Originally posted by Pseudonym
I'd be in favour of some splitting of the net or the adoption of .sex domains. I have 5 young boys and I don't want them stumbling over some dodgy site. I do police their net usage, but it's bound to happen at some stage either here or at school. If there were two nets, or regulated and deregulated domains these could easily be filtered.
Equally, I think there anarchic nature ofhte net needs to be retained. To regulate out websites that don't match some governmental standard is not a good thing.
So it seems to the best thing is to acknowledge that the net has its seedy corners and work on a system of allowing those that want to avoid them to steer clear.
Originally posted by Chip NoVaMac
I agree that this has some merit. Yet you raise some concerns that should be the concern of any freedom loving individual.
In the case of your 5 sons, the net is just one factor. I remember in my youth my Uncle nearly breaking his ankle changing the channels when Elvis's Hawaii TV special came on with the bikini clad hula dancers doing their thing.
You raise a point about government involvement. Case in point in the US is the libraries that were forced to place blocking software on their computers. Persons wanting information on breast cancer were denied, as well as those sexually based research.
The problem with your last statement is who is to decide? Looking at movie ratings I am surprised by what can pass as PG-13. Maybe I am showing my age and my parents values when i was growing up.
I guess it is lucky that I have no children (or maybe at least for them). I was in bed by 8PM till I was 13 or 14. We did not have the sexual messages that seem to be allowed today in advertising. We had the "7 Dirty Words" that slowly are being accepted today.
I have seen PG-13 movies that friends and I have came out of and said "this is OK for the youth of America". I may be liberal, and not meet what is accepted by some; but that does not mean that i don't have ideas as to how our young should grow up.
I just hope that this doesn't become a "prayer in schools" thing. I think there is enough common ground for all sides to meet on.
Originally posted by XnavxeMiyyep
I have nothing against a .sex domain name. That would actually make things easier for everyone.
But splitting the internet into 2 parts entirely is ridiculous. What if someone wanted to link from one to another? And why should people be forced to pay more for a more expensive internet, just to be "accepted"?
Originally posted by Pseudonym
What I have in mind is introducing the element of choice into this. You could visit the .sex sites at the moment in the same way as you could visit a sex shop now. You could also choose to steer clear of those sites. What I am advocating is a system where you don't accidentally stumble across content you were not expecting or wanting. You still have the freedom of choice.
That would be an easy first step, but how do you force a sex site to use the .sex? Because i have stumbled on many a personal site that i am sure that you would not want your sons to see (and if I had children I wouldn't either). In my mind it would require web hosting sites to be required to offer both .com and .sex domains. And would they?
I ...but some of those sites would make Elvis blush all the way down to his blue suede shoes ....
Thanks for the laugh of the day!
My uncle passed away in the late 70's. It would be interesting to see what he would think of television today.
As to who decides, that is a tougher one. I guess every household has different standards, but at the moment no household has the option of putting those standards into practice without using blocking software that is never that intelligent (as your breast cancer example shows). I really have no answer to that except, perhaps, having some rating system at the lower end (so .kids has no swearing, sexual inuendo or nudity). You could have .pg and so on. It will never be perfect, but it could be better than we have.
You have some great ideas there. Anything is better than nothing. The question now is what do we do as concerned citizens to get changes made? the biggest stumbling block I see is the same that Apple is having getting iTunes transported across the "Pond"?
I don't think you are alone at being surprised at what passes for PG-13s. I'm only 34, but sometimes I feel ooooold!
Thanks for the second laugh of the day! At 45 I have few years on you. Add to that my parents were Depression Era kids, and you can see that I probably should be in therapy at this point.
Originally posted by XnavxeMiyyep
I think it's a terrible idea. Why should people be forced to separate the Internet based on the moral standards of the government? The Internet is based on free speech, and people have the rights to that. And it is no coincidence that they want it to be more expensive. The world has more than enough cesorship as it is.
Originally posted by Pseudonym
And Chip NoVaMac, perhaps we could as for a pipe and slippers forum so we could talk about the old days . My first computer had 1k of ram and 8k of rom!
Originally posted by alset
I'm going to catch a lot of flack for this one, but I put the burden on the parents to regulate. Accept that your children will find content from which you want to protect them. They aren't stumbling across it by "accident," in most cases; they are actively seeking it out. I know it's difficult to oversee their surfing, but there are steps that can be taken in the home.
This isn't the most convenient solution, but try moving your computer to a room that is open to the entire family, perhaps where everyone watches TV. Lock your kids off the net when you're not home. Accept that it is the lesser of two evils to inconvenience you than to divide the structural integrity of an open system and inconvenience millions. Remember that they will find questionable content no matter what you do, even if it means resorting to the tried and true method of asking older friends to buy them pornographic magazines at the store.
Splitting the Net in two is the worst solution to a natural problem: teens are interested in sex and they will collectively find ways around technology barring them from accessing sexual sites.
I'm obviously not a parent, so I probably sound like I have no clue as to the need parents feel to protect their children, but I honestly must say that there are far too many parents looking for someone to help police their children rather than actively monitoring their development (I'm gonna catch hell for that one, but I really don't mean to offend). I'm reminded of parents who sue game-makers when their kids shoot cars on the highway.
One other thing.... I reached puberty right around the time that the Net became well known for pornography. Ten years later, let me say that I think I have a healthier outlook on sex than many of my peers who didn't have access to the Net at a young age. I actually learned a great deal from the sites I visited when I was 13, removing much of the taboo westerners are taught about sex. Truly, we are raised to repress our sexuality and feel guilty for desires which are natural. I'm not suggesting that teens ought to be exposed to hardcore pornography, but I do believe that their curiosity is healthy and they are afforded fantastic opportunities to grow as a direct result of their ability to sneak a peek.
Dan
Originally posted by Pseudonym
Alset you're right, parents do need to take responsibility and I would not advocate net access ina child's bedroom. Your suggestion of a computer out in the open really is the best solution. Any protection software can be hacked after all.
I think what I was after is not a splitting of the net, but an extension of the domains so that you have a better idea of where you are in cyberspace. You'd still have one net (to rule them all! - sorry couldn't resist that).
And Chip NoVacMac if I ever make it further west than Wales I'll let you know. I've only been to the States twice, but I didn't think the beer was too bad. Well, not by the end of the evening anyway.
I programmed in Basic too and managed to land a job years later programming some old IBM mainframe that happened to use a form of Basic. Considering I have no computing qualification I thought that wasn't too bad.
I'm off to take the kids out now, but I'll leave you with my first computer!
Originally posted by Chip NoVaMac
What about libraries? Children have access there too.