Net 'could spawn seedy alternatives'

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by iGav, Jan 29, 2004.

  1. Pseudonym macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Location:
    Old Blighty
    #2
    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.
     
  2. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #3
    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.
     
  3. virividox macrumors 601

    virividox

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    Manila - Nottingham - Philadelphia - Santa Barbar
    #4
    it seems like it has some good points and reasons behind doing such a thing. but its implementation will probably be its downfall, i doubt consumers and the government or whoever ends up regulation will ever come into a suitable agreement.
     
  4. Pseudonym macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Location:
    Old Blighty
    #5
    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.

    I agree that the net is only one factor here, but some of those sites would make Elvis blush all the way down to his blue suede shoes:D The TV (in the UK at least) has its watershed at 9 and you are normally pretty safe up to then.

    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.

    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!
     
  5. XnavxeMiyyep macrumors 65816

    XnavxeMiyyep

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Washington
    #6
    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.
     
  6. 7on macrumors 601

    7on

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2003
    Location:
    Dress Rosa
    #7
    I don't think it's a bad idea. Your freedom of speech isn't being regulated. If you're not allowed to host on the "regulated" net, host on the unregulated one. All we'd need is to re-organize certain addresses.

    Like .com, which stands for commercial or company. I think only true companies can call the .com name. Prolly limiting it to those on Nasdaq or Dow Jones. And a .biz or something could be for the other businesses. .Gov and .edu are pretty much sorted properly. .Sex might work for the "obsene" sites. Then .tv for TV shows and film. And the country scheme could follow the uk's scheme. Instead of Yahoo.de, yahoo.de.se (search engine?) It'd be pretty complicated, but eventually people would get the nack of it. Or use the ESB ratings or something. .E, .M, .NA, .K and stuff.
     
  7. wdlove macrumors P6

    wdlove

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    #8
    It sounds like having a separate domain for sex wouldn't impose on anyone else's free speech. It should be easier for parents to have a filter to keep children away. There is already regulations in place to control the use of domains, therefore no new laws needed.
     
  8. XnavxeMiyyep macrumors 65816

    XnavxeMiyyep

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2003
    Location:
    Washington
    #9
    I have nothing against a .sex domain name. That would actually make things easier for everyone.:D

    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"?
     
  9. Pseudonym macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Location:
    Old Blighty
    #10
    I don't see why the two would have to be split. If it is just a case of domains the you can set google to filter out .sex or even only search on .sex!
     
  10. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #11
     
  11. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #12
    I agree about censorship. Yet I don't see it as censorship if we were to Pseudonym's suggestions with .sex, .kids, and .pg type of domains.

    And in a free market society what is wrong in trying make money off those that would like to see more?
     
  12. Pseudonym macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Location:
    Old Blighty
    #13
    I agree that the regulation of this would be a nightmare. There is really no way to legislate against some ISP in Bangkok putting a .sex site under a .com domain.

    Having said that, I think that it would soon be in the interest of companies to post sites under the correct domain. At the moment if a teenager wants to watch TV they go the channels that are geared up for them. The advertising is also more targeted so the shows can generate some capital. A .teen domain could cater for that traffic. Any company, organisation or advertiser that wants to target the teen market will go to that domain. They could post under .com, but they would risk losing teen traffic. Similarly any adult site not posted under .sex would miss out on its target traffic.

    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!
     
  13. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #14
    If i ever make across the "pond" i would love having an ale with you! Or if you ever find yourself in the DC area let me know! I'll treat you to an American beer. i know it is not the same. But hey.

    Not very often a post makes me truly smile.

    At the risk of taking this thread down a different path...

    My first computer was an Atari 400 with 8k RAM and 10k ROM. I bought it because of it being a great game machine of the time. I justified the cost since it was a "real' computer. I then found myself spending many hours doing Basic programming on it.

    The more i think of it a Pipe and Slippers forum is not such a bad idea. Recently I ran across a number of sites that dealt with computers that most would ask "who"? It brought some warm and fuzzies to me. And for us "oldies" it shows just how far things have gone. Not to mention how much money I spent chasing that perfect computer, only to have found it some 25 years later in my PB 12" 1ghz.
     
  14. alset macrumors 65816

    alset

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2002
    Location:
    East Bay, CA
    #15
    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
     
  15. Pseudonym macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2004
    Location:
    Old Blighty
    #16
    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!
     
  16. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #17
    I think that you hit on a major point. Parents need to be more open to talk with their children about sexuality. We need to get pass our own hang ups.

    In my case my Mom handed me a razor when it came time. In the end it would have meant more to me to have my dad at my side during my first shave.

    There are multiple issues at play with your comments. First of which do you lock access to the Net at home while parents are away. What about libraries? Children have access there too.

    In my case when I

    I questioned my sexuality I turned to the library for information. If I had the access to the Net as the youth of today, i am not so sure that i would have benefited. Sometimes too much info is not a good thing.

    I guess I wish parents could talk more honestly about sexuality.
     
  17. Chip NoVaMac macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #18

    I think you and i are on the same page. To pay extra is not right. But under your idea of domains to segment the Net makes sense. Will it be 100%, NO. But it is better than we have now.

    In some ways we are talking about differing value systems. For Pseudonym and I the thought of a telephone or television to call our own would be unthinkable.

    With wireless internet becoming a standard in the home, it becomes more difficult to protect our youth.
     
  18. alset macrumors 65816

    alset

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2002
    Location:
    East Bay, CA
    #19
    I think the majority of kids are too shy or embarrassed to look up pornography on a public machine. As to those that would do it anyway, I'm actually pretty impressed. There's no way I would consider it.

    Also, a library can install parental control software (and usually does). You can always get around it, but kids are far less likely to discover exploits on a public machine than one at home, where they can test for openings every day. Of course, this brings back the issue of restricting valid research of breast cancer, etc - but it's already in place in almost any library that would restrict access, so it's also somewhat of a moot issue, for the purposes of this discussion.

    One more thing - I forgot to mention this one, earlier.... Some adults support the splitting approach in order to ensure that they, themselves, won't accidentally come across lewd content. I would venture to suggest that this is a selfish stance. The risk is small and that's the price you pay for freedom of expression. You could just as easily be offended by something on television as you flip through the channels or when you scan a book at the store because it has an interesting title. Also, if you find yourself misled to pornographic or otherwise edgy material on a regular basis than it's time to re-evaluate your approach to searching.

    The moment we separate parts of the Net is the moment we cripple it's all-encompassing range of free expression and begin a journey into sterility.

    Dan
     

Share This Page