RSS
And Now The Government Says Filters Don't Work?
from the depends-on-the-situation-apparently dept
It's always fun to see how arguments change over time. A few years ago, when the federal government put in place a rule that schools and libraries needed to put internet filters on all computers if they wanted to keep receiving federal funds, there was a lawsuit claiming that filters don't work very well and they tend to block out lots of perfectly legitimate content. The government, on the other hand, argued that filters work well enough and there was nothing wrong with mandating them. Eventually, the Supreme Court agreed, and said the federal government could mandate filters. Now, in a separate case concerning the "Child Online Protection Act" (which has been bouncing around the courts for 8 years), that has been twice hit by Supreme Court injunctions over the likelihood that the law is unconstitutional, it seems that the ACLU will be arguing that filters are just dandy as a solution to protecting kids, while the federal government (thanks to data a bunch of search engines freely handed over) will be arguing that filters suck and are ineffective. So, which is it? Either filters are ineffective and useless at protecting kids or they're important tools that need to be in place to protect our kids? Apparently, it all depends on which court case we're dealing with at the moment.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
Well duh!
*Personal oppion plug*
Go with clean elections, it lets us normal folk run with federal money*
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Analysis
It seems to me like we have a constant battle for who comes out on top. Most people agree they want to protect kids. The problem enters in on how to go about doing that. The two main solutions are either filters or more parental involvement. The problem with both of those however is that they can't keep up with the rate of technology very well. Come on, how many middle aged parents are going to know what pr0n or even what a proxy server is. Kids are a difficult bunch to work with because they don't know any better, are persistant, and can adapt quickly.
My vote is to have every parent sit down with their kids and go looking for smut. Parents can educate kids on what filth can do to their lives. Plus if the kids know their parents do it, it quite possibly won't continue as it's cool anymore.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Would the Dalai Lama Censor This?
http://www.angelfire.com/ego/sinzinrui/photo4/rama2.jpg
http://www.angelfire.com/ego/sinz inrui/photo4/rama3.jpg
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Would the Dalai Lama Censor This?
it is an odd case, by the way. well, no odd in that we should expect messes like this, its simply foolish-sounding.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Don't matter
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
public access == anonmymity
it's better to confine everyone to their homes and offices so they are eaiser to track down when they surf for the wrong stuff.
so what if poor kids don't get a chance to use the net for kid stuff (like myspace). so what if people can't do legitmate research. so what if that's the only way that you can expose your company's wrongdoings anonymously.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Educate those around you and call bullshit when you see it. We need people to go to the polls and elect more people who have a freash take on how to deal with our country - they're out there people; stop playing the two-party game and vote for independants or one of the minority parties.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
In other news, if we educated our children with a little more openness to sex (instead of pure fear) maybe we would be fostering fewers psychos and serial rapist. USA leads the way in that category and it's not because we don't have enough Christians.
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
santos
[ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]
Add Your Comment