Starbucks and McDonald's Announce Porn Blocks On Their Wi-Fi Networks (cnn.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNN Money: Anti-pornography groups have succeeded in their efforts to get Starbucks and McDonald's to block porn on the chains' Wi-Fi networks..."We had not heard from our customers that this was an issue, but we saw an opportunity that is consistent with our goal of providing an enjoyable experience for families," McDonald's said in a statement... Starbucks said Friday it's will do so the same thing at its company-owned stores around the globe as well. "Once we determine that our customers can access our free Wi-Fi in a way that also doesn't involuntarily block unintended content, we will implement this in our stores," said a Starbucks spokesperson. "In the meantime, we reserve the right to stop any behavior that interferes with our customer experience, including what is accessed on our free Wi-Fi..."
Meanwhile, this week, the Republican Party officially added the "public health crisis" of porn to its platform.
Meanwhile, this week, the Republican Party officially added the "public health crisis" of porn to its platform.
next any union sites / labor law sites
... only that they didn't already have a content block like this up already. (I'm sure it was already against the click-through ToS, but that's basically meaningless anyway.) There's nothing unreasonable about this. It's a public place, it's a private service, etc. I seem to recall a case a while back about public libraries being OK with blocking this on community-standards grounds in some jurisdictions.
And seriously, if you need to go to McDonalds and configure a VPN to watch porn you should probably try to put that effort into improving your career prospects so you can afford an internet connection at home.
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
Now that might be a public health problem if you spooged on the table.
BTW, do people really surf porn in those places?
All of the celebrated "municipal WiFi" and "community Internet" will do the same before you can say: "Statism".
You have been warned.
VPN? Is that something you'd use to get around our laws, citizen? Well, let's make that illegal too...
Oh, and hate speech should not be allowed to travel over taxpayer-funded networks either, should it be? We like it wholesome in this town.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
"Once we determine that our customers can access our free Wi-Fi in a way that also doesn't involuntarily block unintended content".
Meanwhile, this week, the Republican Party officially added the "public health crisis" of porn to its official platform.
Ah, the American people easily distracted by horseshit issues.
This is so absolutely cool!
Who gets to be the first to sue McDonalds or Starbucks for not preventing a piece of porn from getting through, since they're now taking explicit responsibility for the content served over their computer networks?
But someone watching a violent movie, which won't be blocked, is okay for the kid to see, though, right?
and everything to do with limiting bandwidth and exposure (there's a pun in there somewhere). I'm guessing they got a few cease and desists from porn companies for folks bit torrenting stuff. As an added bonus you don't have creepy dudes huffing and puffing at a McDonalds or Starbucks (well, not as many anyway)
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"Oh, that's just that Game of Thrones show, honey." You, know, that violent show with nudity that won't be blocked by this policy.
Quite the contrary. When some porn slips through the filter they now may have some legal liabilitiy.
Not that I eat at McDonalds anymore..
Me neither, I always use the drive-thru
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
I've eaten at McD's many times and not once have I seen someone watching porn there. Also, it's not the sort of environment that makes sense for watching that content; you don't have any privacy to do the sort of things that someone watching porn tends to want to do.
What's the point?
I think blocking porn videos in their stores isn't unreasonable. The idea of someone taking their kid to McDonald's and have to sit near some perv watching porn because FREEDOM seems wrong to me. If you want to watch porn, or in general surf any and all sites, do it on your own Interne connection..
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
This is a free country, if I want to watch porn at McDonalds then so be it!!!!
You seem to forget that it's a free country for McDonald's too. They are under no obligation to cooperate with your pathetic need to watch porn on their property.
And seriously, if you really are so desperate that you need to watch porn at McDonald's then you need to go play in traffic or get serious psychiatric help. Time and place people. Time and place.
So in short, they are determining and deciding on what constitutes an enjoyable experience for their clients.
Yes they are. If you have a problem with that, take your business (and your porn) elsewhere. And frankly I agree with them. McDonald's is not the appropriate place for watching porn and never will be. You seem to have a profound entitlement complex if their actions actually offend you.
I am not sying they do not reserve the right to do whatever they want on their network, but diseminating the mesage this way doesn't cut it for me.
So you are saying you think it is a good idea to watch porn in a McDonald's and how dare they prevent it. Otherwise there is no reason for you to care at all.
They are not deciding what is or isn't good for you. They are deciding what is good for them and they have every right to do so. The message they are sending is that of a family and kid friendly place.
That, and they don't want anybody confused when you ask for a Big Mac.
The other half of the quote you provided is that they are spending money to "fix" a problem that may not have existed.
They are doing it to head off any lawsuits that might potentially arise. You can be sure the first time some mom observes someone watching porn in front of her kids using McDonald's wifi that a lawsuit and tons of bad PR would follow. Taking reasonable measures to block this problem before it happens is a very sensible thing to do. If you don't like it, don't shop there. But frankly if you actually have a problem with this you probably need psychiatric help.
Except this really doesn't constitute McDonalds or Starbucks "deciding what's good for you" at all. They're simply exercising some control over what they let you do with THEIR Internet connection. Taken to the extreme, you could cry foul that your local Mexican restaurant keeps deciding what kind of music you want to hear by piping in only Hispanic music, when you actually prefer punk rock. But no ... it's their place and their right to craft the type of dining experience they want it to have.
To my knowledge, none of these chain restaurants have ever put out pamphlets, posters or other advertising advising you to stop watching porn. They just don't want you to do it on their connection while eating there. That's perfectly reasonable.
The $15/hour minimum wage is just a placeholder for now in the US Democratic platform. The actual objective is to get a Guaranteed Minimum Income for everyone. I'm not sure whether they think it should only apply to citizens.
And what exactly is "porn" again? The Venus de Milo? Greta Garbo in a swimsuit? Protest coverage? Dancing?
I'm guessing your parents never had The Talk with you if you are actually trying to use this irrelevant nonsense as an argument.
In this case "porn" is whatever McDonald's defines it to be. It's their property and they can do what they like with it. If you don't like it go elsewhere. If they lose business they might reconsider but I'm pretty sure they won't miss you or your porn.
No it's not, it's perfectly rational. Violence is, by and large, something to be avoided throughout your life. As such, fictional depictions of violence will not, by and large, change behavioral patterns. Whereas sex is something the vast majority of society will participate in, and there have been plenty of cases shown where porn consumption changes expectations of sexual experiences and relationships, generally for the worse.
Provide a separate area for people to view porn.
You could have little stalls with doors for privacy and actually charge them a quarter every 5 minutes or so.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
You gotta remember who you're talking to.
You are welcome on my lawn.
There are some large countries in the world that have very strict bans on pornography. Specifically ones where Islam is the religion mandated by the government. Now look how well-behaved the youngsters who grew up there act towards women. How they don't need draconic measures to be kept from living out their sexual fantasies violently. Oh, you find that's not quite the case? Well, then maybe banning pornography is just outright stupid and harmful.
This is a free country, if I want to watch porn at McDonalds then so be it!!!!
Utah recently passed a law making viewing pornography punishable by fines and 30 days in jail for "repeat offenders". This is a statement made by Paul Horner, a spokesman for Gov. Herbert:
First time offenders will see fines of $100-$500, depending on the quantity of pornography or the amount of digital graphic content seized on the criminal's computer. Repeat offenders can expect 30 days in jail or worse, depending on what type of pornography is found in the individual's possession. Missionary style pornography will result in a fine or up to 30 days in jail, while pornography that involves any kind of homogayness, that being sodomy or Devil worshipping, will result in long-term prison sentences. Law enforcement will also be working closely with local ISPs and the NSA to monitor those who search out porn on the internet. We will win the war on porn and masturbation.
The legislation was introduced by State Sen. Todd Weiler, who was on the Family Research Council's "Washington Watch" program, specifically complaining about McDonalds:
TODD WEILER: McDonalds has free wi-fi, unfiltered wi-fi, in all of their locations, and I've had mothers in my Senate district call me and say, "I have filters in my home, I've come to find out that my teen's at McDonalds with a tablet, looking at porn!" And I said to McDonalds, "you're a family restaurant and you market to children! Why would you want to be a purveyor of pornography? And I think they're going to change that. And I think, you know, we also have to look at the libraries. And I'm glad you, sir [FRC] did that. I think it's a bill we need to sponsor, in Utah, because you know many of our libraries, you know, the librarians will put their hands over their hearts and talk about the First Amendment and yet if these libraries and these McDonalds were giving cigarettes to our children, we'd all be up in arms, we'd be picketing them, But somehow it's okay if they deliver pornography to them."
TONY PERKINS [host]: Yeah, yeah, not only that, but you know how we've had all this outrage over "second-hand smoke". You don't even have to access the porn yourself to be sitting in the booth next to somebody or in the you know at the table at the public library next to someone and that was the testimony we had, that you had people that would be accessing it and you had kids walking by or families, and they'd be exposed to it as well. So if it's a public facility, there's some sense that the public has a right not to be confronted by this.
TODD WEILER: Yeah, and that's what I think that's often lost in the First Amendment discussion, because because someone may have the First Amendment right, according to the U.S. Supreme Court, to view pornography, but what about my First Amendment right to not view it? And, you know, David Cameron, in England, which is a country much more progressive than we are on issues of sexuality and nudity, David Cameron met with the Internet service providers in England two years ago and asked them to change the Internet to a default setting of no-porn, and to force the user to opt in to porn. That's something I'd like the U.S. to gravitate toward, and I've already talked with Senator Orrin Hatch about working with me on that.
Boobies are not for little kids!!!!^11111
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
No, I prefer In-N-Out Burger.
You are welcome on my lawn.