Slashdot Mirror


Apple Sued For Man's Porn Addiction

coolnumbr12 writes "Chris Sevier, a 36-year-old man from Tennessee, got so addicted to porn videos that his wife took his children and left him. Now he has sued Apple saying the company failed to install any filter in its devices to prevent his addiction. In a 50-page complaint, Sevier calls Apple a 'silent poisoner' responsible for the proliferation of 'arousal addiction, sex trafficking, prostitution, and countless numbers of destroyed lives.' Sevier is seeking damages from Apple, but said he we will drop the lawsuit if Apple agrees to sell devices with a 'safe mode.'"

5 of 509 comments (clear)

  1. False Flag by digitrev · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Normally, I'm not this paranoid, but this reads like a false flag operation by some religious group looking to get filters installed by default. At the very least, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that they're helping fund this insane lawsuit.

    --
    Cynical Idealist
    1. Re:False Flag by CanHasDIY · · Score: 3, Interesting

      False flag for those who do not know is what the government or any organization does to distract the not-so-smart people while a more sinister plan is enacted. In short: "Look a flying saucer!" meanwhile "BANG!" something blows up.

      Incorrect:

      False flag (or black flag) describes covert military or paramilitary operations designed to deceive in such a way that the operations appear as though they are being carried out by other entities, groups or nations than those who actually planned and executed them.

      Re-using your example: Government agents blow up a hospital and make it appear that a flying saucer (or Al Queda, some militia group, etc.) was actually to blame.

      --
      An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
    2. Re:False Flag by datavirtue · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I acknowledge the nature of an "unseen" world where ideas and thought originate but for which we have no physical proof--some call it "spiritual." I do not believe in it however as I'm still learning more about nature every day. I do not secretly long for the death of those who do not see as I do like the acolytes of these fundamentalist sects do. I grew up in a fundamentalist sect which many people have great things to say about its people, but the truth is that they taught their people that those not in the sect where damned to certain death by god and those real, live, grown up, supposedly adult people believe it and in essence hate and judge their fellowman in their hearts as unworthy of life (while acting perfectly nice to their face). If you think that devout religious people do not view you as a piece of shit then you are wrong. In their eyes you are as good as dead and deserve worse.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
  2. Let's add by SirGarlon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Let's add that the US media run the most shocking, bizarre, or outrage-causing stories they can find, regardless of the actual importance of the events. Since our population is over 300 million, you can manage to find a couple of those stories every day if you have thousands of reporters scouring the country. Then they harp on those stories for weeks. This gives the impression that everyone in the USA is some kind of freak.

    What disturbs me is the number of people here who believe it -- who carry a gun because they actually believe they'll get attacked, or who think they'll get sued if someone spills hot coffee.

    So perhaps stupid lawsuits like this occur (rarely) in other countries as well, but the media don't deem them newsworthy so you don't hear about them.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
  3. Re:factually false by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    First of all I said "The *Bible* teaches hate". I don't know why you chose to misinterpret what I said. The fact is that Christians could have simply omitted the old testament from their holy book. They chose to keep, and are therefore subject to criticisms of the old testament.

    The "ancient Jewish scriptures" didn't simply acknowledge that hate existed. They are included in your Bible as the word of God, and command hate. If you don't think the old testament should be included in the Bible, maybe you should create your own sect of Christianity as many others have done.

    Even if you did this, it wouldn't mean that Christianity was only love. It would only mean that your version of Christianity was only love. Everyone else's version would still be a mix of hate and love, until you converted them to your version.

    Second of all, the new testament also has some pretty terrible stuff in it. On the whole it looks quite progressive compared to the old testament, but compared with modern sensibilities it is barbaric.

    Thirdly it is all irrelevant anyway because it's not real. Religion evolves. The leaders will continue to have "divine revelations" of new scripture or new interpretations of scripture in order to continuously drag this antiquated mythology into the present, ever diluting and politically correcting it's message.

    How much can you change Christianity and still have it count as Christianity? They've already gotten rid of genocide, slavery, mysogeny, through new interpretations. Maybe we can get rid of miracles and Jesus and God.

    The new message can be this:

    Sure Jesus was just a man. That's why his teachings were full of flaws that contradict our current knowledge and sense of morality. We modern Christians are able to fix these flaws in a way that we think Jesus (if he lived today) might approve. We still believe in the golden rule and being compassionate, but we've grown out of the idea of supernatural deities as childish and primitive.