Slashdot Mirror
Separation of Church and Microsoft
theodp writes "Last week, the USPTO published a rather odd Microsoft patent application for Content Ratings and Recommendations, which describes how religious-based communities and other 'subcultures' can use the patent-pending process to prevent their members from viewing undesirable television programs and movies."
See that 'Church' in the title? Where did that come from?
FTFA-
"Other groups of viewers may include a parent-teacher association, a religious-based community, or any other subculture wanting to provide standards and boundaries for program viewing selections."
Who cringes at stuff like this mostly out of the fact that it will be used against (intentional word choice) children/teenagers to enforce a parent/group's own set of values upon the youngster who might not even share them? Yeah yeah I'm all for people's rights to raise kids however they want, but I'm also for the rights of kids to not be brainwashed by david-koresh-worshipping freaks or indoctrinated into neo-nazi-ideology and such at an age where they are too young to have an educated opinion about it ...
That's the beautiful catch isnt it? These crazy belief systems -require- their members to brainwash the kids ... who then grow up and think its the "normal" thing to do to spread the brainwashing, and if you try and stick up for the rights of the kids than everyone bitches and whines that you are "trampling" the rights/beliefs/values of the brainwashing parent....
Sigh, the times we live in ....
the patent nowhere mentions a collusion between church and Microsoft. The patent submission suggests several applications, including, "groups of viewers may include a parent-teacher association, a religious-based community, or any other subculture wanting to provide standards and boundaries for program viewing selections.".
Labeled as kdawsonfud.
So basically this is NetNanny for TV and it's "censorship?"
Churches, schools, rec centers, libraries, etc have been applying this kind of technology ever since the internet got popular, I don't see what the big deal is. If you want to watch porn go home, don't do it at your church, right?
Content ratings and recommendations is described in which embodiments provide that a viewer can create a rating system that other viewers can then subscribe to which forms a group, or subculture, that collaborates to identify and rate television programs, movies, and other programming choices for the viewers of the group. This adaptive and flexible approach enables individual viewers to discover like-minded subcultures, benefit from a rating system that represents similar viewing choices, and optionally, participate in identifying media content and rating the viewing choices.
A group of people willingly subscribe to a group that recommends TV shows they would be interested in and blocks those deemed inappropriate/off-topic/irrelevant. It's like Slashdot for TV.
Is there any chance that Slashdot moderators can apply 'Troll' and 'Deliberately Misleading Flamebait' to article titles and summaries?
Ya know, some people would like a little more information about what a movie contains so they can make a rational* choice about what they choose to watch - and there's nothing wrong with that, nor with getting a little technical help from the publishers etc.
* - just because YOU don't agree with their reasoning doesn't make it wrong.
Can we get a "-1 Wrong" moderation option?
Seriously, it must be obvious to everyone why Microsoft is pulling this. We have an American election in which the right-wing conservatives have been "amiable" to Microsoft's continued monopoly and dubious practices (such as buying out standards bodies). It is in Microsoft's interests at exactly this time to be seen to be "friendly" to those same right-wing conservatives and to win support from the very power-base the politicians are relying on. They are losing support from some of their traditional sources and need to replace them.
That OLPC will need to sell in the US and doesn't (yet) have adequate filtering makes this a skillful move on Microsoft's part. Why? Because if the churches and assorted other fringe groups insist on this Microsoft-patented technology on any laptop provided to children, it completely kills off OLPC's own OS and requires the use of Windows. There will be no alternatives. Schools, libraries, Universities that receive money from religious or other censorus body and so on will likewise be forced to give up Linux or give up their funding. (The Golden Rule of Arts and Science is He Who Hath The Gold Makes The Rules.) If there's a right-wing President, the same will likely become true of all public schools "in the best interest of the kids".
Microsoft doesn't care two whits about the religious groups or the feelings of those involved. It's never cared about anyone's feelings before and I don't see it starting now. This is purely a tactical move to manipulate those feelings into having other people destroy Microsoft's competition. If others are conned into doing so, then Microsoft cannot be (so easily) be held liable, now that it's a declared monopoly.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
The FCC (in addition to other functions) does a lot of censoring to protect society from rogue nipples and people who swear on the basis that everyone has access to television and therefore television shouldn't offend the sensibilities of anyone at all. Well, let's say you're deeply offended by boobies and monk seals. You join a ratings block of like minded folks who also are offended by boobies and monk seals. I, who happen to adore those things but am deeply offended by Jerry Lewis, join a block that reflects my tastes. The result is that networks, rather than being unable to air shows which portray boobies, monk seals, or Jerry Lewis for fear of offending anyone, can now show NOTHING BUT Jerry Lewis, boobies, and monk seals, since my rating group blocks shows featuring Mr. Lewis from my channel listings, and so forth. If this sort of technology could enable me to see nothing but documentaries, porn, old movies, porn, porn, horror movies and porn, all without making soccer moms and ministers upset, I'm all for it.
This unbiased moderation brought to you by the Porcine Aviation Group!
This is essentially how most if not all censorship or group filtration has been accomplished. Noteably the National Legion of Decency used this method to review and filter movies for their participants with a selected subset of their members (usually the priests) viewing films and then delivering a content rating to their remaining members via the pulpit often along the lines of "You'll go to hell if you see Mae West!" This became the basis of the existing MPAA ratings which use a selected set of individuals to rate a film for others and in some cases (e.g. X ratings) censor it from widespread public view.
This is also how other churches have censored things for years, how school boards go about banning books, how large political organizations censor materials, etc.
Basically Microsoft is trying to patent censorship as it has been practiced for centuries.
How exactly do you cite the Spanish Inquisition as prior art?
So what if I as a parent want to subscribe to a viewing community that helps me screen out certain content that I as a parent deem inappropriate. For a site that often exclaims the personal right to choose Slashdot's article posting seems to be on the wrong side of the fence on this one.
First off, with the rate of new show turnover these days combined with the number of channels and shows on TV. There is no way a parent could preview ALL the programming without it being a full time job. So anything that makes that task easier is a plus for caring parents.
Second...shows change. I've been watching Smallville over the years. The early seasons I'd consider a family friendly show. Perhaps a bit flirtatious but nothing too out of bounds. A couple of seasons back Smallville decided to take a turn toward a more adult tack. For example, the Smallville Halloween scene insinuates female vampires biting off a guy's penis and drinking his blood. That might be a fine scene for your children. But I'd rather not have my children watch such a scene. A content rating like the one proposed above could allow people to be alerted to when a show or even a particular episode goes down a track that might not be what you want your 7 yr old watching.
Lastly, we're talking personal screening. There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WRONG WITH AN INDIVIDUAL CHOOSING TO CENSOR WHAT THEY OR THEIR CHILDREN WATCH.
"Government Censorship" = evil.
"Personal Censorship" = freedom.
Somewhere along the way we have seemed to confused the two. Look, politics and political views aside. Taking away personal censorship and forcing people to accept content is an extremely bad thing. You have to look at such laws and concepts from an either or view. You may think these parents are wrong for wanting to censor certain content and that they should not be able to edit said content or even avoid it. But I am sure you'd hate the reverse. How many of the people ranting against this personal censorship have the "Foxnews" channel skipped/blocked out of their channel listings? Would it be right if someone told you that you could not choose to do so?
Come on folks...can we have liberty before politics!!!!
Slashdot can we have "News for Nerds" without the political slants. Otherwise, we should consider changing the name to "Slantdot". Which would be a crying shame. I love Slashdot because it's filled with geek news instead of the constant glutt of political news. I don't mind if an issue is inherently political (ie: politics and Diebold voting machines). But I am tired of submissions which have to twist 359 degrees in order to turn the topic into something political.
*blech*
- Saj
"Where it bugs me is when they start telling me I have to live according to their rules."
Nothing about this is to force you to do so. Nothing says "everyone must join x or y community. It's merely to provide an opportunity for like people help rate and review and approve.
The only ones I hear trying to force someone to live by their rules in this case are the ones decrying this as censorship and saying it must be stopped.
Funny, my TV already has that feature. I don't turn the TV to Fox News, and strangly enough, Fox News doesn't appear on my television.