we will already have our nets set up to catch this stuff, and we'll know to monitor our kids internet use.

We're doomed when some of you start having kids.

Son, I've already had kids, and raised them - and they came out a hell of a lot smarter than you.

That's not a big accomplishment. I think my god daughter is smarter than him, and she has trouble with nursing.

That's kind of my point. :D

Opiate of the Lasses: Department of Redundancy Department

/I agree with the sentiment of your post


More redundancy. Pustule, Chancroid, Romney. Word to the wise. Do not GIS any of these terms.

9beers: sno man: So, okay how does your 'puter v-chip tell if that jpg is a cat in the ceiling or something that's gonna lead to the death of a kitten?

The only way to adequately block adult material would be to make it mandatory for those sites to use the .xxx domain.

Now, that's not true. Why, back in the day I used to look at "adult material" (boobs!) on this very website, when I was still a minor. Of course this was back in oh-dickety-two or oh-dickety-three.

But my point remains. You can get porn of anything, anywhere, on the internet, at any time. Which is why the only real filter is adult supervision.

What's the big deal, you can turn the censor on or off if you own the computer. It's just like GIS, you determine whether the results are censored or not.

Felgraf: MyRandomName: Liberalism, for mandatory seatbelt and helmet laws, against voluntary porn filters.

Well, yes. Generally, one does not get killed or severely injured when one watches porn. Even if you *are* a kid.

I heard that if you masturbate to the wrong kind of porn, your dick will spontaneously combust. You might as well be dead if that happens.

9beers: Nadie_AZ: parents must be the answer

So what's your plan for controlling a kids TV and internet use? Should you lock up all electronics when you're not home? Should you not allow them to have a computer or TV in their room? It's ridiculous to say that even the best parents can monitor what their kids are viewing on a TV or computer 100% of the time.

Actually, I don't allow my kid to have a computer or TV in his room. Mostly it's because he'd end up as a pasty-faced computer addict if he had electronics in his room, but also because parental control is really easy when anyone can walk into the family room at any moment and see what's on the screen.

//not saying everyone should do it this way, but it works for us.

On a slightly related note, I think all kitchen knives should have a sheath or cover that locks in place (mandated by law). Unsupervised children could hurt themselves playing with one otherwise. Toilet seat lids should close automatically after each use, as toddlers could conceivably fall in headfirst and drown. C'mon people, we need these laws! Think of the kids!

codergirl42: So who decides which sites get filtere?

Could it be used to block non-pr0n sites?

Do manufacturers decide or do sites have to willingly comply and add some sort of flag to their sites?

Is it possible this could be used to block the sites of the manufacturers competitors?

What about international sites?

All good questions. My experience with filters is that they block so much non-objectionable content that they are just too much hassle to use. My notion of objectionable content doesn't always mesh well with NetNanny, or for that matter with movie ratings. (I.e., I couldn't care less if my kid sees a boobie, but don't want him entertaining himself by watching depictions of cruelty.)

sno man: Rashnu: Well those SFW, MSpaint-censored porn pics are pretty amusing.

hehe, that'd be one way of making this work, 30 pix wide swaths of red or black that criss cross EVERY jpg until the jpg can prove to the viewer it's not porn! (!)
Or prove that the viewer is old enough by having the camera on full time with some someone monitoring for half nekkid teen fappers for ever!!!

This. Clearly the answer is to have a 1984-esque monitoring system where your computer constantly feeds a webcam view back to some monitoring site. "Citizen 8472821-A! We can see you rubbing one out! Present proof of age immediately!"

If they had all the computers in the neighborhood make the announcement, it'd even cut down on masturbation (not to mention pre-marital sex!). It'd be a bible-thumper's dream come true.

Romney could even eventually have everyone line up in the morning in front of their computers for magical underwear inspection.

But would his filter catch this...

Nadie_AZ: NtropiK: On a slightly related note, I think all kitchen knives should have a sheath or cover that locks in place (mandated by law). Unsupervised children could hurt themselves playing with one otherwise. Toilet seat lids should close automatically after each use, as toddlers could conceivably fall in headfirst and drown. C'mon people, we need these laws! Think of the kids!

Don't forget- playgrounds should be brought up to OSHA standards.

Kids can get lead poisoning from eating pencils, so we should ban them.

9beers: sno man: So, okay how does your 'puter v-chip tell if that jpg is a cat in the ceiling or something that's gonna lead to the death of a kitten?

The only way to adequately block adult material would be to make it mandatory for those sites to use the .xxx domain. You can't knock Romney for saying that he wants to make sure that parents have the means to keep their kids from viewing porn online, even if he's mistaken on how to do it.

Parents already have the means to keep kids from viewing porn online.

TravisBickle62: What's the big deal, you can turn the censor on or off if you own the computer. It's just like GIS, you determine whether the results are censored or not.

The big deal, my probable shill for the RNC friend, is that Mitt Romney literally knows more about fancy ponies than the engine that drives contemporary commerce, communication, entertainment and knowledge acquisition. Which means he also knows little or nothing about contemporary commerce, communication, entertainment and knowledge acquisition.

He is also comfortable proposing stupid policies that would affect all these areas, where he is basically completely ignorant (or bullsh*tting to an evangelical audience and just pretending ignorance - whatever.) That's the kind of idiocy, recklessness and rudderless steering of the ship of state that America truly needs.

adamgreeney: cman: Not to burst his bubble, but parental controls are already built into modern day OSes. Self regulation, motherfarker, how do you like them apples, shiathead?

Yeah, I generally laugh at the sheer idiocy you crap into these threads, but yeah. You're 100% right. Things like Net Nanny and Bess have been around since the mid 90's. It isn't the governments job to watch what your kids see when they surf.

But they will anyway.

Diagonal: Quasar: "I wanna make sure that every new computer sold in this country after I'm president has installed on it a filter to block all pornography and that parents can click that filter to make sure their kids don't see that kinda stuff coming in on their computer."

Old and busted: magic underwear
New hotness: magic computer technology

How's that going to work for those of us who build our own from separate pieces, parts, components, stuff?

/geek


Place your hands in the yellow circles, please.

9beers: Nadie_AZ: parents must be the answer

So what's your plan for controlling a kids TV and internet use? Should you lock up all electronics when you're not home? Should you not allow them to have a computer or TV in their room? It's ridiculous to say that even the best parents can monitor what their kids are viewing on a TV or computer 100% of the time.

My kids do not have TV or computers in their room. Neither do I, for that matter. They do not get to watch television except outside certain hours, and we watch it together. I control the networking in the house, and can and do restrict access to various sites if they spend too much time on it.

Your need for the government to help you raise your kids is your problem, not mine. No reason I should have to pay for your irresponsibility.

Yeah, good luck with that. At one science museum I worked at, they had a publicly-available internet kiosk, running with filtering software. I entered into an ongoing competition with the exhibits department to see if I could access porn on it, and they tried to keep upgrading the filter to prevent me from doing so. I was able to access porn 100% of the time, regardless of what they did, until they restricted access to what was essentially an intranet. They eventually took the thing out, citing it as "insecure".

bobbette: TravisBickle62: What's the big deal, you can turn the censor on or off if you own the computer. It's just like GIS, you determine whether the results are censored or not.

The big deal, my probable shill for the RNC friend, is that Mitt Romney literally knows more about fancy ponies than the engine that drives contemporary commerce, communication, entertainment and knowledge acquisition. Which means he also knows little or nothing about contemporary commerce, communication, entertainment and knowledge acquisition.

He is also comfortable proposing stupid policies that would affect all these areas, where he is basically completely ignorant (or bullsh*tting to an evangelical audience and just pretending ignorance - whatever.) That's the kind of idiocy, recklessness and rudderless steering of the ship of state that America truly needs.

Actually, there is also the secondary philosophical point that Romney is a censorious moralizing douchebag proposing unnecessary regulation that would make it more costly to do business. I hit add comment too soon.

BOO!


Scary Mitt the Mormon Thread!


AHHHHHHH!!!!

9beers: GAT_00: Well then, explain please how a mandatory device acting as a government intrusion into the personal lives of Americans by interfering with their own life choices is small government? Or how it is small government acting to dictate to private business how a free market should work?

What? Have you bought a new TV in the past few years? If so, it has a V-chip in it. Has that ever stopped you from watching anything? No! Why not? Because nobody is interfering with your choices, they're offering a tool for people who wish to use it.

There also wasn't any widely available product capable of doing the same thing with televisions at the time. There are dozens of products available on the market to filter online content for children. Some of them are even free. There is no reason for the government to get involved. It's fine to say that children shouldn't have access to pornography and that parents should be able to block/monitor their children's online behavior, but this is a problem that was solved by the free market over a decade ago. It's needless government intrusion, which will cost money to implement and enforce, and forces consumers to buy a product that they may or may not want or have any use for.

I wouldn't worry about. America isn't a big porn country.

When You Pry It From My Cold,warm sticky Dead Hands

I don't see any problem with having this kind of technology preinstalled on computers. Its not like he's suggesting censoring porn form everyone, just as an option if you chose to use it. Don't get me wrong, I love porn, but when I was going through puberty porn consisted of playboy and penthouse. All you really saw was boobs an a big wad of hair. Some of what passes for porn on the internet these days is just downright disgusting. You get some impressionable young teenager watching that stuff and he's going to grow up with some pretty messed up ideas about sex.

ReapTheChaos: Some of what passes for porn on the internet these days is just downright disgusting. You get some impressionable young teenager watching that stuff and he's going to grow up with some pretty messed up ideas about sex.

You expose your kid to pop farking culture they're going to get some pretty messed up ideas about sex. Like that it's simultaneously the only thing you should seek, yet shameful.

sno man: Serious Black: Nadie_AZ: NtropiK: On a slightly related note, I think all kitchen knives should have a sheath or cover that locks in place (mandated by law). Unsupervised children could hurt themselves playing with one otherwise. Toilet seat lids should close automatically after each use, as toddlers could conceivably fall in headfirst and drown. C'mon people, we need these laws! Think of the kids!

Don't forget- playgrounds should be brought up to OSHA standards.

Kids can get lead poisoning from eating pencils, so we should ban them.

ummm no.. graphite since I was a kid...
If you want to keep the kids from the lead, you might want to ban every house/apartment built before the mid 70's. Turn EVERY American city into Detroit.

You're right. My bad. And I agree with your plan to bulldoze every building that has even a small chance of having lead paint.

We don't have the technology to handle THAT MUCH information...

So, it's not the government's role to make food, shelter, clothing, or education available to people.

It is the government's role to make content restriction software available to people.

gimmegimme: [2.bp.blogspot.com image 500x347]


Government cannot force you to buy a product. Unless it's an anti-porn box for your computer.

Most importantly "Equals=Equals".