Slashdot Mirror
Top Level .xxx Domain Concept Under Scrutiny
An anonymous reader writes "The Bush administration is objecting to the creation of a .xxx domain, saying it has concerns about a virtual red-light district reserved exclusively for Internet pornography. This is despite the the .xxx domain being approved in June and New.net selling domain names using the .xxx suffix for many months before the approval." From the ZDNet article: " The sudden high-level interest in what has historically been an obscure process has placed the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) in an uncomfortable position. ICANN approved the concept of an .xxx domain in June and approval of ICM Registry's contract to run the suffix was expected this week Other governments also have been applying pressure to ICANN in a last-minute bid to head off .xxx. A letter from ICANN's government advisory group sent Friday asks for a halt to 'allow time for additional governmental and public policy concerns to be expressed before reaching a final decision.'"
The 1500+ post liberal/conservative flamefest:
GO!
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
I'm not justifying pornography, in fact... I find much of it is deplorable. BUT, doesn't the Constitution afford us freedom of speech/ press? It seems to me the government trying to thwart the .xxx campaign, is flirting dangerously close to being unconstitutional.
"Simplify, simplify, simplify!" Thoreau
Do they realy think that the folks that own barelylegal.com (for example) are going to relinquish their .com domains and move to .xxx? All this does is create a money making opportunity for those who register .xxx and nothing more.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
"The Department of Commerce has received nearly 6,000 letters and e-mails from individuals expressing concern about the impact of pornography on families and children," Gallagher said in a letter that was made public on Monday.
.xxx (as well as the numerous other porn sites and link listing services such as sublimedirectory, elephantlist, and thehun). If you don't want to do that yourself, pay a third party to do it, but *do not* and I mean *do not* ask the government to do it for you because you are too lazy to keep an eye on your children's Internet viewing. The rest of us do not give a shit about your desire to not pay attention to those in your family but we do care when you step into *our* personal space.
People who are petitioning the government: Learn to use your computer and block out connections to
I realize that the current administration (and quite a few other politicians outside of the White House walls) want to have everyone come crying to them to "think of the children" but we need to remember *real* freedom first - not the created/imagined freedom the Bush Administration and fellow politicians have decided exists in 2005. This type of behavior in response to a few letters? No thanks.
We are talking about 6000 letters. There are what, ~270 million people in the USA? Sorry but ~6000 letters doesn't give equal footing for their voice, regardless of whether or not it "looks good" politically or it fits the Administration's religious agenda. I realize that "morality" is a huge buzzword in America these days but I should be able to do, see, and view whatever the fuck I want regardless of whether or not children could view the material. The Government should be representing more than just a tiny portion of the population. Just because the pro-porno people aren't stepping up to the bat (for obvious reasons) doesn't mean that their silent voice should be ignored. I'll be more likely to understand when you get something like 80 million letters.
If anything, I would think that the current administration would be thrilled with the prospect of having all the porno in one location. It's easier to track the "undesirables" and ban freedom and artistic expression. At least, much easier than the current setup allows.
ICANN, you fuck up enough, ignore these pointless requests from the Nation of the "Free" and go about your business properly.
The USA has maintained a "take our ball and go home" attitude on other international issues, and there's no reason to expect anything different here. After all, the US Commerce Department maintains that it reserves final policy control over the authoritative root server. ICANN simply cannot do its job as long as the USA controls (or claims to control) the DNS.
End of lesson. You may press the button.
Think they'd object to ".cum" for all porn sites?
Ignorance is not a crime; neither should it be a way of life
Congress control $ = inmates run the asylum
The frustrating part of this move is not that the feds object to this- that's fine, they can make recommendations all they want. The key issue is the timing- after a 5+ year process, they chose to raise their concerns in the final weeks?
they legally forced anyone w/ a porn site to move to an xxx domain, and thus freeing up the rest of the domains for non-porn stuff. Legally force sites to do this. This way parents can block their kids from visiting anything with a .xxx extension. And companies can block their employees from watching porn while at work :D.
_Vishal www.squad9.com
The US government should stay the hell out of the way; the whole POINT of a .xxx domain is that it would (in theory) differentiate pornographic content from the rest of the web so it would be easy to identify AND block! The idea that it would create an "online red-light district" is absurd: people wouldn't be able to just type in ".xxx" and get access to all the pornography they wanted (though if they wanted that, all they need to do is turn off SafeSearch in Google or use a file sharing application).
;^)
Don't they have better things to focus on? (/me avoids the obvious flamebait by not mentioning liberation
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
How can a group called the "Bush administration" object to .XXX domains?
That they would actually want to support a TLD such as this, as it would be very easy to block access at whatever level is necessary. It's an easy way to say "This is a porn site," after which you can take that information and use it however you see fit.
.xxx, so you'll have some using it and some not using it. But it does provide an easy way to filter a new porn site with a .xxx TLD without even needing to look at it.
Of course, the problem is that not all porn sites will be required to use the TLD
On one hand, Bush is spending millions of dollars (and thousands of soldier lives) in Iraq just to get the oil. On the other hand, he plays the holy man trying to ban internet pornography.
Oh boy, I'm already wishing to for 2008 to arrive...
Personally, I think that Bush is doing the right thing this time by objecting to the .xxx domain. From what .biz and other domains have shown us already, we can already see proof that yet another new TLD is *not* going to help us in the least. Besides, why would sex.com or whatever other porn site there is want to change domains anyway, since .com's are already convenient enough for them?
Once again, the industry's created something without really thinking through it and considering if it's really going to do any good.
Creative misinterpretation is your friend.
Even after reading the article I have absolutely no idea why they are objecting to this - It makes no sense at all to me. What's the problem here?
17+ rated games and .xxx domains are bleeding-edge, it shows you're hip and knowledgable to be involved, right?
Learn to swim, or stay out of the water. Thrashing around on TV just makes you look silly.
A .xxx TLD would make it much easier for parents and schools to screen out a lot of pornography by blocking all .xxx domains. Their argument that this "creates a virtual red light district" is as inane as claiming placing all the dirty magazines behind the counter creates a "haven of smut in 7-11" as opposed to making them easier to control.
Let congress make it a law, bush won't veto it
Another reason why the gov't shouldn't be left in control of the internets
pornographers will be given even more opportunities to flood our homes, libraries and society with pornography through the .xxx domain.
.xxx somehow gives porn sites more disk space or something.
Wouldn't it be easier to filter if it was all in one TLD? The Family Research Council seems to think
More insightful policymaking from the Bush administration. I know I'm going to get modded down for this, but what exactly is the point of social conservatives objecting to this? It seems if anything this would be in the social conservative's best interest, because by delegating porn to a particular TLD you can more easily shut it down.
Yes, it's unlikely to ever occur. The prominence of .com porn sites will probably never go away. But if your goal is to rid the world of pornography, or at the very least reduce it, wouldn't you want to at least move in the direction of having it all in a centralized, easily controllable place?
to all people that can't achieve orgasm but still like to view porn!!!
.nc17 extension...
I would prefer a
Easy solution: make half the sites for children, no more exclusivity for porn. Hello, that is the fucking (no pun intended) point of .xxx.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
It seems to me that folks interest in guarding families/children from pr0n would embrace a .xxx TLDN. That way it would be VERY easy to block those sites. No context analysis is required, just disallow access to all sites hosted on the .xxx TLDN.
The Register is reporting that the letter to the ICANN board of directors couldn't include the phrase "xxx" for fear of it not getting past e-mail spam filters.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
This makes me scratch my head. Why is the Bush admin against this? With a .xxx TLD it seems as if filtering software could hopefully at least get a little bit better, herd all the smut into one fenced in area. Seems like something porn peddlers as well as parents that want to protect would agree on.
.xxx domain to at least get some semblance and better blocking for software?
It seems to me that the Bush administrations concerns are more with just porn in general, which is neither here nor there in this debate, internet porn is here to stay, why not go along with the
Will the day come when there are multiple, independent root servers, with ISPs in one country favoring, or being forced to use, one, and those in another country using another?
I'm not talking Communist China or North Korea here, I'm talking in "free" countries:
If American policy decisions tick off other countries, they may just "go their own way" and run their own root servers. As a matter of civic pride, local ISPs will be happy to spit in Washington's face. American ISPs may be under political or social pressure to stick with the US-blessed servers.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Theres are positive features of this for the government. Any newly formed .xxx sites can easily be managed and blocked for net-nanny purposes.
When will the /. editors live up to their titles??!?
this week Other governments
How hard is it to recognize there is a problem there?
My god! Don't you see the irony here? Internet porn will always be there. But if we were able to have all porn sites go under *.xxx then they'd be easier to block. I see this thing as a major convenience for everyone. I say let .XXX happen and then we can start blocking when we want to not see it... or is it just better to have this stuff in our faces "accidentally" all the time?
Undoubtedly this whole letter-writing scheme was orchestrated by one of those fund-raising, bible-thumping, "defend the family" organizations who really don't care about the sense of what folks were trying to achieve: segregate porn.
*mumbles*
But I bet they raised a lot of money in the Red States...
You can't talk about Wikipedia's flaws on Wikipedia
Creating a .xxx domain would actually be potentially more risky to free speech than to prevent it. Here's the problem. If you have a .xxx domain, then it's possible to distinguish between the part of the internet that's supposed to have objectionable material and the part that isn't.
So this would open the doorway for regulation to go after merely indecent material on non-xxx domains. They could argue in court briefs that it's not preventing them from existing. This would make it far easier for the merely indecent material to be isolated out of the mainstream Internet. Then the filters get put in place and suddenly people get a controversey free Internet.
So for once I agree with the Bush administration but probably for the exact opposite reason.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
The idea is a perfect idea. Restrict all adult websites to ".xxx" domain. All existing sites should be removed from their current domains and ported to ".xxx". This is a great benefit to everyone (well some brand/name issues will have to be worked out in the transition, but still). Why is this good? Well simply because now if you don't want your son/daughter/child/person/computer from accessing adult sites, you simply block the entire ".xxx" domain and are done with it. No more mish-mash of site lists, etc. All legal adult sites must be moved within a given time-frame (say 1-2 years, basically long enough to get the word out and leave up re-directs).
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
would this domain designation not help parents and "nanny software" to block large portions of pornography sites? i doubt every pornography site would switch to the .xxx suffix, and some may create sister sites on .xxx to link or coexist with their .com sites. however, it could usher a lot porn into a specific area where consumers of porn can find it easily, and at the same time parents can block off entirely.
ICANN, you can either prove you are your own independent agency and follow through on what you approved or decide you are to be held in check by outside agencies.
If you follow through on the former, you're most likely to be attacked, via funding cuts and endless red-tape. It will be a long fight, but you'll survive.
If you do the later, you have guaranteed one thing; you will be replaced. It might not be this year or the next, but it will happen. If you bow to outside pressure, you are irrelevant.
Several governmental officials are mentally screaming, "I'm not gonna give up my Porn, there's no way I'm going to let ISP's and spyware programs easily filter it out of my broadband on my watch. Besides, The big corps would NEVER bribe us again if we killed their cash cow..."
[Now, I'm off to lift my le... Um, visit... at another place.]
No Republican would ever be caught looking at titillating .xxx Top Level Domains(TLD).
Nasty Democrats. You deserve a spanking!!!
...that the Internet was already largely a virtual red light district.
.xxx would necessarily make the 'net seedier, nor do I think it would help "clean" it up for those that don't want to see it.
I'm not sure what the big deal is yet, I don't think
I'm running a p0rn shop in North Elbonia. My government and my approved domain registrar which coincidently is run by the North Elbonian Dictator's great-nephew don't care if I use .com.
What's the USA going to do, cut off all domains registered by my registrar, or worse, start a war?
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
it seems that the US government wants to veto the .xxx TLD because a number of "concerned citizens" are afraid that sudently a horde of pornographs will create many new porn sites and transform law and church abiding young people into perverts.
.xxx TLD could potentially allow schools, universities, "familly value" ISPs and corporations to block .xxx and the governement to force any site that could "potentially be to titiliating" to go where nobody can see them.
.xxx domain being obviously in the interest of censorship the US government veto leads to some interesting questions.
Its interesting that the initial worries where more on the civil liberties activist side.
Worrying that a "red light district" could open the doors to censorship "outside the RLD".
Basically a
So the creation of a
a) Are they totally inocently clueless ? since the US conservatives are quite skilled at using the Internet politically this seems unlickely.
b) Are they trying to protect a large (very US based) industry ? Maybe, this would be the "fun answer kind of similar to the funding of Plan 9.
c) Are the US jsut trying the show the ICANN who the boss is ?
In the last case this should lead to some thinking about how to move from the current DNS toward some P2P distributed protocol.
Wich would lead of course to questions about is www.something.this the same everywhere ?
To check this we would need an increased reliance on signed certificates.
It seems we are back to square one.
It seems the Internet Karma has just been modded down.
I think that I'll register www.MoonShine.xxx and sell stills, big glass jugs, copper tubing and straw hats. Maybe even coveralls!
I didn't RTFA, but it's pretty obvious that an .xxx TLD would would lessen the chance of exposure of pornography to minors.
.xxx could shield young children from damaging material.
It doesn't take a Yale-educated parent to realize that blocking
I fail to see why anyone would oppose this.
I thought the Bush people would've gone the other way on this one.
It seems more their style to want to require the speech that makes them uncomfortable to be placed under one top level domain, and then require software vendors to have a way to block access to those sites. You know, a forced v-chip for web browsers.
Then I could see them, the Bush people, wanting to go after companies like Google who show content from those sites that someones parent blocked.
Ofcourse, that can't happen right now, because of free speech and all, but a few more Supreme Court noms, and we could be well on the way...
The whole idea is retarded anyway. The fewer TLDs the better for everyone.
Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
There is porn on the Internet. Why try to hide it? .XXX!
.xxx and know they are getting what they want. People who don't like can throw in the .com and know they won't be subjected to any porn. EVERYONE WINS!
This just helps better differenciate it from everything else, so hopefully one day you don't type in something like whitehouse.COM and get some porn site, because to get a porn site you'd have to put in the
All sites won't switch right away and some will lose their name before they can switch, but hopefully EVENTUALLY all the porn sites will switch over and everyone will be happy.
People who like porn can throw in the
an Ex-drug dealing/drug using president is now concerned that we are creating what is already there. The guy creates false WMD to invade a nation, and now wants to ignore a situation that is here. Personally, I think he has done way too much of it.
I want the ability to block this stuff from my household. This will not solve everything, but it will make it easier.
I won't bother discussing how stupid yet another batch of useless TLDs is - much less one specifically for "adult" content (whatever THAT is).
.XXX TLD is because it would be condoning something that the moral majority (the guys who would like Bush to have a third term) finds reprehensible.
.... we're going to support setting up districts in every city where it can be done legally by adults".
However, it's damned obvious that the reason they don't support the
If you oppose pornography and adult content, you can't very well go and support having a special area for it. These people don't care about the constitution or freedom of expression or speech or allowing adults to do what they wish. They don't want this material, PERIOD. It's the same reason they oppose medical marijuana. Not because it may not have medical benefits. Not because it can't be used responsibly. Not because it's seriously harmful or will destroy the fabric of marriage between a man and a woman yadda yadda yadda. Simply because it's "not right" and you can't support such things AT ALL or your constituency will eat you alive.
It would be a lot like the Bush administration saying "prostitution is horrid and evil and wrong and
So I have to say, I'm stuck on this one. Yet another stupid TLD is retarded. Squeezing all adult content into one place is retarded (by the way, because one or two pages of my site might have adult content, does that mean my friends and family can't access my site AT ALL from work or a hotel or a library?). On the other hand, the reason Bush opposes it is retarded, too. In this case, both "enemies" are enemies of my enemy. Heh.
"The Bush administration is objecting to the creation of a .xxx domain, saying it has concerns about a virtual red-light district reserved exclusively for Internet pornography."
Maybe they prefer the nearness of http://whitehouse.com/?
As much as I'd like to see him choke on a pretzel, I'm actually impressed with Bush for once.
.xxx? No thanks. Who's doing the regulation?
.xxx domain now?
.com's. So we waste everyone's money to give the morality nazis another inch, so they can then demand another foot.
It's not that he even has a clue about what he's doing, or how he's doing it, but he's actually defending freedom for once.
The people that label science textbooks with pictures of the human anatomy as porn?
The people who say a profile picture of me streaking while drunk at a party is porn?
Should we just put the whole internet into the
Gah. And what, it won't be regulated?
Then it's a waste of freaking money, now, ain't it? A worthless idea that will provide no value, as existing real porn sites won't give up their
Bravo!
I'm not justifying pornography, in fact... I find much of it is deplorable. BUT, doesn't the Constitution afford us freedom of speech/ press? It seems to me the government trying to thwart the .xxx campaign, is flirting dangerously close to being unconstitutional.
.xxx sites? Most broadband routers have content filtering and it would be super easy for parents just to block access to .xxx hosted sites rather than a list of pornography.com, smoking-hotties.com, etc
Not only that, but wouldn't it be much easier to filter pornography if the majority of it existed as
--
Don't fight Firefox! Let Firefox fight you!
Internet porn is here to stay. Every technological advance ever made by mankind has been used to facilitate the spread of sexual thought. The telephone, mobile phone, ascii art, copy machine, Bluetooth, two-way pager, fax machine, pen and paper, stone tablet, gun, knife, club, airplane, automobile, cart, domestication of the horse, television, VCR, home video camera, IM, DVD player, the computer, and finally the Internet have all been used to disseminate (pardon the pun) sexual thoughts, facilitate the personal connections necessary for sexual intercourse, or make one potential mate more attractive than the others.
It doesn't matter what the rules are, or what the government says. Everything people do, in one way or another relates back to reproduction. It's in our genes at the most basic level. We're going to have sex no matter what. We are programmed to seek sexual pleasure in whatever form is available. We'd all prefer to have that pleasure be shared with a warm-bodied partner, but we will also seek the pleasure alone, or through the stimulation of one or more of our senses.
How many activities do we engage in which use all five of our senses? There are two of them. Eating and fucking. But if we have a head-cold and can't taste or smell food, we will still eat based on sight, sounds, and texture. If we can't touch the object of our sexual interest, we still become stimulated by the sight or sound of that person. Porn is just a variation on a theme. And it's going to remain popular until something better (like the Holo-deck) comes along and steals porn's thunder the way VHS porn did to printed porn.
Now get that banana out of your ear, and get back to work.
This space for rent.
What are you talking about? This has nothing to do with what you can say, or which pictures you can post. This is about whether or not to create a special .xxx domain.
Obviously anyone can see, there is plenty of pr0n on the internet. No one thinks this will change. But does it make sense to try and force all content of a certain type into a certain domain extension?
Why don't you stick to the issue?
.com.tld .net.tld .xxx.tld .us.tld .mil.tld
.int and .eu, with the latter group restricted to "official business." Move .com, .net, etc. to .com/net/etc.us for the time being and encourage non-US companies to move to their local cc over time.
.us - create .xxx.us and add it to every K-12 school's blacklist.
You get the idea.
Personally, I'd prefer only cc's and international/multinational-org tld's like
Of course, that's not gonna happen with existing TLDs, but it can and perhaps should happen with
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
But I already found some porn on the internet, even though they haven't added the xxx domain yet. weird.
This is also exactly why the registration and management needs to be more global. I'm sure that Germany, France and many other countries have no problem with .xxx TLD's... why should the US determine policy for what is a global communications medium?
ICANN was stupid for promoting .XXX as an official domain.. honestly, what is the point?
.XXX domain. Of course, said sites could be run remotely and avoid legislation. This leading to (perhaps) more costly hosting for the rest of us (bandwidth, available regional options, etc..)
.XXX in the first place either indicates its a $$$ maker domain which is unacceptable (IMHO) or the policy makers are complete idiots who do not think about the consequences of their actions, which is again, unacceptable. Either way, ICANN sucks and the Bush admin sucks for thinking porn will go away if .XXX is abolished. hah..
1. Existing pornographic sites will not relenguish control of their existing domains.
2. Governments may be enticed to pass legislation to force those sites to the
3. A huge debate happens as to what is "pornography" -- is it showing an ankle? A women not fully clothed? A nude photo (no its art!)? Depending on your culture and beliefs, it varies widely.
Its just stupid. It is not a black and white issue where a site can be deemed ".XXX" worthy or not. A ratings system would be better (quantify the content type) but again, poses many of the same issues.
The fact that ICANN went ahead with
Total world population : 6,446,131,400
% who are 6000 Americans: 0.000009307908
% who aren't : Enough
Not that it's a worldwide decision or anything. I just thought I could push the idea that perhaps the internet was bigger than American politics.
Why don't they just chop it off? Sorry, but porn has it's place in our society and it shouldn't be back alleys and raincoated weirdos. Of course it shouldn't be the neighborhood minimalls either. If anyone ever bans porn in America, I'm going to find them and beat them about the head with a sack of bricks.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Remember the whitehouse dot com/dot org debacle way back when? I'm not gonna link it here due to decency and possible "spammer" labels, but I don't think a green internet user is gonna mistake whitehouse dot gov with whitehouse dot x-x-x. El Presidente could just purchase WHdotcom and offer a redirect.
Users of the world: We're here to help you, but help us help you. (your IT dept)
All porn should be on the .xxx domain extension. No porn should be allowed on any other extension. This way system admins and parents can easily block the .xxx domain extension. Simple.
Kickass Cheap Web Hosting
How you're stuck looking for a legal definition for pornography, which has hardly been a success in the U.S. (amusingly, the more repressive the regime, the easier it is to define.) But suppose you manage to find one that at least sort of works in the U.S.
Does the BBC get forced to host in .xxx because they show boobies?
But, take this farther. Suppose the one world government comes, agrees on a global definition for porn, and pushes this through.
Ever heard of IP addresses? Don't say "reverse resolve and block", there's shared hosting. Proxies. Redirects. SSL.
Attempting to filter by TLD may be appealing to some who either don't think about the tech, want to ban porn entirely, or want an angle in to exerting more governmental control on content.
I forget what 8 was for.
Call me crazy, but for me it's a heck of a lot easier for me to filter '.*?\.xxx' than it is "ImA(monkey|loser|dork)(spank|wanker)pedo-monkey\. (com|info|net)"
The ICANN (or "I-can't" as I often refer to them) is not a government agency, and doesn't have some embedded responsibilty to enforce the government's whishes. I-can't owes its existence and powers of internet governance to us. What am I missing here?
My opinion only, YMMV.
-Scott
My other sig is a Glock
.. because the workaround is as simple as editing your hosts file, or using a free dyndns provider to make a forward, or any other number of easy to do solutions.
The only way filtering based on TLD would work would be if the proxy did a reverse lookup on every IP to see if it belonged to the TLD, which would also make it impossible for 1.2.3.4 to belong to both bigboobies.com and bigboobies.xxx, which the porn site operators will not like.
Many say that it would be much easier to block porn if every porn site would be moved over to the .xxx domain. And many are dumbfounded buy the administrations thwarting of the move. However, it could be possible that the Bush administration have succumbed to the Pornography industry as well? By not requiring them to use the .xxx tld, it makes it harder to block those sights alowing the industry to continue unscathed. The "Think of the Children" stance by the Administration is no more than a doublespeak facade like the Patriot Act and FECAL (Family Entertainment and Copyright Act Legislation).
I have a line of door-knockers made of citrus fruits.
They aren't very loud but they are juicy. Put a piece of iron and a piece of copper in them and they double as doorbell batteries.
This will never work. As long as anyone on the WWW can post a picture of a penis on their personal website, there will never be a reason to have a .xxx domain - unless you plan to enforce it with a no-tolerance policy and an iron fist, which is the last thing I'm sure anyone here wants.
Who determines what is PORN?
I think America is messed up in some serious ways. This weekend I saw (the rather excellent, IMO) Merchant of Venice with Pacino. It had an "R Rating" because a bunch of ladies run around with their breasts hanging out.
Ok, so some natural breast exposure is not to be seen by anyone under 18. But then you turn on your TV and it is riddled with so many cop shows, including that Special Victims Unit show which seems dedicated to stories about aggravated sexual assault/rape on minors.
Can someone explain to me how natural things such as breasts are so bad but death, destruction, explosions, guns, and rape/sexual assault are so normal????
The USA controls the root DNS only as long as the rest of the world doesn't get annoyed with us. The root DNS db can be easily copied or re-created if the rest of the planet decides to create their own, non-US dominated DNS service. Perhaps the best thing for all parties concerned would be if the US decides to be asshats about some issue, so that everyone else is spurred to action.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I hope Bush has only as much say in this as the leaders of other countries. America isn't the only country using the Internet and it certainly shouldn't be the only country controlling it.
It's Amex, Mastercard, Visa, etc. who enable any vendor to accept their credit card transactions & it's therefore these same companies that ***MAKE MONEY*** when certain scumbags sell kiddie porn to other scumbags. So how about a ***NAME AND SHAME*** campaign on the credit card companies who allow this to happen?
And on a wider note, how about getting those same credit cards companies to enforce trading standards on those vendors who trade in adult porn before they can grant a license to accept their card transactions - like, for example, forcing any porn surfer to enter a valid credit card number before even allowing them to view any form of pornographic image?
Sorry, but all this ".xxx" issue is just a load of political pussyfooting around (excuse the pun). If we deem certain laws to be good or proper - like restricting minors from accessing pornography - then it strikes me that we ensure all parties involved adhere to those laws.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
So this would open the doorway for regulation to go after merely indecent material on non-xxx domains. They could argue in court briefs that it's not preventing them from existing. This would make it far easier for the merely indecent material to be isolated out of the mainstream Internet. Then the filters get put in place and suddenly people get a controversey free Internet.
The constitution gives you a right to freedom of speech. It does not give your a right to have people want to hear what you have to say, nor does it give you a right to force people to listen to you.
Forcing porn site operators to operate on a .XXX TLD would be no different from forcing them to be rated X and thus not accessable to minors. it is not unconstitutional at all so long as it is available to those looking for it ( if the government forced Google to not index .XXX for example, *that* would be crossing the line ).
If you disagree with the judge it's "Judicial Activism"(Bad). If you agree with the judge, it's called "Judicial Review"(Good).
The days of the digital watch are numbered.
"The Department of Commerce has received nearly 6,000 letters and e-mails..."
We are talking about a country with millions of citizens and an internet with 30+ million websites representing the billions of people around the world. And only 6000 letters and emails were sent. Am I the only one who thinks that is a minute group of protestors, given the populace to be affected?
I remember when the Evil Empire of the Soviet Union was doing even more moderate restrictive things and how we reviled them. It seems the objections were not based on what they did, but on the one-party system under which they were done and being a Democracy legitimises the same vile practices for us. Welcome to the Lunatic Asylum we call Planet Earth.
Primarily, yes: it's an opportunity for the registrars to make money.
.xxx domain is likely to have some; if I want to avoid it filtering out .xxx does a very tiny bit of good.
.edu domain, for example, works because you know that the registrars are going to allow only real educational institutions to have one. If somebody restricted .xxx to real porn, it might have some tiny benefit.
To a lesser degree, it's an opportunity for the porn purveyors to get a domain that suits them. Playboy could put its softcore stuff on playboy.com, and its hardcore stuff on playboy.xxx. That's fairly negligible.
It also serves as a hint to consumers. If I were after porn I'd know that a
It does provide one further amusing property, that anti-porn activists could do some squatting themselves. Why not buy up "fucking.xxx" and point it to an anti-porn web site?
The only good reason for any new TLD is when there is somebody minding the passing out of names. The
That said, it's mostly stupid, because you know there won't be any such gatekeeper on the doman. It's a huge opportunity for trademark infringement. Somebody will register walmart.xxx and start selling porn there, which is illegal but they'll do it anyway.
In the end, the registrars make money, the porn purveyors get a tiny opportunity, and everybody else ignores it in droves.
And the Bush administration is wasting its time opposing it, because it doesn't do any harm, either. It's mostly an opportunity to play to their base, who get to interpret it as "Bush is doing something about Internet porn!" without actually doing anything.
This is why i am no longer a christian. This kind of illogical bullshit driven by a lack of knowledge about the world around you is becoming annoying. If it's not porn, it's music, or tv, or premarital sex. But, of course, they never offer viable solutions to anything, they just say 'this is bad'
Show this to your friends and family that don't know what a real hacker is
A big advantage to the .xxx domain might not come from a strict legal mandate that pr0n sites must exist there, but rather from accountability. That is, by using that domain name, a company would be free from prosecution for distributing material that someone might find objectionable.
.xxx may afford such a compromise. Perhaps it would be more paltable if instead we named it '.free', but the idea is the same. If you post something under that domain name, no one should be able to argue (although I'm sure some lawyer in the end will anyways) that the material is indecent. By typing those three letters, you are already acknowledging your intentions.
At least in the US, it is up to a community to decide what is acceptable material to display in public. Because of its global nature, this standard cannot and should not be used on the internet. What community is there to decide?
While many people on this site (me included) would like to have a place of completely free communication, we do have to face the fact that many people (most importantly, most politicians) disagree with this point of view. To be realistic, some compromise is needed.
The
I would be against *requiring* companies to use '.xxx', and thus filtering would not be a fool-proof. What I would suggest instead of black-listing sites with a domain name, is to have a white-list domain name (maybe '.fam'?). In the same logic before, sites that have domain names there would have to agree to certain standards (perhaps there could be whole families of such domain names, so that different standards could be set).
This is why Bush can't be fucking trusted with it, its so ironic that the medium that has revolutionised freedom of speech came from a country that now has to have a full investigation at the hint of a boob on TV or someone swearing over the airwaves. Actually i don't think Bush is to blame, im almost certain he doesn't give a fuck about Christianity or porn, he just knows he has to please these people for some reason. Sell-out. At least if it gets any worse other countries will be able to just 'do it themselves'.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
Personally, I think it would be good because it can help filter out the good and bad when trying to prevent a child from viewing what he is not supposed to. .xxx domains. However, there is the problem of most pornographic sites being .com still, but they should be forced to move to .xxx, or maybe the government can find a way to separate porn from the other sites.
Say for instance, a parent did not want their child to look at porn sites, they can filter out
Dance Dance Revolution.
Mostly I suspect that they're pitching to their friends. If you're a technophobe and a conservative (as opposed to the liberal technophobes who want to return to a preindustrial era) it looks like the Bush administration isn't being "soft on porn".
.xxx domain without risking a Supreme Court smackdown on free speech grounds. Their base is happy; ICANN passes the domain anyway (since it makes money for registrars, which is the only reason for this anyway); and you ignore both ICANN and the Bush administration.
They don't understand filtering, but then, they don't understand the Net anyway. So the Bush administration can pitch any hissy fit it likes. The new domain is a dumb idea anyway, since there's no chance of them forcing porn into the
Sounds like a win-win to me.
Why is it such a problem to have a .xxx domain? I have been saying for years we needed a .prn for the same purpose. It seems it would be easier for parents and anyone looking to block this type content that much easier. Simply block out the .xxx domain, any pr0nographic material should be placed there, anything not placed there dubbed pr0nographic should be subject to heavy fines/penalties ( I said penal )
I think this would go along way to prevent children looking for the latest uber 1337 HL2 hack easier since the "Brunette cum bucket cam" link in google would not distract them from their search.
I am Bennett Haselton! I am Bennett Haselton!
You'd think an administration with a Dick and a Bush would be all for the xxx domain.
Sorry for feeding the troll, but, people never realize that Bush is just a puppet.
Next time, keep an eye on hidden agendas, so that you people will vote for someone that keeps his/her head away from "corporations".
And catch the thing on video, just like Paris Hilton. Piratebay will (probably) gladly host the torrent.
These Christian religious fanatics are the same kind of people that become Islamic terrorists. It's no wonder they got kicked out of Europe.
You mean there's *porn* on the internet? How long has this been going on and why was I not informed!?!
The only thing simple here is you!
Surprised the NRA haven't suggested it.
Open Source Drum Kit, LPLC deve board - mjhdesigns.com
The Bush administration is objecting to the creation of a .xxx domain, saying it has concerns about a virtual red-light district reserved exclusively for Internet pornography.
.com domain.
.xxx domain, but of course obviously only if the other freely registerable domains .com/net/org get regulated to now allow porn sites, and .xxx to only permit those. It'll probably not happen though, and in that case I think the .xxx domain is totally pointless.
Yes! Yes, you understand it perfectly!
It's to separate porn sites from the rest of the internet to not stumble upon stuff seemingly innocently named under a
But the Bush administration obviously want to maintain a blurred line between non-porn sites and regular ones.
I like the
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
It's a well-known fact that there's a government mole in the /. administration whose only job is to downgrade all posts hostile to the Bush administration.
Thankfully there's only one of him which is why you sometimes see anti-Bush posts rated higher than -1.
-Deep Swallow
The Future:
Websites are required disclose their sites' "rating" in their HTML and meet the requirements for the rating -- similar to game, music, and movie ratings.
Popular browsers incorporate a new feature to set the allowed rating of material to be accessed that can be controlled by parents with a password. The browser looks for the rating code on all websites. If a website does not have the rating code in their HTML when the browser's rating system is active, then they are blocked as well.
Internet police will regulate sites with the help of Google to enforce accurate website ratings.
Kids no longer are able to access material outside the rating their parents set.
This will solve the "for the children" issues of the internet and will most likely be implemented in the next 10 years.
However, it won't do any good because either most parents won't take the time to set up the blocking password or the kids will figure out a way around it.
I think that pretty much sums up, in entirety, the exact reason people are against the .xxx domain, well written, i could agree with you more.
The .xxx domain will never achieve the goal of segregating "pornography" from the rest of the internet. It's a level of bureaucracy that may generate more money for registrars and filtering companies, but will not stop sex-related content from "poisoning minds".
.com domains be given up by porn sites for .xxx? How about hustler.com, or playboy.com? At what point is nudity considered art and not pornography? Or maybe it's both. Would a Mapplethorpe exhibit have to be under .xxx? He made a lot of art that doesn't involve penises or bondage. Does Karen Finley's work go under the .xxx domain? How about Vanessa Beecroft or Spencer Tunick?
.kids domain should show that segregating content isn't likely to succeed. Whatever guidelines or rules or enforcement is put into place will be circumvented. It's how the internet works. The bottom line is the entire DNS system can be ignored and some other name service put into place.
As is pointed out elsewhere, why will
The failed
What is the problem with creating a new porn domain? It makes perfect sense and if the government took their heads out of their asses they would see that this is a good idea in that they could further push there puritanical views by simply blocking that tld. Maybe I'm wrong
saying it has concerns about a virtual red-light district reserved exclusively for Internet pornography.
Like, a virtual red-light district does not exist NOW?
People like Bush fail to understand that just because they don't agree with something does not mean that it isn't there. Enough with the denial. Go look for the WMD's that you say are there and really aren't, and stop pretending you can impose your morals on the internet.
"If you have to have crime, it may as well be organized crime" - Terry Pratchett.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
This is all we need. goatse.xxx "all goat all the time."
Dear aunt, let's set so double the killer delete select all
ICANN: UCANN'T --USA
The fun that whitehouse.com owners had was that browses in previous years simply added a .com to the name and then redirected when a period was not provied. Firefox now seems to send "whitehouse" traffic to "whitehouse.org". Internet Explorer now sends "whitehouse" to msn search, which gives whitehouse.org as the first answer
There's sex on THE INTERNETS?
Fark Bush.
Obviously Bush is just looking out for the interests of his constituents in the internet filtering business. If you just need to block .xxx sites, why does your state need to shell out $76,000,000 for NetNanny licenses for all school computers?
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
1) News of .xxx domain in trouble. Some have already purchased domains in .xxx.
.com and .net versions of domains.
.xxx domain overturned, owners of domains now must find domains in .net and .com as the .xxx domains they bought are now worthless. Registrars now must give them domains in those TLD's.
.net and .com versions of those domains being squatted by rivals.
2) Rival porn sites buy up
3)
4) Oops,
Whitehousecom is still up and running!
The Future For the Children:
Websites are required disclose their sites' "rating" in their HTML and meet the requirements for the rating -- similar to game, music, and movie ratings.
Popular browsers incorporate a new feature to set the allowed rating of material to be accessed that can be controlled by parents with a password. The browser looks for the rating code on all websites. If a website does not have the rating code in their HTML when the browser's rating system is active, then they are blocked as well.
Internet police will regulate sites with the help of Google to enforce accurate website ratings.
Kids no longer are able to access material outside the rating their parents set.
This will solve the "for the children" issues of the internet and will most likely be implemented in the next 10 years.
However, it will all be a pointless waste of money because either most parents won't take the time to set up the blocking password or the kids will figure out a way around it.
So, we have to have "Parental Advisory - Explicit Lyrics" on CDs, and an MPAA which assigns ratings to movies, and basically the same thing for games - and TV shows! But having a label which everyone can recognize (and gravitate towards or away from as they chose!) is a bad thing?
.xxx would be a way of labeling yourself as "please, Congress make a law forbidding my business," but from a provider-consumer/avoider basis, this sounds almost ideal to me. It's when government interferes that things go sour, I guess. (For the record: I vote liberal/Democrat.)
I don't know if Constitutionally it makes sense, and I guess I don't know for sure if using
I mean, the internet is already chock full of graphic porn - wouldn't putting it together in one place (from a TLD point of view) be better than having it all over? For everyone?
I mean, this is kind of like clear labeling on foods of the amount of Sodium, Calories, etc... Isn't it?
Education is the silver bullet.
with ctrl+enter and shift+enter and ctrl+shift+enter used what's going to be the keyboard shortcut to add 'www.' and '.xxx' .com to keep the name part, until there's aconflict between .com and .net or some other one. Another domain is another chance for massive domain/type-o squatting and all the media attention. So what happens when all the "good" names are used, sex.xxx, porn.xxx, whitehouse.xxx maybe even slashdot.xxx featuring nek'd mother boards, or not? They're just going to go back to .com once all the popular names are taken, unless they want to have .x .xx and .xxx, who said the domain has to have three letters.
It maybe useful for some filtering, schools, florida libraries, parents of under 18 kids, but that's about it. Wow, a whole 6000 letters, were they all from members of the same religous parents group, like the one responsible for over 90% of the letters condeming the Janet Jackson breast at the Super Bowl?
Last I heard the porn industry has a lot of money and infulence, where would the VCR and Internet be without the interest of the adult entertainment industry? Giving the industry its own upper level domain will be recognizing that it does exist and is more popular than those with their self proclaimed higher morals may want to accept.
If they're going to try it, it had better be very well regulated, allow the owners of
It's either going to work or be a big mess.
F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
I've already ordered slashdot.xxx, microsoft.xxx, google.xxx and apple.xxx.
.xxx goes live. Of course you could just pay they registrar thousands of dollars over the next many years to avoid this... enjoy the blackmail :)
You can purchase them from me for $10,000,000 each.
Step 3. PROFIT!
While the above is fiction, it will happen for real to EVERY company soon as
THANKS ICANN!!!!!
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
Yeah, before you know it you'll actually be able to find pornography on the internet.
Worse yet ... pretty soon people will be confusing internet porn and the Gospel! Oh ... wait ...
This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
AAARRGH!!!!!
All these new domain suffixes are getting pointless. Does anyone actually think it's going to work? The only people who will benefit are the domain name registrars. That's about it.
eTrade SUCKS
The reason they object is because the porn industry is not going to move their stuff to .xxx they are just going to have another domain to propagate their stuff to. If there was a "mandatory" redirect to .xxx domains then maybe they would okay that.
Band - Steppenwolf
...
Song Title - The Ostrich
"You're free to speak your mind my friend
As long as you agree with me
Don't criticize the father land
Or those who shape your destiny
'Cause if you do
You'll lose your job your mind and all the friends you knew
We'll send out all our boys in blue
They'll find a way to silence you"
Still relevant today
Obviously, whether or not there is an .xxx domain will have no impact on the availability of porn on the internet. The Bush administration is evidently worried that by allowing this, they will look like they are somehow countenancing porn.
.xxx domain would have made it easier to protect kids from accidentally stumbling over porn (of course, nothing is going to stop kids from intentionally searching out porn).
.xxx, then there would be an immediate demand for libraries and the like to block all .xxx sites, followed by pressure on ISP's to do the same. Porn vendors would move back to .com to avoid the filters. Then there would be pressure to create laws to force them to use .xxx, which would of course fail because porn vendors would simply use international ISPs. Ultimately, we'd have a lot of bother, a lot of unnecessary regulations, and we'd be back to exactly where we are today.
If it had worked, the
But it wouldn't have worked.
If porn venders moved into
You are entitled to your opinion.
I am entitled to mine.
I think people who meet once a week to fool themselves into thinking that they receive forgiveness for being idiots the other days of the week from an imagined being are SCUM. We need a complete ban on that, too. It's hypocrisy and rather childish.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
He can object all he wants. Who cares? He can't stop it. Some conservatives have made the assertion that a .XXX domain would just expand the number of x-rated websites out there. True. But, with people registering .xxx, all I have to do to protect my kid from casual browsing is to replace *.xxx with the ip address for something more wholesome, like the pleasant and uplifting sites of the Mainstream Media. That's alot easier than creatively filtering any domain with words that might be sexual in them.
So, you're pro-Jeb, then?
I am seriously amazed at the idiocy of not only our elected officials, but a huge chunk of the US population.
Do they (the morons) honestly believe that the porn industry has been sitting on the sidelines waiting for the .xxx domains to become available so they can finally put sites up? That somehow the internet has been porn free all this time and .xxx will open the floodgates?
WAKE UP! The floodgates were open long ago and we're all paddling along in our little spam filled canoes looking for a drink...
Do you think your child should be able to see tasteful nudity? What about violence? What about cartoon violence? What about sex? What about abrasive language?
.xxx is that it's binary. You are either there or you are not. There's no grey area to distinguish between the extremes.
.xxx internet? I'd tend to think it'd be on the regular internet, but I know a lot of people would disagree with me.
The problem with the concept of
The V-chip is a good example of a system that ALMOST works. It provides a more fine grained rating system, but I know of parents who still don't get the granularity they want. Some shows that are considered by whatever authority to be okay for kids they don't feel are okay for their kid.
Would information about safe sex belong on the regular internet or the
See the problem?
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
If someone is truly serious about filtering access or limiting children, then whitelisting is the only way to go because new information can appear every second out on the internet.
.xxx domain is that once in place then any non-pornographic material that anyone finds politically "objectionable" this week will be threatend with legal action unless they also move off the internet, and into the blacklisted area.
.xxx domain will only create a legal loophole to permit censorship by means of intimidation.
The problem with a
Hence, the
How old are you? Don't you remember the last crusader for the children from the 1980s, the one who brought us those "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics" labels on CDs? That was none other than Miss Tipper, the wife of Democratic presidential hopeful Al Gore.
I am willing to buy that Tipper had perfectly honest, heartfelt reasons why she wanted to judge and label bands' CDs. The "brain damage" comes in the solution. Tipper believes it is society's responsibility to take action to censure the behavior of people who are not morally aligned with society. But the solution she chooses -- labeling CDs -- results not in improved morals, but merely in reduced sales for the CD. She's essentially trying to apply an economic fix to a moral problem.
News flash for Tipper and all others like her: markets != society. Markets are just that, economic markets.
"The Bush administration is objecting to the creation of a .xxx domain, saying it has concerns about a virtual red-light district reserved exclusively for Internet pornography."
.xxx domain. As easy as it is to avoid a redlight district (if your so inclined).
.com, .net, .info, etc. domains in favor of a .xxx or .adlt or some other top-level domain that allows the user to know the type of site they are visiting. That was the objective of the different top level domains after all.
I personally perfer the idea of a virtual red-light district over what we have now... adult peep-shows on every corner.
Honestly, think about how easy it would be to filter porn if it were all in the
I personally think that the Bush administration should be lobbying to require that all sites providing materials for adult only entertainment should be required to relinquish their
Sometimes the best solution is to stop wasting time looking for an easy solution.
Sounds to me like the Bush administration is fighting against the .xxx domain because they feel they're fighting the spread of Internet porn. Like someone's going to go: "What? No .xxx domain? Well I guess I have to give up my idea for that BukkakeBarn site..."
Get real. All the domain does is give porn site operators the opportunity to denote their sites as pornographic, which in turn may help site filters and potentially foster government regulation. The Bush administration probably likes both of those things; strange that they shouldn't try and just let the .xxx go through then. Maybe they're just not used to making mistakes.
(insert witty/esoteric/dumb quote here)
I seem to remember an article about the US not relenquishing control of the root DNS servers to an international body of some sort.
I seem to remember a large number of US citizens saying things like, "the US has never abused it's power (over domain names)", "the US would not impose its views on other countries by interferring with the domain names", and so on.
Some of us who posted that we didn't want the US to have controll over the domain names because we didn't trust the US administration got flamed to a crisp.
Well. This is exactly the kind of tampering that we didn't want. Top level domains should be controlled by an international group that does not let one country impose its views on the rest. I hope people now see why some of us want this.
The article mentioned that the xxx tld is not yet available. Yet if you go to http://www.xxx/ your get a redirect to http://www.xxx.com/ in firefox. Is this the xxx tld working or is is a "feature" in Firefox which defaults www.whateverdomain to www.whateverdomain.com? Methinx the latter. If so it looks likes we'll have a firefox patch next week :)
AM
Untill parents, teachers, relgious zealots & government officials quit making SEX a taboo, nothing will ever change. Parents cover their childs eyes, teachers wont answer questions & punish raw comments, "god bother'ers" tell us that our thoughts betray us & our natural desires are sins, and poloticians (standing on the shoulders of the religious zealots) tells us its their "moral" obligation to protect us from ourselves. Yet for all thier pissing, whining & moaning...sex still sells (refering to ads here), porn is still a flurishing billion dollar industry, and people everywhere are *gasp* still having SEX!! The solution is as simple as the solution to our drug "problem" (sic)...not less drugs, more drugs...make them legal. Take away the allure of SEX as a rebelious action (especially for kids & teens who most of these moral responsibility laws are directed at) and you will diminish many of societies related problems.
Don't ya hate it when the correct spelling of your favorite screen name is taken?
If you oppose pornography and adult content, you can't very well go and support having a special area for it.
What? Isn't that like saying "if you oppose violent video games, you can't very well go and support having a rating system"?
Disclaimer: If you're a level-headed leftie who genuinely disagrees with Bush on sound reasoning, this ain't directed at you.
/., on the other hand, you get modded down.
To the parent: Yeah, I hear all the time that the Iraq war was for oil. If that's true, why do we have sky-high gas prices? Where's all the glorious oil we're supposed to be getting?
Sigh. Of course you got modded up for that completley off-topic Bush-bash remark. If you bash liberals on
When people say the war is for oil, they are admitting they have no other real arguments against the war. So they'll just reference something that sounds evil yet has no basis in anything. "Oil! It's for oil! Yeah, that's it! Saddam should still be there paying bombers' families and raping his citizens!"
Setting up a "red light district" works.
.xxx domain.
.xxx domain. I think someone in porn and viewing it as an entertainment *business* would probably say okay. It's a good business move for them not to fight and stick to making their entertainment product and publishing at a .xxx domain.
Why? If I'm going to somedomain.xxx I know what I'm going to get. (whitehouse.com anyone?) I'm not impairing your free speech either. Your free speech is exercised at a
Do whatever the law allows, but do it with a
Sadly, Americans just aren't enlightened enough to even accept pron as a rather undignified but commercial entertainment industry. They do it with tobacco, why can't they do it with pron?
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
The BBC reported on this more than twelve hours ago, The Register picked it up soon afterwards. What is the point in Slashdot? What takes so long? Editing? Independent research? Ha!
So, it is obvious that government people here in the US just do not understand the Internet. Rather than try to change things, STAY THE FUCK AWAY FROM IT. This is, after all, MY fucking Internet -- I helped build pieces of it. My blood, sweat, tears, fears, sexual desires, and future, are invested in this Internet.
We watch you while you sleep. Don't fuck with us.
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
The bottom line is this boils down to censorship. People should be able to make any type of domain they deem necessary without the government trying to control it. I think his post was very much on point.
If we were to allow a top level .xxx domain, there might be pornography on the Internet! Keep the Internet safe from pornography and ban the .xxx!
The Internet is generally stupid
But does it make sense to try and force all content of a certain type into a certain domain extension? Why don't you stick to the issue?
.com domains, but if .xxx is only porn sites it will be much easier to find them.
I think it's more about keeping a particular domain targeted at a certain type of content. It's unlikely that anyone will ever force established porn sites off of
Find coupons in Greeley
If you support freedom, free speech and the constitution, yes.
.XXX universally? In Australia, it's not a big deal to show naked people on television (at least after a certain hour). I've heard the word "shit" on British television. In America, you can't even say "nuts" if you're clearly referring to testicles.
.XXX? I've seen film clips of chicks making out, Dr. Ruth and a news woman talking about vaginal dryness. Car chases. Discussion about beheadings. Half naked strippers sitting around and giggling with Donut Boy (Neil Cavuto). Not to mention stuff on the actual Fox Network. Or even the big three broadcasters.
.XXX because I have a couple pages mentioning a wild party with some hot chicks I was at? Or because I have a webcam and my girlfriend happens to walk by it without a shirt one day? If some middle eastern country finds that showing a woman's face is pornographic and offensive, does that mean that any website anywhere in the world where a woman isn't clad in a burka belongs in the .XXX TLD?
.XXX? Does a medical website with photos of genitalia have to be a .XXX?
.COM site that someone in the US finds offensive are they going to seek to have me extradited to face charges in the United States?
.XXX TLD?
.KIDS TLD into which only completely kid-friendly content can be placed? When regulating free speech, they've typically ruled that you must choose the solution that will least impact the freedoms and rights of the majority. Rather than sanitizing the entire internet for the sake of toddlers, it would be easier to sanitize a single TLD for them.
But they don't care about that. Remember, Bush has the support of the type of people that form organizations who then go and send a 250,000 complaints to the FCC about ridiculous things on television from three or four individual people claiming to represent the entire country. He has the support of people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson who think 9/11 was God's way of telling us that lesbians are evil. He has the support of people who think that a flash of a boob with a pin-covered nipple for one second on television is going to harm people.
These are groups that want all "inappropriate" material to be done away with. It isn't a matter of "only adults should have this". It's a matter of "this is filthy and we should burn it". Politically, his most staunch supporters would see any step to set aside an area just for porn as condoning it.
Oh, and using the ESRB to suggest that this is just "a way of rating content" is silly. How are you going to rate content that belongs in
Would the web-equivalent of what you see on Fox News Channel be considered
Should I have to register my entire domain as a
Since Netflix rents rated R movies, does that make them an adult site? Do they have to become a
Is a website about boxing or professional wrestling acceptable, even though it "promotes violence" but a site about swimsuit models isn't? Is ICANN going to become the arbiter of what is is "adult" the world-over? Or is some American agency going to be responsible for that? If I'm Korean and I have a
What about Amazon.com? What about your local library's card catalogue? Both link to and provide adult content (everything from Fanny Hill to "art" books of lesbians in latex whipping each other and sex manuals). Do they both have to move into the
And, more importantly, if we MUST do something stupid like this, doesn't it follow more with the Supreme Courts previous rulings to have a
Anyway, in my entire life I've never accidentally come across mass quantities of adult material. Or any quantities really. You have to go looking for the content. If you're coming across hard core facial sites or something, it's because you're looking specifically for them or you're clicking on links at illegal warez sites. Either way, your eight year old is not going to "accidentally
http://www.walken2008.com/
(Yeah, I know it's a hoax)
Find coupons in Greeley
When people say the war is for oil, they are admitting they have no other real arguments against the war. So they'll just reference something that sounds evil yet has no basis in anything.
Kinda off topic:
I'm mentioning the reason _I_ think Bush has for invading Iraq. It's the only possible reason for invading. Second, Sadam may be a dictator, but is that any different from the US where the CIA can just do whatever they want because "you *MIGHT* be a terrorist so they have to make sure? the US interventionism is world famous. Vietnam? Korea?
And don't forget that Bin Laden got so pissed off at the US PRECISELY for their intervention in wars that didn't concern them. He was infuriated that "the great devil" (that's how they call the US) would assist them.
The US does whatever they please according to the moment. One day, they help the muslims. Another day, they help the jews in Israel.
So to answer your question: why the high gas prices? Maybe because there's a SHORTAGE and that was the reason they needed CHEAP OIL in the first place?
It would have been better for ISP's to establish a separate subdomain that includes a keyword such as "kidnet" or something, then legislate that adult content providers block client connections from the "kidnet" subdomains.
That way, if you wanted to be censored you could express your interest by picking up a kidnet account and responsible content providers could comply with little effort.
Enforcement would be clean as well.
Or am I just naive about the whole thing.
You are checking your backups, aren't you?
relevent to this discussion - and apparently ignored by ICAN is RFC3675 .Sex Considered Dangerous http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3675.html
The first few paragraphs are worth noting in this discussion
[begin snip from rfc]
Introduction
Periodically there are proposals to mandate the use of a special top level name or an IP address bit to flag "adult" or "unsafe" material or the like. This document explains why this is an ill considered idea from the legal, philosophical, and the technical points of view.
2. Background
The concept of a .sex, .xxx, .adult, or similar top-level domain in which it would be mandatory to locate salacious or similar material is periodically suggested by some politicians and commentators.
Other proposals have included a domain reserved exclusively for material viewed as appropriate for minors, or using IP address bits or ranges to segregate content.
In an October 1998 report accompanying the Child Online Protection Act, the House Commerce committee said, "there are no technical barriers to creating an adult domain, and it would be very easy to block all websites within an adult domain". The report also said that the committee was wary of regulating the computer industry and that any decision by the U.S. government "will have international consequences" [HOUSEREPORT].
[end snip from rfc]
I know I'm going to get modded down for saying this, but I've noticed that whenever someone says this in a comment, they get modded up to +5.
Signature.
Is it easy to find ISPs by searching through .NET domains?!
The first few paragraphs are worth noting in this discussion
[begin snip from rfc]
Introduction
Periodically there are proposals to mandate the use of a special top level name or an IP address bit to flag "adult" or "unsafe" material or the like. This document explains why this is an ill considered idea from the legal, philosophical, and the technical points of view.
2. Background
The concept of a .sex, .xxx, .adult, or similar top-level domain in which it would be mandatory to locate salacious or similar material is periodically suggested by some politicians and commentators. Other proposals have included a domain reserved exclusively for material viewed as appropriate for minors, or using IP address bits or ranges to segregate content.
In an October 1998 report accompanying the Child Online Protection Act, the House Commerce committee said,
"there are no technical barriers to creating an adult domain, and it would be very easy to block all websites within an adult domain".
The report also said that the committee was wary of regulating the computer industry and that any decision by the U.S. government "will have international consequences" [HOUSEREPORT].
[end snip from rfc]
No, but it should be.
Find coupons in Greeley
The real question is:
:) It came (oops bad pun alert) across as something close to: oh no, they are adding porn to the Internets. ROFL
Will i be able to put my lifestyles for 30-somethings page under lifestyles.xxx?
hehe, best i could do as i didnt really understand the objection
Hah. Who the hell promised that a war for oil would benefit you?!?
You elect oilmen to public office and give them large guns, you get higher oil prices. Duh.
"I find much of it is deplorable"
Unless you've looked at "much" porn, you can hardly find "much" of it deplorable.
[note: at this point, you'll drag out some nonsense about "degrading women". Its okay dude. Every guy likes porn. Most guys admit it, other don't, but still enjoy]
Porn is cool; in fact, porn is one of the coolest parts about being a guy. That and liking/playing sports. Oh, and bending girls over a desk and...
Right... in a perfect world.
.NAZI TLD and have everyone who posts hateful or hurtful or rude comments have to use the .NAZI or .TROLL extension?
"Somewhere... over the rainbow..."
Hehe... but riddle me this, batman. We as a society might someday want to filter hate speech as well as pr0n, so should we create a
That would keep kids safe too....
Most of the "professional" porn sites have disclaimers on their main pages, asking for confirmation of age. Many of them use systems like AdultCheck for further verification that it's not a minor surfing their site.
The slimeballs that use hidden/misleading sites aren't likely to start registering "proper" .xxx domains any more than they use age check pages now.
Next will come the issue of whether to allow "illegal" porn to be registered as a .xxx. IIRC the Netherlands allows much younger models than are legal in the US or Canada. Japan and other countries don't allow full nudity at all (officially.) Other countries like France might consider simple nude beach shots to be vacation photos, while certain groups in North America would call them pornography.
The .xxx domains are a good idea in concept, but I just don't see them working out very well for resolving the "issue" of pornography on the internet.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
I agree with the parent.
.com meaning commercial, .org meaning organizations, and so forth. If .xxx was for porn, it just organizing things better and puts in place a system that has been used in the real world for centuries.
.la domain being bought from a country and used for the LA area in California.
Ever heard of red-light districts? Commercial zones? Do you want a strip club next to the elementary school?
We should get back to
Anyway, I don't see why it is a big issue. It is better than the
Their interpretation trumps human rights. The right to make my own choices for myself, regardless of who agrees with it or not, is the most commonly violated human right. Start counting the laws about morality and personal choice and you'll also be counting every law that violates the Ninth Amendment. Choice for one's self is not a crime, and violating laws that attempt to enforce another's choices on the rest of us are wrong for the same reason rape and murder are -- because they force a choice on someone else, violating an individual's right to choose for himself.
I posted well before any of the ones which, although appear "above" this post, are most definitly posted AFTER the post. In fact I posted AT the same time as the "FIRST POST" people were.
The most obvious reason:
Bush's daddy told him that boobies were teh bad.
I agree 100%. I think ICANN can easily give all the people who run porn sites on .com or .net tld's a resonable deadline (1 year?) to move their sites over to .xxx, and assuming that their domain doesn't have a raunchy domain name they could keep the domain for non-porn uses. For example whitehouse.com could exist both as whitehouse.xxx and whitehouse.com as along as the .com counterpart didn't have porn or link to porn.
The difference between the .xxx TLD and a .NAZI TLD is popularity. There is a HUGE number of people out there that want access to pr0n sites. The number of anti-semetic facsists is slightly smaller.
.xxx domain is inherently evil, purely an organizational tool. This is ICANN's chance to show that it's an independent organization and not just a puppet of some goverment officials.
.xxx from your previous .net example. I can't imagine most companies or individuals will setup a site on a .xxx domain unless it's for adult entertainment. Most businesses aren't going to want to be associated with .xxx. .net is much more innocuous so has many more sites that should not be on it.
I'm not for 'We as aasociety' filtering anything, I just don't think that a
One last thing that may differentiate
Find coupons in Greeley
Censorship I think not.
What the heck is Bush worrying about, geez, like the .com domain is not a virtual red light district already!? Sounds more like something to divert attention from people getting shot at a place 4000miles away.
See what happens when you don't use your email for 4 years?
There are plenty of places other than websites to get all the pr0n you want. IRC, P2P Filesharing, Instant Messagers, and ftp are all places that are not being monitored. I'm not sure about any of you, but I was hired along with a friend to test the capability of accessing pr0n through an internet filtered site. Within 5 minutes I had downloaded mIRC and was in a room that was serving free videos and pictures. I also rana search on google.com for something like "pr0n sex .ftp video". It listed a bunch of ftp sites. We were able to get access to about half that we connected to with Anonymous login and no pass. Then there are the P2P programs. Just type in sex .mpg and you'll find hundreds of shared programs. There's no real limit to the amount of pr0n you can get a hold of that's not contained in any .com, .org, .gov, .biz, or ... You get my point.
I'd like to pose this question if I may.
How can all of that be stopped?
Generation Trance: What generation are you?
Can all suck my big red hairy NUTSACK!! Stupid right-wing neo-con POS cocksuckers!
You're dealing with Christian fanatics and right wing psychotics. Neither of these groups would have any trouble slapping ALL content THEY find objectionable to THEMSELVES into the XXX TLD.
Problem with it is that they'll most likely automatically demand (by law, easily enough) that every ISP to block anything they don't like, the ones that don't comply will be shot in the foot in various, republican financial hamstringing type ways...
Who knows, Microsoft might petition that Slashdot and OSDL/Sourceforge/Newsforge get put in this TLD because they're "offensive" to "microsofties and minors".
Sounds far fetched, but that's what my grandparents thought about the fall of the berlin wall. (And what do you know...)
" What luck for rulers that men do not think" - Adolf Hitler
.. is they can't admit defeat. There is no way to keep porn out of the hands of those people who actually want it. Yet they can't accept that fact, and they still believe that they can eliminate it. So what do they do, any move that regulates and thus stops some of the excesses of the porn industry, but thus also further legitimizing it, is fought tooth and nail. In this case a sensible approach of putting up a virtual redlight district that everybody knows is there, and those who want to visit it can, and those that don't can avoid or if a childs guardian chooses to can be blocked very easily.
The same is also true of prostitution of course, which porn is an abstraction of. There are many good reasons to legalise and regulate prostitution, including STD prevention and monitoring and giving the prostitute a legitimate status that will significantly minimise exploitation.
The truth is, nobody has irradicated prostitution, and nobody can irradicate porn now it is so entrenched in our society, and anybody with a video camera can make it.
Using the Adults Only rating? .ao?
Oh wait... that's Angola...
Well, you raise some good points. But it does come down to .xxx is a government endorsement of a pr0n category.
.VIOLENT or .GAY category regardless of popularity or audience size.
I would not want the government to endorse a
ICANN is the puppet of many things. Certainly not the people. I see no value in it subjecting us to its "judgement". At least as a government puppet, I can vote for new direction in ICANN. As a shadow puppet, I have no control over ICANNs operations.
I really really need an answer to this question because it is simply the most retarded lack of thinking the world may ever see:
.xxx tld was proposed to make it easier to block porn, why oh why is a .safe or .kids tld not created that has a registration control (similar to .gov, .mil and .edu) so that only 'safe' content sites can have the tld? i really cannot see any problem with my logic unless i am completely missing something? this .safe domain would be so insanely perfect on every level:
.safe.uk .safe.ch etc, therefore each country would be able to set the rules exactly how it wanted.
If the
1) it would be separate for each country -
2) it would not make anything mandatory and thus would be more 'free'
3) it would make everyone equally happy
4) it would create a natural incentive for people to clean up their sites or risk loosing part of their audience
i really would like a sensible answer to this question because the apparent lack of thought and generous application of retardedness on behalf of the bush administration will continue to bug me unless someone can justify it in some way.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
The example of .NAZI includes ANY hate speech. So lets call it .TROLL.
.TROLL should be a reality?
.GUN .GOD and .GAY. Lots of people like guns. Lots of people like god. Lots of people like gays.
.GOD .GUN and .GAY and its easily customized to fit the tolerance and political correctness of the user, right? Just adjust your browser threshold value.
Certainly, there is a large audience of people who WANT to hear negative comments, angry comments, etc. This could be huge. So you believe if I get a critical mass of supporters,
There are also
Now, we just subdivide the internet into
http://www.clevercaption.com/98.html
.xxx is a tld that is voluntarily supported by the porn industry to help make blocking easier for parents and librarys etc. In no way is it supposed to be a SOLUTION, but the start of a migration. It doesnt even make sense for people to oppose this TLD. Pornography is ALREADY THERE, how are you going to tell me that migrating it to .xxx is going to make it worse?
People really need to think about what they are saying especially when it involves an emotional subject like this. A XXX tld isnt "legitimizing" porn, porn is ALREADY LEGITIMATE, open your fucking eyes people.
It's about what you say you oppose. It's the appearance of impropriety that's to be avoided. The actual impropriety itself is great if you can get away with it without seeming, in public, to condone it.
That's right: The internet is as much a kids place as an adults place.
Adults need to but out of trying to limit kids free speach, access to porn, and other in demand information.
Also, hey USA, the internet is INTERnational. In some coutries, sex is legal. (And not just for adults.) Get used to it.
It is a matter of history that .com exists instead of .com.us or .co.us
.tld should surely be created under the introducing country's domain.
Any new
The fact that the US based ICANN is trying to foist this on the world is what has caused so much controversy globally.
Are you guys honestly worried that the federal government will be able to restrict porn?
/nobody/ likes spam -- I'd like to see them actually shut down porn sites' computers.
I mean, after five seconds of thought, it occurred to me "censored" porn would still be available by IP address. Porn sites would just have to distribute the IP address of a directory service or search engine that searched other domain-less porn sites, or they'd all have to register for OpenNIC or something.
And if the federal government can't effectively disable spammers -- and
wtf do we need his approval anyway, he's not our dad for christ sakes. Even considering his position gives him power.
"He was a wise man who invented beer." - Plato
because it is censorship.
.xxx? It's a slimeball business, and it needs to be marked just like we mark it in the real world.
Not trying to flame, though I'm not sure why this would be considered censoring free speech. As a society, we place markers on adult shops so that minors don't enter them. We place black bars on risque magazines so that minors can't see them. Movies are labeled 'R' or 'NC17' identifying them as adult-only. We have ESRB ratings on games, V-Chip ratings on TV shows, and explicit lyric labels on CDs. Has any of this censored the adult industry or put them out of business? No, what it has done is to inform people about questionable content, so stupid parents don't accidentally plan their seven-year old son's birthday party at a strip bar. It's still illegal in the United States to sell pornography to a minor, and if I walked up to your kid on the street and showed them porn, I'd be arrested.
And that's why America doesn't have free speech. It's illegal to show or talk to children about sex; despite sex being a natural act. Just because many Americans are prudes doesn't excuse censorship.
In America, a topless woman who isn't doing anything remotely sexual will still be arrested for stepping out the door in public. The very idea of having a bare body is somehow considered "pornographic". It's the same concept as the Islamic censorship of women showing bare ankles or an unhooded face in public; to limit expressions of sexuality, so that women will remain obedient.
In America, it's not illegal to carry a handgun where children can see it. Children are expressly encouraged to become self-centred, greedy, and violent at the first sign of provocation. And for some reason, when those kids grow up, they kill more people than in other countries.
The per-capita homicide rate in the USA is 3 times that of it's nearest neighbour, and even higher than many places in Europe. Is anyone suprised? I'm not.
Which is really more damaging; accidentally seeing Daddy gun down a "tresspassing burglar", only to realize it's just the neighbour's kid coming over to play; or accidentally seeing some porn video where a bored lady gets something uncomfortable looking shoved inside her while moaning unconvincingly? My bet's not on the porn.
In America, advocating slavery and murder to children is expressly legal. If you don't believe me, go read the Bible again, and remember that children are not only allowed but encouraged to read it!
In that dark book, slavery is explictly encouraged by the harvest god of sacrifice. The children are asked to pray to this god, and are encouraged accept the dubious ethos of the novel without question.
In several places, this god leads his "chosen people" into unilateral wars of agression, and even advocates the genocide of opponents. The god to who these people pray not only believes in slavery, it orders them to take sex slaves (concubines) by force from conquered nations.
In one place, the god (to whom our children are taught to obey unthinkingly) speaks directly to a young child as a disenbodied voice; and the child is expected to obey. The god also slaughters children ruthelessly by sending an Angel of Death to kill every child who isn't staying in a house warded with a doorway stained in blood.
To me, that's a heck of a lot more gross, corrupt, and outright wrong for a child to be exposed to than anything porn could contain. Porn is just two people fucking; that happens every day. That stone altar and slaughter and slavery stuff; that's just not normal!
So what if the porn industry is forced to use
Ahh... porn is full of slimeballs, and slimeballs shouldn't have rights, is that it?
Unlike the religous industry, which is, of couse, not composed of any slimeballs? Go ahead, tell me televangelists are good, honest people. Just try. Like the guy who said God would kill him if he didn't get enough money. He didn't, but God didn't. Wasn't that nice of God to spare his li
Thanks captain obvious!
Meh.
Hey, maybe Bush likes porn. I mean, when you've got Laura Bush telling jokes about George involving gay bestiality, it has to make you wonder.
So sure, the .xxx idea might be unpopular with their base, but it's a really bad idea. It wouldn't work and it opens the door to more laws to infringe on the first amendment. For once everyone agrees on something, and there are those here that would support it *just because* Bush opposes it? At least have some kind of grounds for an argument like, oh, "It would make .xxx easier to tax and once legislators get their hands on the tax money, porn will never go away!" or something like that.
Personally, I think the whole idea is stupid. It wouldn't work, and all kinds of shit that wouldn't belong in .xxx would be forced to live there. Besides, it does nothing for usenet, p2p, and the plethora of other protocols out there. Big deal, now you can stop junior from browsing hotgirls.xxx. So what, he's still got Kazaa, and you still have to take responsibility as a parent raising him.
I just submitted a comment to another thread, and this is what appeared on the top of the screen:
/.ers are anti-Republican. The statement above is purely Republican! -- It is a right wing statement that it is your own responsibility to check for mistakes given the tools available to you. /. does not do it that way!
:)
Submitted Comment
Comment Submitted. There will be a delay before the comment becomes part of the static page. What you submitted appears below. If there is a mistake...well, you should have used the 'Preview' button!
Sounds good. This makes total sense. What I don't understand is that the majority of
It would be a left wing statement if it claimed it was the moderator's responsibility to fix posters' mistakes...however that is not the rational thing to do; therefore
just my $.02
since i'm not registered yet, anyone that would like to comment/question,
pimpmaster68 at gmail dot com
I welcome any feedback
Internet shouldn't follow one administration's morals.
You know, it's better to have it all spread around in places EVERYONE goes, and hidden where some unsuspecting kid or, god forbid, a self respecting politition (do those still exist?) might stumble accross it... Perhaps it's just that Bush want's to be able to blame his porn surfing on accidental circumstances. G: "Dubya, Dubya, Dubya, dot, whitehouse, dot, com" (ok, so I know it's no longer around, but you get the idea, wouldn't very well work for .xxx now would it?)
L: "George, what are you doing?!?"
G: "Er, uh... Reasearching something for my speach-- my god, what is this evil stuff?!"
More domains for them to have to buy.
.com domains and are making money doing so. .xxx has a lot of downside potential for them.
.com, do you like .info?
.xxx
More domain names for competitors to take if they don't buy them.
They own many of the obvious
If you own a non-porn business and have a
Likely that answer is no.
Same with porn companies and
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The construct:
<META name="Voluntary Content Rating" content="adult">
at the top of a page with adult content has existed for years. Some adult sites use it and some don't.
All that would be required to achieve a better result then .xxx would be simply to make this labelling mandatory and to pressure browser vendors into adding a password protected "filter adult content" option.
The browser mod could be achieved by pressure from parents and government. The mandatory labelling could be achieved by making credit card companies liable if they process for any site that doesn't have the tag as well as making sites which don't self label liable for prosecution (that would not be impossible to police since they are already intending to police the entire adult oriented internet with these various tax proposals and 2257)
So that would be problem solved. Except... this wouldn't make anyone rich like .xxx will (on the back of pretending to protect children which it won't do). Also .xxx is easier to understand so more useful as a political vote booster at some point (Bush attitude in opposing initially is not all it seems and I expect that to change down the line after "careful consideration" - but that's another story).
-------- What about Amazon.com? What about your local library's card catalogue? Both link to and provide adult content (everything from Fanny Hill to "art" books of lesbians in latex whipping each other and sex manuals). Do they both have to move into the .XXX TLD?
.com extension. But to access it easily you would have to go through a small .xxx gateway, which could be easily blocked by a kiddie filter.
No. They merely have to identify their adult content and link to it through tinyurl.xxx or some such service.
The adult content could even have a
What about seach engines? I understand that it is trivial to put code on the top of a webpage that requests/instructs the index robots to go away.
" I mean *do not* ask the government to do it for you because you are too lazy to keep an eye on your children's Internet viewing"
it would be trivial for a child or adult to accidentally go to an adult site.
I mean, what if my daughter decides she is interested in knowing what other teen girls are going and tries teengirls.com?
It could be an easy mistake that has nothing to do with the parents being 'lazy'.
It can be no different then walking into what appear to be a teen age clothing store only to see some 18 year old taking it in the face.
"I realize that "morality" is a huge buzzword in America these days but I should be able to do, see, and view whatever the fuck I want regardless of whether or not children could view the material"
so you are saying people should be able to put up bill boards along freeways that advocate killing you? Showing people having sex?
"The rest of us do not give a shit about your desire to not pay attention to those in your family but we do care when you step into *our* personal space."
except this isn't 'your personal space' is it? it is a public space. We're not tlaking about having porn delivered to your house via a plain brown wrapper here.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Who has dibs on microsoft.xxx ???
Gravity Sucks
(Yes, that's 2 or $0.02 in dead presidents)
.xxx TLD. People are going to view porn, no matter what "we" or "they" do. Yes, I beleive viewing pornography is a sin (Matthew 5:28). No, it's not a crime. Yes, there is a difference. It is not the job of the government to save our souls - it's the job of the church. Neither should try to do the other's job, just as you shouldn't take your car to a beauty salon for a transmission rebuild or go to a mechanic for a cut and style.
.xxx TLD will accomodate both of these things. It keeps the porn available to those who may legally view it, while simultaneously giving those who wish to filter out the porn a simple TLD to drop into their filtering software, firewalls, proxy servers, etc.
.xxx TLD.
I'm a conservative. I'm not a neoconservative, or a Bush fanboy. I'm not even a libertarian (though I voted for Badnarik last fall, but there's a long story behind that).
I'm also a recently-converted Christian. I'm not a fundamentalist or an evangelist. I'm not even what you might call "religious". I just believe in Jesus Christ and that through Him, one may be granted salvation.
With those two premises in mind, I support the
Another reason that I, a born-again Christian, refuse to call for the prohibition of pornography, I refer the reader to John 8:7, in which Jesus said "he that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone". I will not cast the proverbial stone at those who produce, sell, or consume pornography.
Porn is legal (at least for people over a certain age in the US). It generates revenue. It is a profit-making enterprise, and a part of the free market. As a conservative, this is perfectly fine with me.
The owner of a computer or network has the right to restrict the material viewed on said computer(s) or transmitted across said network. This right to determine how your own property is used falls within what is called property rights. As a conservative, this is perfectly fine with me.
The
Logically, true conservatives should support the
"Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
Honestly, I have no idea what the big deal is. I've been looking at porn and masturbating since I was 12 or 13 (5th grade), and I wouldn't be surprised to learn that many other people have been, too. As far as I can tell (I'm 18 as of last month), I'm not fucked up in the head. I'm still a virgin -- hell, I've never even had a girlfriend. I'm a nerd, just the same as the ones that don't look at porn. Why is porn bad for people under 18?
This seems, to me, to be the same issue as violence in video games -- shitty parenting yields shitty kids, who by coincidence, also look at porn/play video games. I have excellent parents, play (sometimes violent) video games, and watch porn yet I'm still able to become a productive member of society.
Assuming you live in "the west" you are in a [largely] capitalist society.
So, this is how it works: The ISP blocks stuff you want to see/use. You cancel your account and go elsewhere.
No foul.
God is real, your believing that he is not will save you just as much as believing gravity is a lie when walking off a cliff, i.e. not at all.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
Not meaning to specifically single out the parent, but the subject line was appropriate.
.com = commercial, .net = network afiliate, .org = non profit organisation etc etc. Since most porn sites are also commercial entities, they are IMHO just as entitled to a .com as anything else. This sorta makes the .xxx TLD somewhat unnecessary.
The issue here may also be less about censorship and more about redundancy. In my time as an ISP helpdesk phone bitch, I learned (and was always under the impression) that
I doubt however that Bush is whining on this point, but I still felt that it was valid.
Having said all this however, I think it'd still be useful, and it would make it easier for the tech savvy to find what they want, when they want, instead of tripping over a million porn sites on their hunt for.. well anything else they want to find on the net.
NOTHING.
.xxx TLD for the simple fact that it becomes easier for people that choose not to subject themselves to that sort of material to block it off.
.xxx TLD does nothing to prevent people from publishing pornographic material on the Internet. What it does do is give it a place to be, much like the back shelf behind the counter at your local 7-11 (that's where the Playboy-type of magazines are kept around where I live; YMMV). Some places, such as your local library, may have restrictions on the sort of material that may be accessed from the public computers. Something like the .xxx TLD would allow them to block it off if their policy requires it.
.xxx TLD to prevent my kids from seeing things that they (legally!) shouldn't see at their age. If they choose to look at X-rated material when they're adult, that's their call, but while I am responsible for them, they aren't going to have access to it if I can help it.
People here that know me know that I've been a supporter of Bush for a while, and that I admit that I don't always agree with his Administration.
This is one of those times where I have to disagree. I like the idea of a
Having the
I also like the idea that I can block off the
When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
Having .xxx as a requirement of the porn industry, as far as the internet is concerned, probably wouldn't fare very well in practicality. In most cases, a lot of ideas for content control / segregating the internet look well, or have positives to balances the cons, on paper or in a rough sketch.
As for the article, however, it notes public opposition to the .xxx suffix even being available based on something along the lines of "for the children". Why? Control and monitor what your children do on your own. As for society? If society wants to visit a .xxx site, or members of society, then I wouldn't exactly call it a plague rather than an opportunity for them. Why would someone else's habits that don't directly affect others be a good reason for the Bush Administration to get involved?
Personally, I don't buy it. That's fairly unreasonable in a logical sense. I think it'd make an acceptable suffix that's a bit more to the point than using .com or .org for porn. While I don't think it'd do anything to hurt or hinder the industry, it'd just be another option available for those interested in such sites.
Fun Zoid RPG
God is real, your believing that he is not will save you just as much as believing gravity is a lie when walking off a cliff, i.e. not at all.
The key is tolerance, really. You'll never convince me, and I will never convince you. Why even bother arguing the point? Neither of us will ever "win". The logical conclusion is that we have to tolerate each other, since we're both on this green earth together.
My facetious comment to the parent was meant to illustrate that point, since I merely parodied what s/he said but with a different point of view. If I "choose" to watch pornography, and you "choose" to worship your Saviour, how exactly are we affecting each other? Does it matter to each other what we do with our individual time? But when one group starts calling another group names and attacking them, it's the beginning of violence. What a shame. Only yesterday we could have been good friends. The only difference is that today you learned that we share a different point of view. Now how silly is that?
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
You'd just have a quick .cum boom and a bust.
.XXX leads to busting .NUT ?
You mean, like booming
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
Ok. Situation:
.xxx to exist? Sure. I'm not blocking off any TLDs.
There's a pool in a neighborhood with kids. The risk is that the kids fall in.
Do you build a fence around each house to keep the kids in, or a fence around the pool to keep kids out?
If you say the latter, you're thinking coasean economics. Why? Because, for the same societal benefit, you're adding fewer costs. It's what's called "Socially Efficient".
Having explicit porn sites restricted to a TLD is a very smart way of doing this (granted, it's not being done smartly; $60/name is excessive).
Problem comes in the definition of pornographic. In legalese, most people get tetchy about this.
Ok, pornographic: adj. depiction of sexual acts or sexual parts for the purposes of sexual arousal.
There we are. That keeps merely "offensive" and controversial material, and artistic nudity out of it.
Unfortunately, I'm not the law, politicians rarely ever define anything in the public interest, and ICANN is a large group of captured bureaucrats.
Do I think it's ok for
To tell the truth, though, I have no idea what Bush's objection to a dot-ex-ex-ex domain would be. I meaan, unless he doesn't understand what a domain is...
110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
Idiots.
And banish Bush, Rove, Rush and the other morons to their own neocon domain.
No, the Bush administration doesn't want to make it EASIER for people to do a simple search for
In other words, it's all bullshit and breast-beating to kowtow to the rightwing Christian morons. Bush doesn't want to look like he's "authorizing" porn by giving it a domain. He'd rather it stay the way it is just so he looks good to morons like himself.
Pathetic.
In fact, the whole notion of a triple-X domain is pathetic in the first place. It's obviously an attempt to pander to puritans by fencing off the Net.
I think the whole notion of dot-this and dot-that should be dropkicked entirely. It's like DOS file names with 8.3 notation. It's stupid. Who cares whether a domain is
You want to find something on the Net, start using structured metadata about sites. Develop a sort of DNS that uses metadata to retrieve types of sites to any degree of specificity. (Yes, I know how DNS works, gimme a break. Figure out a new way - this shit isn't carved in stone.)
Hell, use Google - that's what it's for.
Don't waste my time with this pointless ruminant evacuation.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
So like, are we gonna start categorizing the internet, forcing crazy nonsense to sort itself into neat categories, and expect it to stay that way for more than 3 seconds? Its just more Rules! And the internet breaks rules repeatedly! From behind; sometimes two at a time; and it doesnt hurt the internet one bit; but the rules get fucked.
that's total bullshit, there are towns and cities where the economy has gotten to such a state that there are no jobs available. The only option is to join the army.
.org, .com, .net ... all are not accurate and even non geeks realize those distinctions are not worth a whole lot.
.info we should have .xxx. We all know that porn is a huge part of the internet, much more than .tv currently is for example, probably more than .biz or the whole output of many countries.
.xxx for other reasons and not actually do porn, just as all those .com people who get .info and try to fool people with "info" or .org or .net for corps.
.xxx, even a forced site will still be accessible, even if its censored by its classification. Wake up, libraries and book stores censor by classification already. This is not on that depth, despite it being global in scope.
For the exact SAME reasoning we had for
If anything deserves it, its the xxx, by content volume, traffic, and participants.
So people may want
As long as you can get to
A LARGER issue of wether national laws can be applied to the internet is what is more important--- and a large part of the argument for the U.N. taking this over.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
I'm not exactly happy with TLDs in general. As far as I'm concerned, there should only be national TLDs and that is it.
.xxx.us. Same for other countries. The TLDs were not thought out in enough depth. I'm for killing all the non-national TLDs.
Existing ones don't mean jack. I don't care if they add a bunch of goofy TLDs, because they are a waste to begin with.
If the USA wants to do stupid censorship laws with xxx then it should be
If I buy something.us someone in CountryX can't claim I caused them mental pain and suffering under their country's laws. Should be that simple. Now if I register under their country, then I should be subject to their laws reguarding the web.
Sure, this global TLD has had some impact on spreading content globally but LAWS are being made ; those benefits are short lived.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Apply the same logic to .info or .com or .net.
.org sites to be real non profits?? Naturally, different countries have different rules. .xxx is just as legit as any other non-national TLD.
should the government force all
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
This is very simple. This is a clear example of people attempting to stop any labelling or discussion of a thing because they cannot stop the thing itself. No one can stop there being pornography in the world, so they try and stop anything associated with it instead. It is the shoot-the-child method of stopping child kidnapping, or perhaps the blow-up-all-cars method. It only ends up hurting people while doing nothing to stop the actions.
It is asinine, and these morons need to be stopped.
Why do so many people think that this is some sort of attempt to censor, or force porn to only exist in ".xxx"? That is rediculous. The point of new TLDs is not to restrict, but to empower. If I want to create a new porn website, right now the best I can do is ".com". Well, that does not tell my users what I do. However, if I choose a ".xxx" TLD, then it is very clear to everyone what I intend. And people seeking porn will come straight to me, where if I had ".com", they might not immediately recognize my URL as being porn. This is not about censorship, it is about ease of use. It is about recognition. It is about the semantic web.
If I want porn, the easiest way is to wander around in the ".xxx" domains. I am guaranteed to find what I want. Similar to ".gov", ".au", ".mil", ".edu", and so forth. ".com", ".net", and ".org" are so overused they have been marginalized and their meaning lost. ".xxx" is crystal-clear.
And people wonder why we non-americans object to ICANN's control with the domain names...
I prefer to walk on water when I show that gravity is a lie....
Don't these people realize that the US is the major world exporter of porn? Thousands of jobs are dependant on this vital industry. Would they prefer these jobs to be offshored to countries which have hotter women?
Maybe they would compromise on ".yyy"?
Wait till they hear about the proposed ".666" domain.
sorry i mistyped.
"saying it has concerns about a virtual red-light district reserved exclusively for Internet pornography" As appossed to the current trend of .net .org .co.??, .com, .org.??
At least we will know the difference between lovellykittens.org and lovelykittens.xxx
And that's why the civiliced world don't like how ICANN is sitting on the US government's lap like a little kid, asking for approval of every step.
Sad to see the emblem of the beautiful sity of Amsterdam being used do symbolise smut to the rest of the world.
I can see why the association would be made by smut peddlers (Amsterdam is a liberal, trade-oriented place) but it's another thing to solidify the association by making it a TLD.
I presume this suggestion was made in the USA? ICANN is based there too, isn't it? Was there any input from Europe on this plan, or is this even possible?
Does anybody know what the X's mean in XXX? I read it at one stage but have forgotten. It's quite ironic, given the current context...
Let's just ban the word "pornography" altogether, thereby stopping all pornography.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
RFC 3675 ".sex Considered Dangerous"
.sex (or .xxx) TLD is a bad idea.
There's a long discussion of why, exactly,
I already get my porn from xxx.lanl.gov
And yes you can accidently bump into a porn site, which will VERY likely say something like: "This site contains explicit blah blah blah, YOU MUST BE 18 YEAR TO ENTER, click here to enter, here to leave", just like the mailman could misdeliver your neighbors montly porn.
The sooner we kill this ".xxx" domain idea, the better.
I don't want to have the governement involved in what I do, expect when it comes to parenting my kids. Or at least that is how it sounds.
When I was young (10 or 12 or around that age), there were no internetsites. I still was able to get hold of some porn. I am sure it was the same with a lot of people and they turned out just fine.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
that there are so many people that would rather have the government take over more and more parenting of their children rather than taking the time to do it themseves. If you're not willing to spend the time necessary to raise your child yourself, then you should have kept your legs crossed. The day that America as a whole would rather have the government raise our children for us is the day that I start memorizing the words to "O Canada".
Death is lighter than a feather, Duty heavier than a mountain.
Another giant leap in America's mission to make their way of life extinct by getting so gradually up-tight they finally outlaw sexual intercourse.
.XXX is EASIER TO BLOCK. Can anyone here say:
.cum .gay .lez .jiz .crap .blog .noob .god
It's been said before. But I'll say it again.
*.xxx*
I think so. What about the bush administration? Nope. What they know about computers, computing, domains, the internet could be written on a post-it note with a board marker and would probably read something like: "Teh intarnet is bad!"
Morale of the story? It's about time the masses overthrew the sparse few complete morons in power- come on, we outnumber them a bazillion to one and we're at least twice as smart, if not smarter. Once I'm on the throne as emperor of earth I'll commission domain suffixes left right and centre.
Here are some of my proposed possibilities:
Gadgetoid.com - Gadgets & Games Journalism
Seems to me that the .xxx would make it trivial for parents to black those types of sites. I can't for the life of me see why it's a problem. Let the people who want to view p0rn view it, and those who don't block *.xxx every one is happy now...
Whitehouse was a print magazine in the UK, back when porn was .. tits.
There was a campaigner called Mary Whitehouse who tried to organise the religious pensioners to protest against smut. The name of the magazine was a deliberate 'swivel' to her.
Mibus is correct. The copying of DNS dbs is trivial. Getting everyone to use your DNS db instead of the 'Official' one is the trick. It would take some major polarizing event to get enought people to switch over.
Perople who are calling for a transfer probably don't care about the cost issues. They care about having a neutral party controlling the db. The issue is about power, not cost.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I have been reading many of the posts on the subject of pornography, and after reading a couple hundred, all I want to do is look at porn. So... I'm taking a break from slashdot for a few minutes. Back in a jiffy!
You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.
Name a single one. Next.
Why do they not want them to use the .XXX domain? "Virtual Red Light District"? Meh. That's like saying private individuals shouldn't be able to reserve .COM domain names, because they're not 'commercial'. Wouldn't they WANT all the pr0n eggs in one basket? Or would that make too much sense?
VOTE!
I never said it would succeed in doing anything. I just said the govenment can legally force them to label it as such.
If they want to waste the time, who gives a rats ass.
Your argument has absolutely no bearing on mine.
The goventment can legally force any provider of content to label it in any way they see fit. Doing so in no way hampers the freedom of speech, because the content is still there.
this is trolling....but it's not...? mod parent up? i dont' know.
I've checked on http://www.new.net/, and guess what? People have already registered popular domain names under .xxx! Here's some of the ones I found, along with their owners:
microsoft.xxx is owned by:
C Angle
cja5481@hotmail.com
10 Bryn Hedydd
Morriston
Swansea, SA6 8BS
GB
yahoo.xxx is owned by:
P.+Adams P.+Adams
biz2004@mail.com
PO+Box+811505
Los Angeles, CA 90081
US
google.xxx is owned by:
Nader Driver
driverinc@hotmail.com
14 Relroy Court
Toronto, Ontario M1W 2Y7
CA
ebay.xxx is owned by:
Xingtao Jiang
sinoleojiang@yahoo.com.cn
Nanjing Road
Shanghai, none 200070
CN
I dunno, but it looks to me like those domains haven't been registered by their respective companies. A WHOIS yields (predictably) nada on any of these, but if they actually go up, I'll be looking forward to the lawsuit landslide.
Well I am definitely for it. I don't know how many times I've been looking for quality porn and instead have come up with results pointing to things a bit too pure for my tastes. Now a simple filter on the .xxx domain will bring appropriate results right to my desktop. I for one couldn't agree more with this new domain.
Think back to the days of the horse-drawn wagon. If you went out for a sunset ride — say, about three hours — on a regular basis with a constant route, a smart horse could learn the route well enough that guidance from the driver was eventually not needed. A few blankets in the back of the wagon, a suitably inclined passenger, and you don't even need to find a parking place for the local sheriff to risk causing a scandal at. Two hours is plenty of time for mischief, although modern contraception availability is an improvement.
No, I'm not quite that old. However, once I hit eighteen, I started hearing the most amazing off-color anecdotes from my ninety year old "maiden" (well, unmarried anyway) great-aunt about the antics perpetrated by various of my relatives from her and my parent's generations during their collective and assortedly misspent youth. Several incidents had circumstantial documentation in the family Bible when I checked... a matter which I pointed out to my Mom when she was working on updating the family tree. She was unamused; however, my siblings and I have noted both the "true" and the "proper" dates in our copies, even if Mom won't.
If you're legally an adult, try asking your grandparents about what kind of trouble they (or your parents) got into when they were teenagers. (Great-aunts and great-uncles tend to be even more colorful, if you can track them down; never underestimate the lasting power of sibling rivalry.) It will make your elderly relatives happy for the company, drive your parents mad, educate you a little more about family history, and possibly make you think extra hard about making sure you don't have kids too soon. Good all around fun.
I mean I've seen the dog pictures of coures, but not horse ones.
Well, yes, that too. An un-safe Google Image search on "horse sex" could be... um, instructive. But you might find that conversation with your grandparents much more suprising.
//Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
For the exact SAME reasoning we had for .info we should have .xxx. We all know that porn is a huge part of the internet, much more than .tv currently is for example, probably more than .biz or the whole output of many countries.
.tv is the county code TDL for Tuvalu, are you trying to suggest that some tiny country should be used as the standard for what deserves a TDL?
I'm not sure what your point is.