Airlines Plan To Filter, Censor In-Flight Internet Access

BlueMerle notes that the much-vaunted arrival of internet access in the friendly skies may come at the cost of heavy content filtering by the Airlines. Ars Technica's commentary is prompted by an Associated Press article which does its best to make checking your email seem sinister. "Seat 17D is yapping endlessly on an Internet phone call. Seat 16F is flaming Seat 16D with expletive-laden chats. Seat 16E is too busy surfing porn sites to care. Seat 17C just wants to sleep. Welcome to the promise of the Internet at 33,000 feet -- and the questions of etiquette, openness and free speech that airlines and service providers will have to grapple with as they bring Internet access to the skies in the coming months."

Comments

OMG censorship!!!

[The_Mystic_For_Real]

God forbid anyone regulate behavior in a situation where they are liable for the results. The airline has 100+ strangers including children and overprotective, on edge, a little under the influence parents. They have a duty to keep order on their plane. I'm not sure that I, while I have no problem with porn and have even *gasp* watched it, would want to see a giant gangbang going on right next to me, while my rowmate eyes it longingly.

Re:OMG censorship!!!

[SterlingSylver]

I support this sort of filtering for the same reasons that I support the rules prohibiting cell phones on planes. Now, ignoring the safety concerns of cell phones, the second that two or three business travelers start competing to be the loudest person so that their incredibly important conference call can hear their thoughts on the Johnson proposal is the second that other passengers start acquiring arguments for reasonable homicide. Idiots on the web can only be an even worse idea.

I don't mind people checking their e-mail, but if airlines wish to enforce civility while I'm paying $150+ for a 1.5 hour flight to DC with a bunch of philistines...I say more power to them.

Re:OMG censorship!!!

[YrWrstNtmr]

Children will see things eventually, so instead of hiding the truth from them, as an adult give them some parallax and understanding on what they are seeing.

The problem with that is that it is not up to you to determine when I should have a teaching moment with my kid.

Do you invite your kids into the room when you and the wife are gettin it on? Do you surf porn with your 6 year old? Have you explained the finer details of tubgirl to her?

Re:OMG censorship!!!

[Albanach]

If every moment isn't a teaching moment for your kid, then you're doing something wrong.

No, sorry. I think you are wrong

Every moment for children tends to be a learning moment, but parents can decide the time, pace and subject for teaching.

As they say, your right to swing your arm ends just before my nose. Equally, your right to watch stuff on a plane ends when it starts to offend or disturb those flying with you.

Re:OMG censorship!!!

[1u3hr]

. I'm not sure that I, while I have no problem with porn and have even *gasp* watched it, would want to see a giant gangbang going on right next to me, while my rowmate eyes it longingly.

As may be. But who, would watch hard core porn in public, a coffeeshop, or such, now? I'm sure it does happen, but this is something that most of us do in privacy, or perhaps with friends. Someone who openly watches hard core porn on a plane should be stopped by the hostesses, the same as if he started masturbating in his seat.

Anyone likely to use their laptop to watch porn could much more easily load it up with a few GB of videos before they leave the ground, rather than see -- buffering -- at inconvenient moments, let alone probably paying a small fortune for the privilege.

So I'm not saying that watching porn is appropriate on a plane, but trying to filter it out of the net is not going to stop it, and we all know the silly side effects of overbroad filters.

Re:OMG censorship!!!

[egomaniac]

Atheists are ipso facto stupid. Like anti-gay fundamentalists, atheists have the ludicrous belief that they can make pronouncements about an emotional phenomenon which they do not experience. All people who even glimpse the complexity of the universe experience awe and wondrous exhilaration with such profundity that it cannot be described as anything other than a religious experience. Einstein understood this. You do not.

Do you believe in Odin? Zeus? Ra? Queztalcoatl? The Great Spirit?

No?

Based on the fact that you're a self-righteous prick, I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that you're Christian. Mankind has dreamed up ten thousand different gods. You don't believe in 9,999 of them. I don't believe in the same 9,999 you don't believe in, plus I also don't believe in the God of Abraham. Evidently not believing in 9,999 gods doesn't make you stupid, but not believing in 10,000 gods makes me stupid.

I'd like to believe that there's some logic or reason behind this, but there's no logic behind religious delusions. Sad that so much time and energy is spent defending fairy tales.

Oh forget about pr0n

[laejoh]

I wonder what would happen if I'd open this on an American airliner? Would people care? Probably, they'd all go nuts!

Laws of own country?

[SerpentMage]

>Besides, even when you are in another country, regardless of their less restrictive laws, you still must abide by the laws of where you claim citizenship, or risk be arrested on your return to home soil.

ehh... No... Otherwise there would be oodles of people getting arrested for smoking pot legally in Holland. When abroad you are actually subject to the laws of that country, not your country of citizenship.

Yes there are situations where a country will act even if the act is not carried out on in the country of citizenship (eg child prostitution) but that is relatively rare.

A citizen is nothing more than the right to vote and not be persecuted by your own government. With respect to the law everybody in the country regardless if they are a citizen or not has to respect them.