| 4:47 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|I not talking about major regulation but a little to tweak the edges. |
Where does that start and stop...or stop and start?
One man's wine is another man's poison etc.
I'm not taking sides, just wondering how it could be done to satisfy the vast majority since a few people sitting around in a room at the U.N. can't agree on many things and this would be much more difficult to agree.
| 4:53 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I am very much in favour of some form of regulation but how wouold it work?
| 4:54 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Well for instance I once came across a guy tranquilising cats and the placing them in jars and he was communication this over the internet .
Stuff like that certainly needs to be regulated.
| 5:03 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
There have been several attempts at creating site ratings (much like movies are rated). However, such ratings are simply not enforced in anyway, although they are used by various types of "safe surfing" software.
Anyone engaged in not-safe-for-children content publishing should be advised to use such ratings.
But then people need to be educated for how to limit what content is "safe" on their home computers.
The big problem is not that regulations don't exist. It's that they are hard to enforce and that the general Joe Shmoe has no clue they exist to begin with.
| 5:26 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
"Well for instance I once came across a guy tranquilising cats and the placing them in jars and he was communication this over the internet .
Stuff like that certainly needs to be regulated. "
Bonsai Kittens lol.
Anyway I am for anything goes as what is illegal and immoral in one country doesn't mean it is illegal and immoral in another.
| 8:04 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|Anyway I am for anything goes as what is illegal and immoral in one country doesn't mean it is illegal and immoral in another. |
Are you serious? Name a country where paedophilia is legal and moral?
| 8:14 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I don't think the abuse of children has anything to do with regulating the Internet.
There are lots of laws and regulations out there to protect children, and to stop slime of the universe from posting their abuses online.
I feel as long as you aren't breaking laws or hurting anyone or anything so that you can create content for your sites then I say fair game.
I understand people do messed up things but it is the act of raping a child that is regulated, it is the act of drugging animals and harming them that is regulated. If someone is dumb enough to post the crap then I say bonus... just keep the site up long enough for the authorities to find you.
We have enough regulations already, child rapists and other abusers that post their crap aren't going to stop because of an Internet law... they already don't care.... them posting it makes it easier for us to catch them.
If you are worried about your children then parent them and don't wait for some regulatory body to make the Internet safe for them. That is your job as a parent not the job of some committee.
| 8:39 pm on Aug 1, 2008 (gmt 0)|
I support the enforcement of laws, not the enforcement of morals. If there's a site that's hosted in the US and is offensive to 90% of the population, but doesn't violate any US laws, then let it be. If that same content is illegal in Canada for example, then Canada has no recourse but to block it, which may or may not be feasible.
If new laws are needed to prohibit certain activities, then so be it. That then becomes a separate issue.
Children still need to be protected from viewing inappropriate stuff. So if you can regulate the children without eliminating the content, that's fine by me too.
| 8:26 am on Aug 2, 2008 (gmt 0)|
|If you are worried about your children then parent them and don't wait for some regulatory body to make the Internet safe for them. That is your job as a parent not the job of some committee. |
I can see that this is already going where so many other similar discussions have gone in the past. Blame the parents!
Why not blame the parents if a kid is run over by a drunk driver on the way home from school?
I am all for parental responsibility but parents cannot monitor their children's activities 24/7/365. A line has to be drawn. In a civilised society the imposition of some controls to help protect children is hardly some sort of big brother situation.
Anyway it's not all about kids and it's not all about "one man's meat". It's about right and wrong and once again most civilised countries know the difference.
| 12:21 am on Aug 3, 2008 (gmt 0)|
Censorship is a slippery slope. Who decides where to draw the line? Other peoples morals don't necessarily reflect mine or vice versa.
Because of government policy decision, foreign journalists covering the Olympics will only have limited internet access. Do you really want bureaucrats censoring your surfing habits.
[edited by: Old_Honky at 12:22 am (utc) on Aug. 3, 2008]
[edited by: lawman at 11:09 am (utc) on Aug. 4, 2008]