Slashdot Mirror
FCC to Develop 'Super V Chip' To Screen All Content
An anonymous reader writes "The Senate Commerce Committee has stepped in and approved a legislation asking the Federal Communications Commission to 'oversee the development of a super V-chip that could screen content on everything from cell phones to the Internet.' Since the content viewed by children is no longer restricted to TV or radio Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., the sponsor of the Child Safe Viewing Act, feels that the new law is necessary. 'The bill requires the FCC to review, within one year of enactment, technology that can help parents manage the vast volume of video and other content on television or the Internet. Under the 1996 Telecommunications Act, TV makers are required to embed the V-chip within televisions to allow parents to block content according to a rating system.'"
Why not just turn your children over to the government when they're born?
Parents today obviously have ZERO interest in spending time with their children and monitoring their activities and habits.
This is ridiculous.
Peace sells, but who's buying?
Why don't we save time by just installing chips in the children to keep them from even registering the content at all!
I guess this will be super ignored as well.
Added Pressly: "Oh, and by the way, milk is nothing but liquid meat."
Again?
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
...that Janet Jackson can now show her nipple on tv and it will be OK since nobody will be able to see it?
Unplug the TV.
..carpeting the whole world because we refuse to wear shoes instead.
It is our obligation, as adults, not to prevent the reality from reaching the senses of minors, but to provide adequate explanations and guidance. Those technical censoring measures are the result of the intention to avoid adult responsibilities, to "sweep the problem under the rug", so to say.
When they change that ruling, then we need to worry.
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
...except commercials.
I don't, I have a preteen kid. Among my friends almost nobody uses the V-chip. Infact half of them dont even know their TV has the V-Chip. And those who know find it a pain to set up thresholds and remember the password. The only person I know who knows how to use the V-Chip is my brother's 10 year old son. He is a remarkably curious boy who reads all the manuals and figures out things mainly to annoy the adults. He would set the V-chip threshold very low (or high, I dont know the parlance) and make his mom scream, in a strange mixture of admiration and admonition, "You make the TV play Law-and-Order now or I am going to ground you for a week!" and the boy would laugh and giggle.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
-b.
Does anyone not wonder what has happened to parental responsibility? I know what my kids watch on tv, movies they watch and what sites they visit on the internet, all without government intervention. This will just be another crutch for the negligent parents to use.
Speedy thing goes in; speedy thing comes out.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
something as complex as one of these here deep packet inspection thingys, and even that will fail against determined content providers. http://arstechnica.com/articles/culture/Deep-packe t-inspection-meets-net-neutrality.ars
Wherever there's a person going through puberty, there you will most likely find prurient material.
"If still these truths be held to be
Self evident."
-Edna St. Vincent Millay
So every form of content that exists will require a mandatory rating by some sort of standards body? Because, after all, that's how the V-chip works at the moment.
Yeah, good luck with that, folks.
Last night I went out to dinner with two close friends. As we watched, a mother semi-ignored her 4 or 5 year old girl as she cried and screamed and jumped up and down in a royal temper tantrum. It seems mom was too busy chatting with her friend to notice as the girl bellowed at the top of her lungs even as one of the waiters came over and offered the girl a balloon to silence the child. The mother occasionally glanced at the girl and said things like "It's okay." and "What's wrong?" then went right back to gossiping with her friend about what was going on at her job. This went on for 15-20 minutes until she finished her conversation and then all three left.
It's bad enough that some parents think that television is a babysitter. It's even worse that some feel the Internet is a more interactive babysitter. Now, it seems, your cell phone and ipod are capable of acting as babysitters.
Sadly, judging from my experience in the restaurant, technology might actually be a better babysitter than some parents...
And this chip will be used only for kids, oh what a relief to know that it won't be used for adults.
This technology is all overkill anyway, and here's why:
To view content, you have to physically have access to a device that can display the content. As a parent, you should be able to remove that physical access for all 'locally controlled' devices; you can't prevent them from watching a friend's phone or whatever regardless of V-chips or whatever.
There is this thing called an 'off switch' and, failing that, circuit breakers.
You don't want them to have a phone, don't give them money to buy one. If they're old enough to get a job to afford their own, then they should already have the capacity to handle whatever content they can obtain anyway.
To me, these laws just take away responsibility and, with it, freedom from the general populace.
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
This is the same Mary Pryor who is cosponsoring the Protecting Children from Indecent Programming Act.
More concerning is the new anti-TV violence rules. I really don't want to go back to the days of the A-Team where you could have machine guns as long as they never hit anyone.
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
A federal mandate that parents actually provide parenting for their children. This opposed to the government providing it for them. Radical, huh?
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Until you get carpet burns. Give me bruises on hardwood instead.
Ah yes...one step closer to a society that takes no responsibility for anything their children do. I guess you could argue that using a technology such as a super V chip helps parents automatically filter content that they are concerned their kids will see. Unfortunately, as a computer tech, I see so many parents ask tech shops about spying software and filtering software so they don't have to actively monitor what their kids are doing. If a parent is worried with who their kid is chatting with online then they need to be involved and ask. Parents have built in monitoring called "looking". I know its a low-tech foreign concept but it works. If you are open and honest with your kids, actively talk to them about dangers, keep them using search engines that filter bad content by default (like google) and watching what they are doing and who they are talking to on the internet then things like this are not needed. But that would take too much responsibility I guess.
It is so frustrating for me to see things like this. You take away more and more responsibility from people, you in effect take away more and more freedom. I should be allowed to watch what I want, do what I want, smoke what I want, and drink what I want and be held responsible for any consequenses of my actions.
wont somebody save the children! oh the humanity!
every part of me screams that the real agenda is using a moralistic excuse to add another layer that can make somebody more money.
Even if this becomes law, I can't imagine that it would survive its first challenge in a federal court.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
It's a more pervasive problem than that. Ignorance and a lack of learning are corroding the structures we depend upon to both innovate and produce healthy and intelligent children. It's a vicious cycle. If technology as a whole were better understood, we would have less knee jerk regulation and you can't really blame a politician for looking for a quick fix when they will be out of office on average in four to eight years. If a parent is a bad parent then its probably because they didn't learn how to be a good parent from their own father and mother (which is a skill by the way). Furthermore, computer technology inspires a certain elitist perspective from people who likely grew up with inferiority complexes already and build their own faults and imperfections into the machines. I use computers because of what they can do, not because they're way cool anymore. It's easy to blame rather than discuss the underlying problems. People are afraid. They then make poor decisions.
What would Richard Feynman do, if he were here right now? He'd do some math and he'd follow through!
...when -- with the flick of a switch -- the government can disable "dangerous" or "offensive" content to any device I own, since every device will be mandated to have a Super-Duper V-Chip. Think of the seditious and untoward thoughts that the Government Nannies could prevent! It will be Utopia! Wait! Better than Utopia... it will be Oceania!
v.m
I have a "Zero Policy" tolerance.
*/
Does this mean Cartman's power level will be OVER NINE THOUSAND!?
Caffeine is my anti-drug!
Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
...or are you going to legislate its use, too? And I, personally, don't know of anyone who actually uses the current V-chip. Most people I know tend to do this somewhat old-fashioned thing called "parenting."
"I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
Sorry, but I disagree. It is our responsibility as adults to introduce children to reality as they are able to understand the explanations and guidance. A five-year-old is not likely to understand any possible explanation for a violent rape scene that he/she saw on TV. I'm really astounded that people think of the V-chip as censorship. Could somebody explain exactly how a screening tool that can be turned on or off by the owner is censorship? The V-chip is nothing more than a tool. It can be used for good and for bad. Good parents will carefully monitor what their children are watching (either to keep them away from inappropriate content or to explain questionable content). Bad parents will rely solely on the V-chip (a huge mistake) to allow them to shirk their responsibility. I have two children. I use the parental lock-down features on my cable box, but I also monitor what they are watching. The parental lock-down is nice because it cuts down on inappropriate content that may show up while I'm running through channels in the presence of my children. It also makes sure my eight-year-old isn't going to change channels to something that's not suitable for him (or his little sister) while I'm in the bathroom. But I'm also fully aware that it is not a substitute for responsible parenting. Some channels don't include rating informations for all shows (The Science Fiction channel and HDNet are two notable offenders), and the most questionable content comes from the commercials rather than the programming itself. Therefore, I make sure I'm there to explain behavior that is and is not appropriate. I like the V-chip as a tool, and nothing more. These laws aren't about mandating that people _use_ the V-chip. They are about making sure that it's available for those who _want_ to use it.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
I prefer the A-Team to the reality crap that's saturated the networks today.
Hey everybody, I have a great idea!
Let's spend a lot of money developing a very complicated technology that won't actually accomplish what it's supposed to and make it available to a bunch of people who don't even know how to set the time on their VCRs!
Vote for me!
Oh yes, Think About the Children!(tm).
While we're at it, Blame Canada!
I never understood the opposition to the V-Chip. Why shouldn't the multimedia client (TV) come with a network screening app? In HW, so it's harder to crack, especially by literal "script kiddies".
The alternative is that the government and providers screen content at the server, without consumer choice.
The only problem is that today's FCC, coming at the tail end of the Republican covert government, will probably install spyware on their "Super" V-Chip. So instead of all your TV signals of all they offer coming down your wire or over the air, for you to privately select from, their "Super" V-Chip will send a log to the NSA. Crossreferenced to all your personal data, including email, phone, surveillance video, and all the electronic/digital transactions that profile your life.
Eventually the NSA will convince us to implant an RFID V-Chip "so we can easily tune our TVs wherever we go".
But if we get a private V-Chip now, before they do it, then we can satisfy the demand for convenience before that convenience is exploited to mask total privacy invasion. If the V-Chip specs and HW/firmware/SW are open, then we can get both safety and convenience. That's known as "freedom": the (traditional) American Way.
--
make install -not war
It will take a kid with 1/2 a brain to circumvent it quite quickly. then as soon as he posts how to do it on his myspace page, the whole thing become an exercize in stupidity.
you know what, the world is not a sanitized disney cartoon, you have uncouth idiots walking around in a FUCK YOU! t-shirt. Morons that tattoo profanity to their forhead (yes this is REAL, I saw one of these morons this summer.) etc...
it's the parents job to educate their kids, Howard stern get's turned off some mornings when it's just me because I cant stand the crass and unfunny that day, some days it's a fartfest and the F word is tossed every 3 seconds and I'm crying laughing. do I let my 8 year old niece listen to it? no. I still feel uncomfortable with my 15 year old listening to it and constantly remind her that the people on the Howard stern show like Sal are typically the worst of the low IQ morons on the planet and howard goes looking for them because it's fun to laugh at the stupid people.
Congress is out of control, none of you young voters (18-35) are willing to get off your asses and vote or be active in your country so the 70+ year old demographic controls the government.
I go out every election and volunteer for the things and candidates I believe in and help them. what do you do?
I forget, Playing Halo2 and posting on myspace is far more important to all of you.
Have you ever considered turning off the TV...sitting down with your children...and hitting them?
- Bender
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
I am also waiting for the Intellecual Property lawyers to figure out tht people can remember movies and songs. This is a clear copyright violation and so we should all be required to have our memories erased.
Dr. Frank J. Nagy Fermilab Computing Division Authentication and Directory Services Group
Damn Republicans throwing away our rights . . . oh . . wait.
Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
So, how hard is it going to be to set up? My VCR clock is still blinking.
Could somebody explain exactly how a screening tool that can be turned on or off by the owner is censorship? ... These laws aren't about mandating that people _use_ the V-chip.
True, but it is mandating (I think) that every adult has to pay for it, presumably in everything from computers to phones, which is still an issue. What's wrong with overseeing the development to make it available as an option to those who want it?
There's also the question of how they intend to implement a rating system for the Internet.
And then they can make the V-Chip X-TREME! when this fails.
11 was a racehorse
12 was 12
1111 Race
12112
Back in the 50s, the TV was for the most part clean. Kids could watch most of what was on TV with very little considered to be 'unacceptable for a child to watch'.
Today it seems like kids are very limited in terms of what would be 'acceptable'. Now maybe I'm just crazy or too tired to think straight, but WHY are we watching/listening to this 'crap' on TV? If it's so bad for our kids, is it really that good for us adults? Sure, there's definite limits. Can't exactly show the evening news on Iraq on Nickelodeon, but it seems like TV is just getting more and more into the realm of 'not really worth anything'. Maybe Mr. Roger's had it right when
With using the 'N' word in music and the crap-tastic "reality shows", if it's not good for my kids, is it really good for adults? Is your point conveyed that much better adding the F-bomb to your sentence?
Sometimes I swear we're really all a bunch of teenagers rebelling against our parents and listening to the F-bomb and N-word just to rebel(are we trying to prove we're really adults?). Why don't we grow up and realize that crap isn't really doing us any good, and just quit allowing that junk on TV/Radio? Maybe I should enable this new Super V-Chip just to block out the garbage I shouldn't be watching anyway?
Disclaimer: I'm in my late 20's, so maybe my concept of what was on TV in the 50's is totally hosed.
But if a chip can filter content on the internet/cell phone/whatever based on some settings then it can be made to record that content and possibly where it came from and what (or who) filtered it.
Just a thought.
Here will be an old abusing of God's patience and the king's English.
How many people actually use a V-chip in existing TVs? Anyone.....anyone at all.....
OK, there were about five people that use them.
Why waste resources on a system that virtually no one uses. Actually, most people don't even know that it is there to start with.
Parents need to take responsibility and teach their kids right from wrong, what is real and not real. An other people need to let all the other parents make their own mistakes, they can not fix their own kids by forcing others to do as they should have done in the first place.
Other than adding somewhat to the cost of the device(s), so what? Nobody's stopping adults from accessing whatever content they want to. Nobody's forcing you to use it. It's just an option that parents can use, if they wish, to _help_ control what their children have access to on equipment the parent provides.
I know that it's not a fix-all but if parents are concerned about what their children are watching, this is just one more tool they can use (along with actually monitoring the children, of course).
Everyone acts like this is a move by the morality police to stop legitimate adults from accessing their Mexican Donkey Porn(tm).
Well said. Children are being used as the new lowest common denominator today and it's insulting to everybody that we are basing our entire culture around some mythical ideal of childhood that never really occurs. Don't children one day become adults? There are two real issues being covered up by this cultural regression to a faux childhood: The American childish public attitudes towards sex and how this relates to parenthood. How can you really teach a child anything about life when you can't even get past the 'icky' bias of sexuality and what it means?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Here's the correct link to the /. article discussing the Protecting Children from Indecent Programming Act. This group of senators is passing so many damn thinkofthechildren bills to ensure their reelections that it's hard to figure out which one we're talking about at any given time. Their constituents should be ashamed if they believe these bills are doing anything but wasting tax dollars and time that could be used to discuss important issues.
You mean to tell me that socialism really doesn't work? Man, you just blew my mind!
That's a great idea, we could power the world on the static electricity generated from everyone walking to work in their socks!
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
Oh fuck this.
My ignorant country needs to stop tying to be the thought-police and fix some real issues.
Nevermind the fact that there are more students than there are SEATS in many classrooms across the nation, no no no, it's much more important to put content filtering systems in place instead of working out the already existing problems.
You can't take the sky from me.
Fuck That
And any manner of other "inappropriate" words for that matter. The idea of allowing the government to filter for us what is appropriate is absolutely absurd and anyone who thinks that the law-making body is the one best suited toward deciding the standards of decency for a socity needs some serious education in sociology.
When you hand the job of deciding what's appropriate over to an organization whose job is to define laws, sooner or later laws, what's appropriate, and of course the personal agendas of those who are in power all become the same thing and the people are left with nothing.
I say please, give our fore-fathers their due respect! They were wise men, though not perfect by any means they knew a lot better than any living American today what a totalitarian government looks like and they fashioned their government to be the opposite.
I have ranted on Slashdot and in another of other public outlets for years about the concept of incrementalism and how bad governments are rarely made overnight, but rather they're over several decades. Those with agendas make lots of small, seemingly insignificant incremental changes that are relatively painless when they're made, but add up over time to full-blown oppression. There is a saying to this affect that goes something like, "If you throw a frog in boiling water, it will hop out, if you put a frog in cool water and slowly raise the temperature, you'll boil it alive."
My friends, I assure you, we are being boiled alive. Some point left, some point right, but the truth is that it comes from both sides and the animated characatures of political parties that you see today are nothing more than sock puppets meant to distract you from the real agendas. The fact of the matter is, the water is getting hotter, and we're to the point in which it no longer matters whose fault it is, and we aren't granted the luxury of time to point fingers, we must act.
Speak out, write letters and editorials, post videos to YouTube, really exercise your freedom of speech. Use it or lose it. Get people involved, get them out of their complacency and get them mad about the loss of their rights. When people speak out about the loss of freedom of speech, media outlets and politicians deftly paint those people as crazy extremists. They conjure images of things like Waco and other nonsense, they say that freedom of speech is for crazy people. It's a simple tool, and it's very effective.
Those of us who are worried about our future, however, need to work to change that image. We need to show everyone that the guy who values his rights isn't an unstable misanthrope, or a cult member, it's the guy in the next cubicle, it's the IT manager, or the nice old man across the street, in short, it's real Americans. These people aren't radicals, they aren't perverts, and they care about their children, but they also care about their rights. They would much rather risk the oh-so-terrible possibility of their child hearing a naughty word, or seeing a risque picture, and have to guide their children through that, than lose their freedom of speech entirely in exchange for the warm, comfy, controlling blanket of government decency enforcement.
Patriotism is not plastic flags and bumper stickers, it's not t-shirts with bald eagles and pictures of the WTC on them, it's not regurgitating the verbal vomit of television pundits, it's standing up for yourself. This country was founded when a group people stood up for what they percieved their rights to be, that's what made them Americans. The most patriotic thing you can do isn't to blanketly support your president, or hang ribbons, or support the troops; the most patriotic thing you can do is to fight for your rights, no matter who is trying to take them away.
Our greatest enemy is neither a single man, nor is it a nation, it is, as it has always been, our own greed.
You know, so I could screen out shows that would insult my intelligence?
Just think of the possibilities:
Yeah, that's it! A chip for everyone! The world will finally be safe from itself ;-)
Come to think of it, I could just turn off the tv or change the channel... Hmmm...
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
It'll come. Sooner than you think with all this direct-brain-computer interaction research.
"If still these truths be held to be
Self evident."
-Edna St. Vincent Millay
If you think so then YOU be in charge of vacuuming it.
The only way that you could protect them from bad content would be to allow content that is registered as being not-bad. The majority of the bad content that they get could come in the form of images, or images of text that would be hard to read by computer (captcha). There is no way to protect children from seeing bad content on TV, Cable or the internet (which is now on their phone). As others above have pointed out, the best way to protect is to arm your children with a sense of what is right and wrong. Spend enough time with them to teach them good and bad, and then sit back and hope it all worked. I have a 21 and a 17 year old at home and they both have gone down the bad path at some point and we have resticted cable and internet to be used in a place that we can look over their shoulder. Not that we do look much, but the youngest knows that we could at any momenent, and that is part of the deal with access.
Obligatory LOTR reference.
Beyond that, why are people mad about armed robots patrolling and protecting our soldiers in a trial when we're e EXPECTING a chip to protect our children so we don't have to?
Beyond that, who REALLY uses the v-chip besides cartman? I'm sure it's in all of my TVs and i have two young children at home...but personally it's more complicated to program the friggin thing that to, uhm, keep an eye on what my kids are watching?
You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
Without this protection many of us would see these vile and dangerous images which instantly turn sane men into immoral savage killing machines.
"That bad man hurts and humiliates this other person."
-Why?
"Because bad people like to make other people suffer"
-Why?
"Nobody knows exactly why, not even bad people themselves, but many smart scientists have been trying to find out, while police, judges and all of good people are doing all they can to make bad people not do bad things to others". (OK, I exaggerated and simplified a bit, but in principle, that is general idea)
Explanation chains usually fast converge to the limits of human knowledge, but that is how it is... don't fear to admit when you don't know something, leave something to new, fresh brains to try to find answers in their lifetime, or make good decisions.
Keep your filthy hands off my hardware!
There is a war going on for your mind.
That your post would be modded "informative" on a tech site! I would have modded it "interesting" but NOBODY reading slashdot should be "informed" by this. We're supposed to be nerds, we're supposed to know how this stuff works.
Even though Congress doesn't.
You obviously know this (hooray that there is at least ONE nerd at "news for nerds, stuff that matters"), but for the rest of ths slashdot audience who thinks having a new copy of Vista makes you a nerd (mod me flamebait, Congressman!), the "V-Chip" in your TV works because broadcasters have to add codes to the programming.
There is no way that noncommercial content will be able to be covered by a V-chip, unless the chip keeps all noncommercial content off of the device! Hooray for the commercial content producers, their worst nightmare of user-produced content usurping their role as gatekeepers will be over!*
Want to send a clip of your girlfriend to Mom? Sorry mom, this stupid phone you gave me won't let me send or recieve any unauthorized content. MySpace? Well, MySpace will automaticelly be assigned a "TV-14" rating. Google? They'll play ball, with "safesearch" on the kid's searches will get a "G".
Meanwhile my site sill be kid-friendly, meaning NO FUCKING KIDS! Get off my damned lawn! And no you can't have your goddamn ball back! Slashdot? Hooray! No more goddamned fucking kids posting links to goatse! No more frosty piss! No more juvenile... what? Those are twenty seven year grad students from SIU? Crap!
-mcgrew
*It started with the old outlawed Napster. When the major labels found out that Joe Schmoe and the Nuze Bluze Band could get his songs heard without Clearchannel's help, they started suing. Piracy? That was just an excuse. If you want to hear the latest top-40 hit just turn on the radio. If you want a copy of it just plug your radio's headphone jack into your sound card. They aren't trying to keep "WTF Madonna" off your hard drive, they're trying to keep Joe Schmoe out of your ears.
The next threat to the commercial content producers was killing internet radio, because those damned punks kept playing indie music.
Now YouTube has them worried. It's ok though, you can bet they'll find a way to kill that, too. This new V-chip is just another gun in the war against user-produced content.
You know, the real tragedy here is that we've had movable type printing presses for some 600-800 years, and still no one has come up with a rating system for books! How am I supposed to know what books are appropriate for my children or school district without some sort of letter grade system!? I am supposed to actually read all these books? Why, there must be 10's of thousands of them out there.
Obligatory User Friendly Strip
The snow doesn't give a soft white damn whom it touches. -- ee cummings
There's a reason I moved to Canada. Not that it is wildly better or all that different, or even free of major stupidity and scandal, but it seems to be largely (but not completely) free of retarded hatefilled shitbags. And while the gov't has a deeper hand on things here, one would expect boneheaded nanny state nonsense like the legislation in TFA from Canada, not from the USA. OH, how times have changed... The Rethugs want to blow up the planet and make everyone a classic Xian sexless mouthbreathing mallrat and the Dems want the corporations to own every piece of cultural artefacture in perpetuity, and make it all safe for the lowest and stupidest citizens and remove the responsibility that PARENTS SHOULD BE EXERCISING in favour of the nanny state.
As the Dukes of Stratosphear (XTC) crooned:
I'm the Mole in the Ministry
And you'll all bow down to me.
I'm the mole in the potting shed.
I'm the bad thoughts inside your head.
And you won't catch me...
As a little black girl once shouted into a bullhorn on the TV show "Wondershowzen":
RISE UP PEOPLE!!! RISE UP!!!
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
The V-Chip has two components: the transmitter end, which sends the program rating embedded inside the television signal; and the receiver end, where the V-Chip decodes the rating, and enables/disables viewing of that signal.
For an internet V-Chip rating system to work, every web site would need to embed a rating tag on every page... which they would have zero interest in doing. Even if Congress mandates it in the USA, foreign web sites are still readily available. (And if the V-Chip blocks unrated web sites, everyone can just stick the "G-for all" tag inside of their porn). Plus, I'd bet that various Russian anonymous-browsing web services will spring up that change all US web site tags to G....
For television content, I suspect the cost is negligible. However, I would have no problem if it were just an available option that we have to pay a little extra for if we want it.
I wonder this myself, which is why I didn't really mention it. Probably the best way is to have one of the companies that provides URL filtering start providing a rating system for web sites that people can subscribe to if they want it. This one definitely needs to be an opt-in, though. I would imagine that maintaining a rating system for the internet wouldn't have a trivial cost associated with it, even with a large subscriber base.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
...religious content.
hmm, yeah, that would actually be enough, I can stand all the rest of the stuff, opinions, smut, games, violence, etc. Just get rid of all those religious people and their shows and the crap that comes out of their mouths. THAT would be using technology to better mankind!
Sorry, but I disagree. It is our responsibility as adults to introduce children to reality as they are able to understand the explanations and guidance.
Let me fix this for you.
Sorry, but I disagree. It is your responsibility as [a parent] to introduce children to reality as they are able to understand the explanations and guidance.
Its not your god given right to watch or even own a TV. It was YOUR choice to have a child, YOU pay the expense of raising it. I personally don't give a damn if there's another generation after me.
I'm really astounded that people think of the V-chip as censorship. Could somebody explain exactly how a screening tool that can be turned on or off by the owner is censorship? The V-chip is nothing more than a tool. It can be used for good and for bad. Good parents will carefully monitor what their children are watching (either to keep them away from inappropriate content or to explain questionable content). Bad parents will rely solely on the V-chip (a huge mistake) to allow them to shirk their responsibility.
Its very easy to see how v-chip + ratings system is censorship; look no further than the recent Manhunt 2 debacle. Rated AO, suddenly cannot be purchasd by ANYONE. Suddenly, other game developers are taking out content BEFORE they even submit for a rating.
have two children. I use the parental lock-down features on my cable box, but I also monitor what they are watching. The parental lock-down is nice because it cuts down on inappropriate content that may show up while I'm running through channels in the presence of my children. It also makes sure my eight-year-old isn't going to change channels to something that's not suitable for him (or his little sister) while I'm in the bathroom. But I'm also fully aware that it is not a substitute for responsible parenting.
Its good you think you're doing a good job. I'm not sure that sheltering kids is a great idea though, and i think it distorts reality for them and leaves them unable to handle pretty much anything. The Don Imas situation is a good example of this. I grew up learning the old "sticks and stones" saying. Now we have college girls crying over a stupid joke. Its no wonder we can't tackel the problems facing us today. If you can't handle THAT, how are you going to handle the really important things in life? It doesn't seem like as a nation we can anymore.
Some channels don't include rating informations for all shows (The Science Fiction channel and HDNet are two notable offenders), and the most questionable content comes from the commercials rather than the programming itself. Therefore, I make sure I'm there to explain behavior that is and is not appropriate. I like the V-chip as a tool, and nothing more. These laws aren't about mandating that people _use_ the V-chip. They are about making sure that it's available for those who _want_ to use it.
You think commercials are offensive?? Good god man. Perhaps you should move to Iran or Israel when you don't have these highly offensive content! Honestly I think commercials today are awful because they ARE so safe and cut down that there's nothing interesting about them at all.
The v-chip is fine, but I don't see why EVERYONE should pay because you want to over shelter your kids. You do what you want in your home, leave me (and my income) out of it.
Your example is how I would handle it if the situation arises, but the explanation doesn't generally stop the nightmares. In my mind, it's better to steer the child away from it until they are more mentally prepared to handle it.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
The less religious crap, the better.
They said that the original V-Chip would put control of TV content in the hands of parents and take government out of the censorship business.
THEY LIED.
Censors always lie.
If you think it'll be any different this time -- if you think that if you give them what they want, they'll go away happy -- then you're either hopelessly naive or just plain nuts.
Those people cannot afford children. Even with all the free tax credits and rebates subsidized by the child-less people of the USA, these people can't hack it. They made bad decisions and over-estimated their earning potential...and we're all going to get to bail them out of their stupid choices. Wonderful.
Blar.
DVD players usually have parental control, but I have never seen anyone use it, except for the default settings on the PS2. Most parents I know just keep the bad DVDs put up and away from the kids. If the kids are old enough to start snooping around and find it and curouious enough to watch it, its probably time to have the talk with them.
Truthfully, does anyone here actually know how to even access the VChip in their TV and set it up?
(4) operate independently of ratings pre-assigned by the creator of such video or audio programming;
I know some families that don't even HAVE TVs and don't let their kids use cell phones and other devices because of all the objectionable material.
They entertain their kids with family-friendly DVDs, prescreened music, and the like.
This may be going a bit too far but it shows that ultimately, it is the parents who raise their children, not Washington.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Someone is going to get a juicy contract and they don't even have to deliver anything.
Don't all items already have a universal screener, i.e. the off button? We had "No t.v. week" when I was a kid, and I think it dramatically shaped my view on how (un)important TV really is. If you teach your kids to enjoy a variety of activities, I don't think they'll be all that affected by any of this supposed bad content. Besides, as always, if your kids really want to see the bad stuff, they'll all go over to "mikey's house" or whomever has the good stuff unblocked on their system.
stuff |
Why is this the job of the gestapo, err I mean US government. Don't we have better things to spend our money on? Parents, is it worth working the extra hours to buy the hummer rather than taking your kid fishing? What is more important to our government, the liberties of it's citizens or the market, the money? Sadly, I already know the answer. How upsetting things have become.
...with the US assuming that the world ends at its borders. Good luck getting offshore web site operators to conform to some sort of mandatory rating system.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
Don't they have markets to regulate? Shouldn't they be worried about promoting broadband access nationwide, which free-market competition has simply found not that profitable (see Rural America and various suburbs)? Shouldn't they be checking in on the ATT/Cingular super-bohemoth? Maybe get Comcast to stop screwing customers? Maybe?
This is not censorship. No outside agency is requiring studios and telephone providers to use V-chips on their end to prevent you from seeing objectionable things. This is on your end to allow blocking of material based on standards you determine (to some extent.) On one hand, parents should take a specific interest in what their kids are watching. On the other hand, kids work every single gray area they can find. Including a V-chip in the TV set certainly would allow parents to block things while they're away and allow whatever while they're present to offer the guidance you're talking about. Or they could just leave it off. My TV has a vchip in it and I've never used it to block anything.
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
I personally don't give a damn if there's another generation after me.
I bet you will when it comes time to retire.
That was another fantastic "let's have it all" idea that fell on its face before it even came out of design.
Is there any particular reason that compels Washington to try and turn the US into precisely the kind of nation they're publicly denouncing?
How are you supposed to see the ads that way?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I don't see why the under-performers in our society need to get the biggest (relative) incentives to breed! Perhaps we should be giving at least the same incentives to child-bearing couples of every socio-economic class instead of cutting most of them off at the middle-middle-class mark.
Blar.
I think you will reconsider that statement when the first dog shi..s on the carpet. And YOU have to find a way to get it out again!
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Then I've got the place for you: http://europeforvisitors.com/switzaustria/articles /st-gallen-bleicheli.htm
I HAVE CUBIC WISDOM THAT TRANSCENDS AND CONTRADICTS ONE DAY GODS
But will it run on Linux?
Seriously, if this sort of thing becomes law I could see it only being compatible with proprietary systems.
There is more to science than physics!
www.iomalfunction.blogspot.com
...parents (and I am one, incidentally) could exercise some intelligence and keep an eye on what their kids are doing with the TV/Internet/phone/whatever.
I have kids spanning 3 to 24 years old. As parents, my wife and I are very involved with our kids. We have dinner together the majority of the time. We do family events every week. We talk to our kids, and we limit TV and all the stuff you'd expect.
However, that doesn't mean that I can watch my kids 24/7/365. I use the V-Chip/content filter on my PVR on a regular basis. For instance, my 11 year old has sleepovers with friends, on a fairly regular basis. I cannot stay up all night in the same room with them and make sure they don't flip from Nickelodeon to HBO or even TNT. As such, I simply flip on the V-Chip and I can get some sleep. Is this perfect? Nope. But at the end of the day, it is far better than nothing.
As a person who has used technology for the overwhelming majority of my life, I consider this a tool, much as I use a firewall or AV software on my computers. Do those tools filter everything? Are they perfect? Heck no. But they serve a purpose.
And as far as content filtering: my kids only have access to the internet on a computer that is in our living room and that faces the entire room. They rarely have access to it when an adult isn't around. But do me a favor. Type in "girl scout" or "girl scouts" in Google. See what happens by the 2nd or 3rd page. I have a content filter not because I'm a bad parent, or because I don't know what my kids are doing, but because the reality is that its far too easy for them to accidentally click on an innocent link that leads to things they aren't ready for me to explain to them yet. My wife has covered sex and puberty with my eleven year old. I still don't consider her ready for me to explain huge breasted girls dressed in slutty girl scout uniforms having *ANY* kind of sex right now.
I don't object to anyone helping create tools to assist me. The reality is that I can't protect them from everything, even if I do everything right. Those tools assist me, just like my firewall and AV software keep my personal machine safe, even though I haven't had a virus since 1989.
Bill
You and likeminded parents constitute a market. Your needs could easily be served by private companies selling you products with filtering features. That way, the producer would have direct accountability (to its customers), and other people wouldn't have to pay for your choice on how to augment raising your children.
I do not have children myself. When I do, I'll be damned before I let any government create a universal content filtering platform with my children as the excuse.
And Now You Know!
The "our" word referred to those of us who are parents. You should not have considered yourself to be included in that group.
Nor is it _your_ right to own a TV. That has nothing to do with it. I have absolutely no problem with bearing the expense -- I'm even willing to pay the price for the V-chip as an add-on option. If you look at one of my other posts, you'll see that. I don't expect those who have no use for the V-chip to bear the cost of it.
And adults don't fall into the ANYONE category?
As one who has publicly confessed that they don't care about any following generations, I'm not sure you would be even remotely qualified to comment on what methods of raising kids are or are not appropriate. Regardless of what you may think, children who have the whole world thrown at them at once may have a very difficult time coping with it. In my opinion, introducing the realities of the world gradually (not withholding them altogether) is a better approach, and definitely isn't the same thing as being completely sheltered from the world until the time you leave home. I have witnessed the effects of "oversheltering", and they aren't good. I have no plans to make the same mistake.
Sorry, but this has absolutely nothing to do with restricting media content. This is a completely separate problem in our society that is related to how parents (and schools) treat problems _after_ they happen. When I was in school, there was a bully who kept calling me names. I ignored him until he started pushing me around (physically). After hearing the situation, my Dad told me I'd have to fight back. So, when he started bothering me the next day in Gym class, I pounded him to the floor. He stopped bothering me, and all the school did was give me (and him) a lecture. A similar thing happened to my son. He defended himself, and was threatened with expulsion for it. Apparently, today's society wanted me to call a lawyer and sue the other kid's parents instead of dealing with the issue directly. I feel just as annoyed as you by this sort of emasculation of society.
I didn't say I found all commercials offensive, although there are a few that I find to be so. I find that _some_ of them have content not suitable for all ages. The biggest problem is that some of those come on during programming for children, which is something I'll never understand. The children generally aren't interested in the products they are selling, and parents who are watching may be irritated enough by the out-of-place content that they would avoid the product just out of spite.
As I already said, I don't think everyone should pay for it. It just needs to be available as an option for those of us that want i
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
I would assume there is no easy 'pork' as such, but you never know.
Tri-Vision International, a Canadian based company. They hold the patent and licenses for the V Chip. http://www.tri-vision.ca/
You're right in that we do shield our children from the inappropriate until they're old enough. Every parent understands that. But also understand that by asking the government for help, you are asking for censorship. Most people do like censorship under the guise of protecting the children (or something close).
You reject this line of thought, because your external opinion differs from your internal view of the world, so it causes conflict and anger directed at someone who points out the inconsistency. Most people will not react well if you shatter the public persona they've created to hide the little boy/girl inside.
I think you'd be much happier if you simply admit that you're in favor of censorship in certain areas and live with trying to reconcile that view with the realities of the world. But by approaching things the way you've approached them, you've set yourself up to unhappy on a couple of different levels.
That's why people are overweight and always claim to be overworked, despite only working 40 hours a week.
I want to save money on a feature I'll never use. I want to buy a TV without this Super-V-Chip in it.
I can't? Oh joy. Perhaps the parents should pay MORE for a TV with MORE FEATURES instead of the government forcing everyone to pay for it.
Blar.
I have a 15-year-old cousin, when he was 10 he removed the password protection of "blocked" channels on his families cable boxes. When he was 12 he circumvented all of the internet kid-protection software my uncle put on his computer, he'd just log in as the admin and remove it, my uncle didn't even know what an admin account was or what it was for or how to log in to it. Go ahead FCC, waste more money and time on parental-supervision-replacement technology. I can see it now, real-life Rosies that chase the kids around, deleting porn and changing channels. I'm sure the little jerk will see it as a fantastically fun challenge to get around a new V-chip so he can download porn on his cell phone in school. In the meantime, my aunt and uncle will continue to scream from the mountaintop that they're wonderful parents, they pay attention, they do their jobs...I wonder what they'd say if they knew my cousin once made dynamite in their half-million dollar home, or what they'd do if they ever found out that he grew a bunch of pot plants on their property last year. So, todays-parents-suck-at-being-parents-posts +1.
So go ahead and block all of the content -- I have a hard time finding anything on TV worth watching. I used to think that it was because I was busy etc and just that the shows were not on at the time that I was around to watch TV.
Then I got a TiVo and even with timeshifting I still can't find more than 20 minutes of watchable "content", which IMO is more like something put up to fill the deadspace between commercials.
This is just a clever way of forcing the worst kind of DRM on every consumer electronic device, at the hardware level, and making us support this "for the children".
You don't hate the children, do you?
whether any of this stuff is even technologically feasible before they go making these proposals? The v-chip for TV only works because broadcasters attach ratings to their programming streams. What's the super-V-chip supposed to do for the unrated Internet? Examine all the traffic in real time using Artificial Intelligence to detect "bad" pictures, ideas, etc.? Not in the next 20 years, at least. Plus if your Artificial Intelligence gets good enough, it's liable to conclude censorship is the bigger harm, and just turn itself off.
FCC should not make stupid regulations like that, these kinds of technologies should be driven by market demand, but I guess concept of free market is a no-no with fcc...
Just to (try) to play Devil's Advocate here:
...of course, the answer is probably NO
If there is a standardized V-chip, could that mean that FCC regulations will become less strict? Would "inappropriate" content be permitted to air at any time, as long as it had the proper rating and would be filtered out for people who do not wish to see it?
If all content is filtered through an automatic rating system, then networks wouldn't have to "think of the children".
Haven't they heard of these new inventions, called "paper" and "the printing press"? I hear they are even used to distribute pornography! And you can't block them on your TV or even phone line, because they can come in from under the door! Horror!
No, the only way to be really save is to implant those V-chips not into the TV and the 'puter, but into the eyes of our children. And the ears. And the fingers, because I'm sure there is braille porn.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Spoken like someone who is keeping their kids "safe" but isn't necessarily teaching them the responsibility they need to become "safe" adults.
The problem with all of this blocking, restricting, controlling, eliminating is that it provides the parents a feel-good "safe environment" for their kids but doesn't do anything to actually allow the kids to learn responsibility. At what point do the kids start to learn responsibility and the consequences of their actions? By restricting them only to "safe" activities?
You're right that you can't always watch what your kids do and they may go to sites or see or hear things you'd prefer they didn't. But at what point are they going to become able to make that determination themselves if they've not been give the chance to learn to make those choices when there's someone around to help them learn? Magically when they turn 18 and leave home?
The "make the kids safe from the world" mentality only causes problems when the kids move out of their parents homes. You end up with a bunch of kids who are no longer being monitored or restricted in the things that they can do AND aren't fully capable of being responsible for their own actions. They've been "protected" so much that they haven't learned that there are consequences to doing the things that they were protected from.
I'm am all for keeping kids safe. I am also for teaching and building responsibility into kids that allow them to become responsible and capable adults. Kids need to be provided the ability to develop that responsibility but with controls like these it becomes easier for the parents to just blacklist everything and forget about it.
So how would a Super V-chip work on the internet? Would it be part of the modem? Would it be part of the display monitor?
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
"I think that you'll find considerable overlap between the smartest children and the dumbest parents."
I'm sorry, but really. If any bright kid has been denied something by an authority figure, most will try to obtain it out of stubbornness. You can either:
Have the system exceptionally high-tech (in which case parents won't bother setting it up, and the hI-Qs will still get around it).
Have the system so simple to set up that kids will be able to get around it anyway.
Back in High School, our IT administrators decided that 10mb was enough personal space for every student (this was two years ago). In order to get more space, my friends and I completely circumvented the schools network security, going as far as to add Counterstrike to the ghost image (a bad idea on reflection, with the 'audit' thing that I am now aware of). We created administrator accounts for ourselves, took over significant portions of network drives, and used the school security cameras to find out what classes all the hot girls were in.
All of this started just because the school didn't think we could be trusted with any small amount of access to the network. Well, I kind of rambled at the end there, but my $0.02
Ninjas use italics.
No senator or congressman really cares if that junk works. There are 2 things that are important here:
1. Find federal jobs and contracts for their buddies. They wanna get "support" for their next election.
2. Appease the thinkofthechildren crowd. They wanna get reelected, after all.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I finally bought a flat panel TV. Just for kicks I kicked on the filters an only filtered content based on SEX, Violence, Adult Situations, and Language. For the most part is is the same as turning off the TV. Prime time, ABC CBS, NBC and FOX are pretty much blue screened "Content Blocked"
n d%20Photo%20Gallery/Sawmill/index.html
n d%20Photo%20Gallery/Oregon%20Electric%20Railway%20 Historical%20Society/index.html
n d%20Photo%20Gallery/Willow%20Creek%20Railroad/a%20 train%20movie.MOV
n d%20Photo%20Gallery/Oregon%20Tractor%20Pullers/sli des/DCP_1069.html
n d%20Photo%20Gallery/Oregon%20Tractor%20Pullers/Kid s%20Pedal%20Pulling/slides/2.html
This is over the air TV. Not subscription. The filters are ineffective because with the filters on, there is nothing on TV. (I guess there is nothing changed)
We rent movies. We pick our ratings there. We don't just turn on the TV to be fed whatever runs out of the sewer pipe anymore. We have a life instead of vegging. This weekend I'm attending a Steam up/Tracter pull. I'll ride the trolley cars, the minature steam trains, help fire up some steam tractors, and watch a steam sawmill operate. It's interactive, hands-on and a lot better than being a couch potato. (It's a lot cheaper than cable.)
Event
http://www.antiquepowerland.com/info/annual.html
Sawmill Photos
http://www.antiquepowerland.com/Antique%20Powerla
Trolley Photos
http://www.antiquepowerland.com/Antique%20Powerla
Willow Creek Railroad Movie
http://www.antiquepowerland.com/Antique%20Powerla
Tractor Pull
http://www.antiquepowerland.com/Antique%20Powerla
Tractor pull for kids
http://www.antiquepowerland.com/Antique%20Powerla
Geeks, Don't forget the sunscreen!
The truth shall set you free!
It's also our responsibility as adults to allow children to be children as long as possible. There is no reason that a 5 year old needs to see Saving Private Ryan, or Final Destination 3 (on a side note does anyone need to see Final Destiniation 3) even if they are explained to them (and good luck on that explaination). Kids do not need to get exposed to all the crap of life at once. Parental controls on TV and computers are tools- not a panacea and I don't think folks that use them view them as such (if they do then they are guilty of avoiding adult responsibilities).
I always think its funny how whenever the V-Chip is mentioned, anti-censorship people scream bloody murder. The fact is; the V-chip; as parent stated; is an entirely opt in technology. It is not on by default, and I know zero people who even know how to enable it on their TV sets. Very few know it even exists, outside of the people I've had discussions about it with. As long as some censorship enabling tech remains nothing more than a tool for parents to use if they want to, it doesn't bother me. As for slippery slope doomsday crap, I'll wait until I meet someone who actually used V-Chip technology voluntarily before I even consider worrying about it becoming a threat.
I think what makes people cry censorship over the V-Chip is the idea to make it mandatory in everyone's TV set. From the advent of a chip to its abuse it's usually a fairly small step. Now, if the law said that all TVs have to be V-Chip-ready, and have to have some kind of easy means to install one, I doubt anyone here would really cause an outcry.
Putting the decision of having technology that affects you in your hands is a good idea. Putting the decision in the hands of the government is not.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Put all the damn V-Chips you want in TVs. Maybe this is the electronic messiah we've all be looking for!
So long as they aren't enabled when I get the set, I have the choice whether I use it or not.
Censorship isn't the restriction of what children may absorb by their parents. That's called "parenting". Censorship is the restriction by adults of what other adults can consume. So if, in your infinite wisdom, you decide that it's easier for you to stop watching crap by enabling your V-chip rather than doing the pedantic, low-tech method of self-censorship known as "changing the channel", by all means use it. However, I might advise that until they come out with a rating system which goes the next step of rating whether or not something is worth watching, rather than the current neolithic method of noting if there are naked boobies or naughty words, I'm afraid you might just end up watching American Idol reruns all the time. Unless I miss my guess, isn't that what you're trying to avoid?
I would like to address the issue of "adding the F-bomb" to a sentence conveying a point better.
Well, I suppose that would depend upon the point I'm trying to convey, wouldn't it?
Where is the "Think of the children!" tag for this article?
Maybe I'm crazy, but if you're this concerned about what your children see perhaps you shouldn't allow them access to these devices at all? I know, it's a crazy thought to expect any of my fellow Americans to go a day without a TV.
The Generation
I'd say something witty here, but I'm not that bright.
Actually, over 50% of parents are using the voluntary television rating system to determine what is appropriate for their children, but fewer than 7% of parents use the v-chip to do their work for them. So the opposite of your argument is true.
More likely, politicians are quick to dictate misunderstood technologies in order to score points with those parents who don't understand the effectiveness until the technology is in their hands... long after the legislation has been enacted.
Remember what happened when Cartman got a V-chip....
The "our" word referred to those of us who are parents. You should not have considered yourself to be included in that group.
I think you see how the phrase "as adults" would lead me to believe otherwise.
Nor is it _your_ right to own a TV. That has nothing to do with it. I have absolutely no problem with bearing the expense -- I'm even willing to pay the price for the V-chip as an add-on option. If you look at one of my other posts, you'll see that. I don't expect those who have no use for the V-chip to bear the cost of it.
It is my right to have access to art, ideas and entertainment which is free of censorship though. Parents typically believe that these things should be censored to protect their kids. I'm sorry I didn't see your other posts, but I don't really have time to search the thread for your other posts or your posting history.
As one who has publicly confessed that they don't care about any following generations, I'm not sure you would be even remotely qualified to comment on what methods of raising kids are or are not appropriate. Regardless of what you may think, children who have the whole world thrown at them at once may have a very difficult time coping with it. In my opinion, introducing the realities of the world gradually (not withholding them altogether) is a better approach, and definitely isn't the same thing as being completely sheltered from the world until the time you leave home. I have witnessed the effects of "oversheltering", and they aren't good. I have no plans to make the same mistake.
I do care about the following generations, because it is for them that many want to censor and make everyone else responsible for thier choices. What I said I didn't care about was if there were any more generations.
At any rate, caring or not has nothing to do with whether I know what I'm talking about or not. Would you say a doctor that doesn't care about his patients doesn't know anything medically?
Sorry, but this has absolutely nothing to do with restricting media content. This is a completely separate problem in our society that is related to how parents (and schools) treat problems _after_ they happen. When I was in school, there was a bully who kept calling me names. I ignored him until he started pushing me around (physically). After hearing the situation, my Dad told me I'd have to fight back. So, when he started bothering me the next day in Gym class, I pounded him to the floor. He stopped bothering me, and all the school did was give me (and him) a lecture. A similar thing happened to my son. He defended himself, and was threatened with expulsion for it. Apparently, today's society wanted me to call a lawyer and sue the other kid's parents instead of dealing with the issue directly. I feel just as annoyed as you by this sort of emasculation of society.
Sure it does. The same groups that believe we should have censorship are the ones calling to get people fired for what they've done in the context of art / entertainment. As a result more and more conent is being censored for fear of offending anyone. Its detemental to our society as a whole.
And adults don't fall into the ANYONE category?
So where may I purchase Manhunt 2? From what I understand, the game is complete. How many NC-17 or R rated movies are made?
I didn't say I found all commercials offensive, although there are a few that I find to be so. I find that _some_ of them have content not suitable for all ages. The biggest problem is that some of those come on during programming for children, which is something I'll never understand. The children generally aren't interested in the products they are selling, and parents who are watching may be irritated enough by the out-of-place content that they would avoid the product just out of spite.
I can hardly think of any commercial I find remotely offensive, even for kids. Please provide an example.
As I already said, I don't think everyone should pay
Great develop a super v-chip so it can be used as much as the real v chip, as in never. This is more low hanging fruit politics. Igonore collaping bridges, rotting dams, and every other issue and go for the cheap 'its for the children' crap.
I'm so glad this new Democratic Congress is here to protect our first amendment rights from those filthy Republicans and evangelicals.
Yeah, except those who live in the poorer part of town might object to their inevitable 70s shag.
... we can get the V-chip filtering technology extended to tag different theologies. I mean, I don't want my kids watching some of those broadcasters that are spreading the wrong word of God. I can trust their judgment when it comes to viewing violence or sexual content. But when it comes to preaching false creeds, how am I to know if they might be led astray by some blasphemer? I'd like a classification system that allows me to select not only the major theologies, but denominations of each.
Have gnu, will travel.
Hey, if every TV has the super-V-chip, the purchase price of TVs will increase to cover the cost of this new feature.
But I don't want the feature. Why must it be mandatory? WHy not let the parents pay an extra $30.00 for the set with the Super-V-chip feature, and let the rest of use save that money.
I didn't buy the more expensive DVD player with component output because I didn't need that feature and I didn't want to pay for it.
This isn't like paying more in taxes to keep poor people fed, clothed and treated medically. This is a convenience to lazy parents.
Blar.
It's called Dad's Leather Belt. I say beat the child.
be exposed to everything gradually (rather than at 18 when they're just going to rebel against their 'rents who kept them shielded [read pig-ignorant] and REALLY going to get in trouble because of their inexperience.)
This is the biggest hunk of crap since Mullah Omar's edict against music.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
These laws aren't about mandating that people _use_ the V-chip. They are about making sure that it's available for those who _want_ to use it.
Then don't use the FCC to bully television manufacturers and service providers into mandating everyone buy one of these "tools". Buy your own damn censorware for yourself!
I think it's naive to brainwash your children into believing that sex, homosexuality, fisting, amputee fetishists, rebirthing, furries, goatse, violence, rape, incest, murder, revenge, racism, genocide, death camps, atomic warfare, and people who cut up other people and use their skin to make lampshades simply do not exist. Out of sight, out of mind, eh? The sooner children realize the immense scope of the human condition, instead of continuing to act like ignorant sheep because it's "cute" for you (like living dolls), the sooner they'll discover their own personal table of values. I have three children spanning the ages of 7 to 15 and they behave more like adults than most adults I know -- including a capacity to actually think for themselves rather than simply parroting whatever I or my partner say (or the aforementioned television and internets).
If you think a five-year-old won't understand the explanation, what makes you think he'll understand a rape scene at all, or recognize that it is violent? If he doesn't understand enough about it to be upset or disturbed by it, then what's the harm, exactly?
The same goes for nudity, profanity, sex scenes, pornography, and other content most people deem inappropriate for children. One quote that I heard often when there was local debate about a porn shop opening in our small town was that exposure to these things would "take away my child's innocence". What the hell does that even mean? The fact that these things are taboo in our culture is LEARNED behavior. If the child hasn't yet LEARNED that it is considered taboo, then how could they possibly be upset, affected, or "robbed of their innocence" (whatever that means) by it?
Granted, I can count on one hand the number of times I've spent more than a few hours around a five-year-old, and I don't have any friends with children, so these are sincere questions.
Give me an f'in break! This ISN'T ABOUT CENSORSHIP!!! This is just a TOOL FOR PARENTS to use to help enforce THEIR sense of morality! Again, it's a tool to help, it's not a tool of government censorship. It's called choice, you can turn it off for christ sake.
This is all bullshit. Every last bit of it. So once we get this super censorship chip, can we finally disband the FCC? We can form a new electronics regulatory organization for frequency regulation etc, but the FCC is considered by the average dumb American to be the Censor for America. Unfortunately they are right, but by law... the FCC is wrong, illegal, and corrupt.
This is America is it not?
I hate America. Our politicians are criminals. Our people are passive. Our rights are lies, and money = freedom. There is no equality. AND you fools keep voting for the same fucking criminals year after year expecting a different fucking outcome! And then you bitch and moan about it.
I have given up on the dam place. I'll vote 3rd party always but it wont matter because so many of "US" keep eating up the 2 party bullshit. Too many believe that the presidential parent will take care of us all.
When the V-Chip was being proposed and designed, I knew that was going to happen. I didn't know of any parents capable of setting the time on the VCR, let alone being able to program it to record a show. The only ones that could use computers were the kids.
It is nice to know that 25 years later, the kids are still outsmarting the results. Way to go youth!!!
why don't people just stop producing shitty content?
I'm getting a lot more accomplished without it.
End of story (speaking on which, try a book. You can put it down and pick it up again later.)
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Here's the thing.
It is unconstitutional for the government to restrict non-obscene content. In the past, they got away with it because it was the least intrusive way to "protect" children from being exposed to indecent material.
When they put forward the V chip, I became very happy. Why? Because if the V chip is universally implemented, then banning indecent material suddenly is no longer the least intrusive way to protect children. Instead, parents could use the V chip to prevent their children from viewing TV-MA content.
And guess what! In January of 2009, analog broadcasting will be turned off. That means that there will not be a single working television in the country without a V chip in it (legacy TVs will require a set-top box, which will have a V chip). I look forward to the ACLU bringing suit in February to overturn the ban on indecent programming that is NOT marked as TV-MA in a manner that interoperates with the V chip. And I guarantee that approximately 2 minutes and 35 seconds after the courts rule, there will be T&A on Fox in prime time.
Thanks to the FCC, that's something you'll never have to worry about. A graphic rape scene simply isn't going to be shown on network TV or basic cable. The US is so sensitized to sexuality that you shouldn't have to worry about anything more than seeing an adult couple kiss each other.
I don't really get why people refuse to give an honest answer to a 6-year old who asks "where do babies come from?", while a child who asks "what are guns for?" will more likely than not get an honest answer.
Seriously, if you subscribe to a porn channel with kids in the house, you deserve whatever you get for it.
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
OK, conceded.
I don't consider providing ratings and a method to filter them to be censorship. Maybe this is the crux of our disagreement.
On this one I might be able to provide a bit of help. It's not quite out yet, but Amazon.com is taking preorders for $39.99. Release date for the PSP is September 1. Release date for the PS2 and Wii is October 1. Enjoy!
Erm, the advertisement against pirating at the beginning of movies?
If you can find a way to get this done without making laws or ended up with only one model of TV that provides the option, please let me know.
Ah, so here's the real thorn. And you know what? I support you on this feeling. The public schools around here are so horrible that we don't even use them. We're shelling out extra bucks to send the kids to private school, and yet we're still paying the property taxes to support what I consider a failed system. Worse yet, we have this local earned income tax that partly goes to the education system. Somehow, private school still manages to cost less than public school. So I share your frustration, if for slightly different reasons.
Actually, this isn't true, at least not around where I live. Most of the homeowners here have children, and we have consistently voted against property tax increases (at least when given the option). We just recently voted down (with a vengeance) a proposal to increase the local earned income tax to add to the school budget. I personally have never met _anybody_ that thinks the school budget (let alone property taxes) needs to go up. And yet the board of supervisors keeps raising the taxes. We even voted one of the worst offenders of tax increases off the board, but the taxes keep going up. Several off us (all with children) are starting to look at other counties (and states) to move to because of the ridiculous tax burden. The truth is that it isn't the children that are making your taxes go up. It's the politicians, and they are using the children as an excuse. If we didn't have a public school system, the politicians would just find another way to separate you from your money.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
I don't consider providing ratings and a method to filter them to be censorship. Maybe this is the crux of our disagreement.
;)
/., the latest update is that TT is appealing the British decision (and probably the US one as well).
;) Just kidding. The only TV the kids have watched recently is from videos, but the next time I see one, I'll let you know. Usually they are advertisements for movies.
On this one I might be able to provide a bit of help. It's not quite out yet, but Amazon.com is taking preorders for $39.99. Release date for the PSP is September 1. Release date for the PS2 and Wii is October 1. Enjoy!
It does seem to be at the center of our disagreement. However, your sources are incorrect. Until the AO rating is overcome (by censoring the game), it will NOT be allowed for sale. Its been specifically banned for sale in the US. Check out the games section for
Erm, the advertisement against pirating at the beginning of movies?
I find that odd, because movie trailers even for R rated movies are pretty watered down. The ratings themselves are rated if shown on a DVD or in the theater.
If you can find a way to get this done without making laws or ended up with only one model of TV that provides the option, please let me know.
You can screen what your kids watch before they watch it. More effort on you, but I assume you knew having kids would be a daunting task.
Ah, so here's the real thorn. And you know what? I support you on this feeling. The public schools around here are so horrible that we don't even use them. We're shelling out extra bucks to send the kids to private school, and yet we're still paying the property taxes to support what I consider a failed system. Worse yet, we have this local earned income tax that partly goes to the education system. Somehow, private school still manages to cost less than public school. So I share your frustration, if for slightly different reasons.
Its another thorn, not the main one. I would love TV, movies, music and video games to push the edge more and more... but this is not possible because of the ratings systems in place. Having people rate things, enforcement and chips to filter rated material costs everyone money too. Maybe games would be just a little cheaper if they didn't need lawyers around because some dopy parent blames the game instead of their parenting, and didn't need to buy approval from the ESRB.
I agree that you shouldn't pay into a system you're not using as well.
Actually, this isn't true, at least not around where I live. Most of the homeowners here have children, and we have consistently voted against property tax increases (at least when given the option). We just recently voted down (with a vengeance) a proposal to increase the local earned income tax to add to the school budget. I personally have never met _anybody_ that thinks the school budget (let alone property taxes) needs to go up. And yet the board of supervisors keeps raising the taxes. We even voted one of the worst offenders of tax increases off the board, but the taxes keep going up. Several off us (all with children) are starting to look at other counties (and states) to move to because of the ridiculous tax burden. The truth is that it isn't the children that are making your taxes go up. It's the politicians, and they are using the children as an excuse. If we didn't have a public school system, the politicians would just find another way to separate you from your money.
Ahh, you see here in Vermont things are a bit different. We actually get to vote on whether or not to increase the school budget. The budget of course comes from property taxes, but who can say no to the children?? (Sorry for the sarcasm.) We also get to vote to close certain schools which are literally less than half full. But even that gets shot down, for some vague "keep neighborhood schools!" rallying cry. Nevermind that you can drive through the city north to south in about 20 minutes... Its not a big city at all, but people seem to think kids taking a bus is a bad thing.
if we have the ability to block anything we want with a new improved V chip, then that means that all broadcasts (TV, Radio, etc) can now be completely censor free ... right? right? NO?!! wtf!
I'm all for allowing people to not be bombarded by something they deem inappropriate.. i mean that's why we can change the channel.. but i am sick to death of seeing my favorite movies hacked to bits because someone can't spend the time making sure little johnny doesn't hear the word fuck, or radio announcers being fined 100,00$ because someone said shit.
The "Super-Duper V Chip" will include a small camera in you media device so that big brother can ensure that you are safe from harm. TVs are also required to add Newspeak to English close captioning.
These already exist- NetNanny, Cyber Patrol, and dozens of others. Why not let people use the products that are already out there, rather than mandating that we all spend money on some magical new hardware that will be equally (in)effective?
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
Mine too....but with different results.
I worked around whatever I could to avoid the rules my parents laid down. So much so, that I found myself hacking and in Secret Service custody at the age of 13 (this was the late 80's).
Looking back, I think my parents probably should have set some limits on the encouragement they gave me. Once the SS confiscated my computer, the problem solved itself but it just seems to me that my parents could have done the same thing and just taken it away before I got myself in trouble. I don't blame them, of course, as they didn't know. But just saying "he's working with technology - good" is not enough. As a parent, you still have to know what is going on.
My point is this: even tho my parents LIKED that I was engaged in computers and programming -- I was still able to get myself in a whole shitpot full of trouble. Being smart was part of the problem!
You could put the "Super-Duper-V-chip-3000" (TM) in there and it wouldn't make a bit of difference. The same idiots who can't figure out the current "Parental Control" features of their first-gen V-chip are never going to figure out the new and improved one either. All of these people also have their VCR/DVD player set to the same universal coordinated time: 12:00 which blinks all day and night.
I like the idea of the v-chip, putting control of content into the hands of the parents, but it relies on an established rating system that broadcasters adhere to. I for one don't plan to add ratings information to my web pages. The only other alternative is content analysis, which 1) Doesn't work, and 2) would be REALLY expensive to try.
This is getting written into every web page I ever write from now on. I'll never have to make another splash page again!
i for one am glad the govt cares so much about me to screen what i see and hear. the land of the free! free from worries! i know the govt would never abuse such a thing. how could it possibly be used for their benefit? and kids dont need to see boobies till their 18, even if they are a girl. i think we should all jsut watch reruns of leave it to beaver and i dream of jeanie reruns.
its totally insane that anyone would be opposed to the govt censoring everything they see and hear, i mean, you wouldnt ever see bad news! its not like thier controlling your mind or anything...some people just dont want anything good
sarcasm intended
I don't know where you go that all they talk about is TV, but I'd like to know -- so I can avoid it!
We currently live in the Bryan/College Station area of Texas (I am pursuing graduate studies at Texas A&M). There is no rock climbing in this prairie area and very few trails to race on, not that I could because I am still losing my excess weight. The weather tends to be between annoyingly warm and stifling hot, and the very few days in the year under 70 degrees outside tend to be too rainy to be outdoors. Most people talk TV, the rest tend to talk evangelical church, conservative politics, A&M sports, and NASCAR.
We don't know where we will live next, but it will have to have much better weather and community planning than this. We used to live in RTP, North Carolina, where there were plenty of greenways to walk/ride and enough urban "stuff" to do that we could sort of blend in a bit better. But even there was still mostly dominated by TV talk.
Helping poor people who are down and out and need healthcare is good. Those people can often return to the workforce and continue contributing. Even if they do not, this is a human life we are talking about. If you want to let someone starve for the want of a medical procedure perfected 50 years ago...you're pretty damn heartless.
Retirement? I assume you mean social security. The program that everyone pays into and everyone gets a pay-out from? Yeah that's fine.
Now let's see...Super-V-Chip. The feature everyone pays for when they buy a TV, but only lazy parents benefit from it because it allows them to dhelter their child from the world. Not quite the same, son. Not quite the same.
I'm also 100% against the Child Tax Credit, which is welfare for poor over-breeding trash written right into the tax code.
Blar.
The stuff that I find personally objectionable are generally for rated R movies that I wouldn't want to see. In general, I guess you could say that the trailer did its job of making sure I knew it wasn't a movie that I was interested in. ;) Regarding the children, though, it's usually imagery from a horror movie. While it doesn't really bother me, it can cause nightmares for the kids. I personally don't care if they show the advertisements, but please not during the middle of children's programming. I don't really want a rating system on commercials, just for somebody who does the scheduling to avoid heavy medication prior to making decisions on what commercials go where.
I actually have no problem with this, and most of the time I screen the content anyway. Just because something is rated G or PG doesn't mean I want the kids watching it. I don't let my youngest watch "Teletubbies" because I find the program an insult to the intelligence of kids everywhere. In general, I'd be perfectly happy to have separate children's channels (which we do, in fact, have) that I pay for separately (which we can't do). In the absence of this, the rating system helps. I'm assuming you wouldn't have a problem with a rating system whose cost was borne entirely by its users?
One thing you may find interesting -- At least the for movie business, the ratings system was self-imposed by the MPAA. However, you would probably be unsurprised to find that it was a more or less direct response to the threat of outright censorship.
Ah, we don't have this luxury. However, proposed big increases are generally put to a referendum. The last one that I mentioned (on increasing the local earned income tax) was shot down. But the officials in charge did everything they could to push it through. They sent confusing information to the public that tried to disguise it as a tax break (they offered to reduce the property taxes by a maximum of $311 annually per household if we voted for the higher EIT (which based on demographics would have increased the tax by an average of nearly $600 annually per household). They also planned the vote during an off-year election for the primaries, when hardly anybody would show up, and I think the polls were only open during working hours. I was so angry about it that I took off work to vote and called up all my neighbors asking them to do the same. Needless to say, the thing lost by a landslide. In fact, state-wide, I heard it only passed in two townships (Pennsylvania).
That's totally illogical, and I'd be pretty upset about it too. The only reason to keep a school that's less than half full open is if attendance is expected to swing up strongly in the next few years (as it's more expensive to build a new school than to keep the old one open for a few years). If they did that around here, I think there'd be a war. As it is, they built new schools recently. For some reason, there's an opinion that children will somehow be better
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
They grew up with parents who could provide a comfy lifestyle on a single income. They grew up with greedy parents who didn't think for the future and kept electing politicians that favored the rich and corporate. Now, they can't get close to the lifestyle they enjoyed growing up, and that their parents told them was theirs if they 'worked hard enough'.
Somehow, I don't think their parents meant '4 jobs' when they said 'worked hard enough'.
Society made the promise of a certain lifestyle level through media (our culture) and family. Society however, didn't hold up it's end of the bargain. Therefore, people are rejecting more and more of our societal norms. Why take the bad restrictive crap when the good stuff hasn't shown up?
Blar.
Regarding the children, though, it's usually imagery from a horror movie. While it doesn't really bother me, it can cause nightmares for the kids. I personally don't care if they show the advertisements, but please not during the middle of children's programming. I don't really want a rating system on commercials, just for somebody who does the scheduling to avoid heavy medication prior to making decisions on what commercials go where.
Well I can't say that I believe nightmares are a bad thing for kids to have, I would think its a normal part of growing up. I am suprised that R rated movies are being advertised during a kids show. Its been a while since I've watched any, and when I was watching those shows it was pretty much toys and video games.
I'm assuming you wouldn't have a problem with a rating system whose cost was borne entirely by its users?
I'm not sure that's a fair question, because I don't think such a rating system could exist. Cost is also only part of the problem; as I've said, when you have a rating you have content developers self-censoring to fit into a particular rating.
One thing you may find interesting -- At least the for movie business, the ratings system was self-imposed by the MPAA. However, you would probably be unsurprised to find that it was a more or less direct response to the threat of outright censorship.
I am aware of that; censorship is also why the film industry is mostly centered in CA. It was believed that if they moved out to the "Wild west" they could escape the mandates of congress. Outright censorship in my mind is unconsitutional; its pretty clear our founders wanted a free exchange of ideas.
You may also be interested to know that when the printing press was first invented people had the same problems with books as they do today with movies, games and music. Back then it was the romance novel that people were upset about. Yet we've managed fine without a ratings system for books, I don't see why movies, music or games should be any different.
Ah, we don't have this luxury. However, proposed big increases are generally put to a referendum. The last one that I mentioned (on increasing the local earned income tax) was shot down. But the officials in charge did everything they could to push it through. They sent confusing information to the public that tried to disguise it as a tax break (they offered to reduce the property taxes by a maximum of $311 annually per household if we voted for the higher EIT (which based on demographics would have increased the tax by an average of nearly $600 annually per household). They also planned the vote during an off-year election for the primaries, when hardly anybody would show up, and I think the polls were only open during working hours. I was so angry about it that I took off work to vote and called up all my neighbors asking them to do the same. Needless to say, the thing lost by a landslide. In fact, state-wide, I heard it only passed in two townships (Pennsylvania).
I'm not sure its a luxury. It seems as the totally illogical are now in charge today. We now are most people voting FOR higher and higher taxes. Where in PA are you from? I grew up between Allentown and Philly.
That's totally illogical, and I'd be pretty upset about it too. The only reason to keep a school that's less than half full open is if attendance is expected to swing up strongly in the next few years (as it's more expensive to build a new school than to keep the old one open for a few years). If they did that around here, I think there'd be a war. As it is, they built new schools recently. For some reason, there's an opinion that children will somehow be better educated in a newer physical structure. I have no idea whose brain fart that is, but it's the idea. One of the schools probably _did_ need to be replaced, as the structure was aging, but the other certainly didn't. So now we get to pay the cost of new schools in the budget. And I heard recently that the new
Southern Chester county, down near the Maryland and Delaware borders. Allentown and Philly aren't too awfully far away.
Possibly. Short of shifting the burden entirely to those with kids, another thing that might help is school vouchers. This would allow parents who send kids to private schools (because the public schools are so horrible) to make at least partial use of the taxes they pay. This also has the effect of decoupling the school budget from the taxes. However, I'm pretty sure the public school system would collapse within a few years, and that might leave some of the poorer parents unable to send their kids to school. Like it or not, the poorer families are frequently the ones with more children. Another option would be to only publicly fund eduction for children who come from families with an income below some arbitrary level. This would make the parents who could afford it directly responsible for the investment in education while not leaving the poorer children without any choices. Done correctly, it would also probably reduce the per household tax burden. At the very list, it would make it very clear what the cost per child was. I think if people knew exactly what that cost was, some eyebrows would be going up and some investigations would take place. I cringe at what they would find.
Agreed. This is just another part of a flawed system. I suspect the intention is that if you have a bigger house, you have more money and therefore should have a larger share of the tax burden. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. You might inherit a house that's really nice, but if that's your sole possession, you aren't wealthy. If everyone is to be taxed, it would be better to have those taxes spread fairly. Any ideas what the fairest method would be? Assume for the moment that not having children doesn't allow you to escape.
GreyPoopon
--
Why is it I can write insightful comments but can't come up with a clever signature?
Southern Chester county, down near the Maryland and Delaware borders. Allentown and Philly aren't too awfully far away.
Not that far at all, especially since the blue route has been completed.
Possibly. Short of shifting the burden entirely to those with kids, another thing that might help is school vouchers. This would allow parents who send kids to private schools (because the public schools are so horrible) to make at least partial use of the taxes they pay. This also has the effect of decoupling the school budget from the taxes. However, I'm pretty sure the public school system would collapse within a few years, and that might leave some of the poorer parents unable to send their kids to school.
I agree; that would only further crush public schools at all. It still doesn't give people a simple value metric to decide of whether or not to have kids or figure out what some of the costs will be. Even with welfare or WIC, the poor are still forced to decide how much to spend on what. If you get name brands you get less food than generics. We need the same thing for schools, otherwise it gets to a point like we have here... people vote for the higher taxes.
Another option would be to only publicly fund eduction for children who come from families with an income below some arbitrary level. This would make the parents who could afford it directly responsible for the investment in education while not leaving the poorer children without any choices. Done correctly, it would also probably reduce the per household tax burden. At the very list, it would make it very clear what the cost per child was. I think if people knew exactly what that cost was, some eyebrows would be going up and some investigations would take place. I cringe at what they would find.
You will have the middle and upper classes rightly claiming that its unfair to them; they not only pay for thier child, but for the poor's children. So any less tax is now going to pay for thier own kids education bill. It also does nothing to discourage the poor from having more children.
My solution, open to anyone that cannot afford it, is the same solution for college. Low interest educational loans. I have not problems with those, even using some tax money to get the program going. Ideally the interest income would pay for program itself.
Another more extreme option is this (and this also solve the welfare problem too): If you give birth to a child and your finances (purely looking at income / debt) don't allow you to take care of it, you lose the child and it will go to adoptive parents. Adoptive parents cannot adopt outside the US unless there are no children in the US that need adoption. I won't promise this solution would work, but I think it may have potential.
Agreed. This is just another part of a flawed system. I suspect the intention is that if you have a bigger house, you have more money and therefore should have a larger share of the tax burden. Unfortunately, that's not always the case. You might inherit a house that's really nice, but if that's your sole possession, you aren't wealthy. If everyone is to be taxed, it would be better to have those taxes spread fairly. Any ideas what the fairest method would be? Assume for the moment that not having children doesn't allow you to escape.
My end goal is simply to reduce taxes (and censorship). The only really fair method is to direct bill the parents, and let those without kids alone. As long as its coming from tax money, you're ignoring that some people have no kids, some one, some two, some have six. I very much doubt a "kid" tax would ever fly, but I know that there are some counties in VA or SC (I can't remember, in that area somewhere) that already have the system I suggest (direct bill only). Property taxes are VERY low, and schools are better than average.
The problem is this is one of these types of tools that lets authorities get too lax in their responsibility and vigilance, or overuse it in situations where it is not justified.
Other examples:
Tool: tasers, rubber bullets, etc.
Use: Allow law enforcment to deliver "less lethal" ways to subdue threats, protesters, etc.
Result: More and more reports of these tools being used to subdue minor threats, or in instances where there was no threat at all.
Tool: air bags, anti-lock brakes, traction control, SUVs, etc.
Use: Make drivers safer in emergency situations.
Result: People drive much more aggressively because they feel safer if they do get into an accident.
Tool: broadcast flag
Use: Prevent viewers from recording movies, sports events, and other high-demand content.
Result: Sometimes whole channels get "accidently" flagged. Expect this to not be an accident in the future.
Now we have a "super" V-chip coming along which will likely block educational material and create other false positives. Additionally, technology like this tends to negatively influence creative expression and dilute content in order to get maximum viewership.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have these tools, but the problem is society suffers because people tend to overuse them, so we should carefully consider that factor when deploying new technologies, especially those which are very prone to this scenario.
Please consider making an automatic monthly recurring donation to the EFF
As usual this thing will evolve in stages:
1. Mandate installing a V-Chip in everything, but leave it parent-modifyable and call it 'parental controls' so nobody argues.
2. Pass a law saying all V-Chips must be factory-set and hardwired to filter everything Big Bro doesn't like (the DMCA already covers bypassing the chip).
3. ???
4. Profit!