Slashdot Mirror


Peer Pressure Porn Filter

Highwayman writes "Wired magazine presents one man's approach to stopping online pr0n 'Instead of relying on filters, the approach, which NetAccountability has been pitching primarily to religious groups, calls for Web users to share records of their online activity. Users pick a friend, spouse or other confidant who receives a regular report showing which sites they visit, highlighting potentially objectionable material.'"

8 of 870 comments (clear)

  1. Bollocks by wiggys · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    Er, maybe I've missed something here but if you're a Catholic priest and you want to look at kiddy pictures then you're hardly likely to hand your logs over to someone are you?

    --

    Sorry, but my karma just ran over your dogma.

  2. This has got to be... by talks_to_birds · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    ...about the stupidest thing I've heard of in a long time.

    "...The idea, according to Cotter, is that people will choose not to visit "sinful" websites if they know a close friend or family member will be aware of their actions..."

    Further proof that people who worry about "sin" and "sinful" are getting just exactly what they deserve: a big, fat neurosis

    t_t_b

    --
    I'm on PJ's "enemies" list! Are you?
    1. Re:This has got to be... by thomas.galvin · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      This has got to be about the stupidest thing I've heard of in a long time.
      "...The idea, according to Cotter, is that people will choose not to visit "sinful" websites if they know a close friend or family member will be aware of their actions..."
      Further proof that people who worry about "sin" and "sinful" are getting just exactly what they deserve: a big, fat neurosis
      --
      NEWS FLASH: Lowest common denominator continues to plummet!


      Why, do you think, does the lowest common denominator continue to plummet? Perhaps because people no longer have moral convictions, but pragmatic guidelines? Because people no longer hold themselves accountable?

      The Bible says that believers are free indeed. Interesting, since we hold ourselves to a stricter set of rules than most people, as this software illustrates. What kind of freedom do we have?

      We have the freedom of knowing that our friends aren't talking about us behinde our back. We have the freedom of knowing that our marriages are going to be among the 20-30 percent that make it. We have the freedom of knowing that our children are going to be respectful, hard-working, and moral. We have the freedom of knowing that, when we screw up, we have a place to go to, and people that will help us, instead of judge us or take advantege of the situation.

      Too many people think that freedom is going to a bar, getting drunk, sleeping with anyone that is willing, and forgetting about it the next day, or, failing that, entering "natalie portman hot grits" and seeing what google serves up. Alway looking for the next fix, the latest high, that truly meaningful one night stand. Been there, done that.

      I try to live a moral life. It hasn't given me a neurosis. It has, however, given me a greater respect for myself, and for others. It's given me the freedom that comes from knowing that I don't have to hide what I am, because people see it every day.

      Perhaps it's not for everyone. C'est la vie.

  3. Re:Dumbest thing I've seen in a long time... by josh+crawley · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    >...for many reasons.

    >First, the whole "my religion doesn't allow me to look at porn" argument is just nuts. If you truly believe this, you won't need your big brother (or whomever) to watch you.

    Damn straight. Then you also end up with Christan deviants whoi believe everything is "of the devil!"

    >Second, what about self control? Okay, you don't want to look at porn. So the only way you can stop is to have your PC report which sites you visit to Grandma?

    She wouldnt understand it.

    >Finally, if you want to look at porn, look at porn. If your religion forbids it, well, that sucks... but otherwise, who the hell cares if you look at porn? I enjoy it, am not ashamed of it, and I certainly don't need anyone else (or any religion) scrutinizing what sites I visit.

    I'm ashamed to look at porn. Tells me I'm not getting any ;-(

    >So next we'll be CCing our Visa bill to someone, to curb excessive spending; faxing the grocery list/receipt to help with over-eating; and so on. Do these people actually need a babysitter? If so, what are they doing living on their own, let alone surfing the 'Net without supervision?

    You know what I'd like to do? Get on that 'list' and fill the sucker with TGP's galore. Give them religous nuts something to look at ;-)

  4. perfectly ok because of who it effects by circletimessquare · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    this is the most insipid, moronic neighbors-spying-on-neighbors idea i have ever seen.

    but... it is opt in, and only applies to the insipid morons who think it's a good idea.

    end result? let them go on with their bad selves! they will reap what they sow: psychosexual dissonance.

    and most importantly, i would rather have them torturing each other with this bullshit than using their energies to torture all of us instead. ;-P

    turning the acid idiocy of the reactionary fundamentalist beast upon itself is wonderful jujitsu-style self-destruction ;-P

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  5. Of course... by callipygian-showsyst · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    ...if he were really religious, he'd know that G-d is watching him at all times.

    The fact that he needs his peers to review his web browsing makes me question his faith. However, since he practices a faith that allows you to commit any sin you want, and then say "Oops, Jeezus, I sinned. Forgive me" I don't see what he's worried about.

  6. Re:This is an excellent idea by eddy · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I don't have anything against it, but the whole concept is stupid. This is just a new vehicle of self-deceit. This "solution" creates one more thing for people to "fail" at, which will make them feel even worse about themselves!

    What is needed is for people to come to the insight that the problem isn't the "looking at porn" part, the problem is the "feeling guilt about it afterwards" part, a guilt that only exists because you've been _programmed_ to feel it! Guilt and fear is the core fuel of Christianity.

    I repeat, the solution isn't the add layers, the solution is to _remove_ layers. In this case, remove the belief that looking at something will harm you. Get a fucking grip!

    There's a small percentage that cannot handle porn and get addicted, just like there are people who cannot handle gambling or alcohol. Will this help these people? I think not. They'll just use it to deceive themselves and their family, thereby prolonging the time till they get _real_ help.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
  7. Re:Even better... by yatest5 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    why don't we make people that surf questionable material wear a distinctive mark

    Er, they do. They carry an extra 100 pounds of weight, wear glasses, have terrible complexions and 'unusual' stains on their thinkgeek t-shirts with 'witty' slogans. They also thing chicks dig case mods.

    --
    • Mod parent up! [a] by Anonymous Coward (Score:5) Thurs, June 31, @13:37