Slashdot Mirror
Google-Funded Free Wi-Fi Kiosks Are Scrapping Web Browsing Because Too Many People Were Using it For Porn (businessinsider.com)
This is why New Yorkers can't have nice things. LinkNYC, the initiative to install super-fast wifi hubs in New York City, is suspending web browsing on all its tablets after 8 months due to "inappropriate behavior," the company says, according to a report on BusinessInsider. From the article:Google parent company Alphabet funds LinkNYC through its spinoff Sidewalk Labs. "... Some users have been monopolizing the Link tablets and using them inappropriately, preventing others from being able to use them while frustrating the residents and businesses around them," the company writes in a statement. DNAInfo previously reported that people were using the hubs to watch porn.
Like there's any other use for the Internet.
If I want to watch porn and masturbate at a kiosk, who are you to take away my American freedoms? George Washington fought for my right to masturbate at kiosks.
I bet they found lots of DNA info after people were done with those tablets.
Porn or cat videos. Or playing Candy Crush for hours. Once again, addressing the wrong problem. Why should it matter what I watch on them. The real problem is here is monopolisation of the devices. I can monopolise one of those devices just as easily watching cat videos.
For once. Just once, will somebody look at a problem and address it properly rather than taking a side-swipe at some unrelated hot-button topic?
I'm utterly shocked about this completely unexpected development.
LinkNYC says that it's working with city officials to come up with potential solutions, like time limits, so that it can allow users to browse the web once more. In the meantime, people will still be able to use the tablets to make calls and look at maps.
Who would have guessed that a free service would be abused? It's almost like there should be a word or saying for that. Oh yea, there is: Tragedy of the Commons
This issue seems to come up a lot, doesn't it?
Because US Christians don't like nude or sex.
There, I fixed it for you.
You have it all wrong bro.
Christians love sex. But, they only want sex that is:
1) only performed by married people.
2) who are married to each other
3) are a man and a woman
4) in the missionary position
And, if Catholic,
5) for the purposes of reproduction only. No contraceptives!
Butter my butt and call me toast - who would ever have expected that?
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
The Tradjizzdy of the Commons
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
I wonder when such a service, when offered for free, is subject to net neutrality. Watching art photos in a museum is art porn. Maps of Indian restaurants for those that are palak paneer-deprived is also porn.
The only way to limit this is to curate it, which then removes liability protection for services rendered, if I'm not mistaken.
I understand the purpose, but without curation of some type, it's an open platform for users. Curating it costs $$, and so the ad revenue drops, making it less useful. Oh, wait......
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
It seems that anymore, we're taught that doesn't really exist. Which is a shame. Because it obviously does. =]
Lol
This is just a temporary measure until they come up with a better solution.
Sorry, I don't buy that. If the problem is that some people are over-using the systems preventing others from using them, then completely disabling them for everybody while you look for a better solution is worse than doing nothing. You've turned unavailable for some people in some places at some times to unavailable for all people every place all the time.
There's no question this was a knee jerk reaction to "pr0n is bad!" They're not trying to prevent people from hogging them. They're preventing people from viewing material they consider objectionable.
Who would have guessed that a free service would be abused? It's almost like there should be a word or saying for that. Oh yea, there is: Tragedy of the Commons This issue seems to come up a lot, doesn't it?
I've only ever seen homeless people using these things. I've seen them doing all sorts of things with them - one was signing up for a Twitter account, another was watching music videos on Vimeo or whatever it is and dancing in the street while singing along. I'm not at all surprised that porn is being watched also.
Seriously - the fact that most people use it for porn should tell them that - most people want to watch porn. It's kind of silly to try to act all paternalistic and stuff and say that this is wrong - but in fact apparently it's Google that is wrong and immature, unable to accept a basic truth about the human condition.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
When I was at a Sun Microsystems early in internet growth before the Dot-Com Bust and widespread adoption and growth, the porn industry was one of the largest purchasers of hardware and software. No one liked to talk about it so a lot of people don't know. It is a lot like the oldest profession, far more people demand it than will admit to it and it is big business. HD porn takes a lot of bandwidth just like HD movies. why single out one commercial market from the other? Let people decide what they want to consume: that's free market liberty. And stop being prudes. Don't spend money on it or watch it if you don't like it.
You are quite wrong on point 4, however. While it may be a matter of personal preference for some christians, there is nothing in the Bible that can even remotely be interpreted as condemning other copulatory positions than 'missionary'. This might be a a particular church denomonation's view (similar to the Catholic church's prohibition on artificial birth control), but is not reflective of most even extremely strict Christian views.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
See? This is why we, the unwashed Yankees can not have nice things, while the wise and enlightened Europeans are going to enjoy the Wi-Fi provided by their loving and caring governments.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
From the Christians' point of view, it's not a thing. Just because the government says it is doesn't make it so (unless you're living in Oceania, Eurasia, or Eastasia).
"No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session." -- Judge Gideon J. Tucker
It is not reflective any more. There was a time when some churches did forbid any other position, even the big RC, on the grounds that they could serve only to inflame man's base and sinful lusts.
(Though, popular legend aside, this is not where the term 'missionary position' comes from.)
I live on the stretch of Third Avenue that first got these kiosks. I don't care what people watch on them, but it's a pretty regular thing to see somebody camping out next to one of them. Often they've overturned a trash can or newspaper vending box to use as a seat - though I've seen some wheelchairs being used for more comfortable seating. In any case, they're there for hours at a time, and the overall effect isn't much more appealing than a homeless guy sleeping in a cardboard box...
That said, the whole kiosk thing is a backdoor insertion of extremely bright LED screen ads that draw your eyes to them as they rotate their images multiple times per block as you try to walk up the avenue. And for what? Free wi-fi that requires you to sign in, tracks you, and provides nothing that your phone isn't already providing over the cellular network. I suppose the charging ports are nice - if you're willing to stand there long enough to get a decent charge.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
Their hubs, their rules. This is a classic example of the tragedy of the commons. There's always some douche who wants to abuse it. I'm curious as to why your ire isn't directed at the abusers.
Ahhh. You live in that magic land where everybody can afford smartphones and big data plans to browse and watch videos for hours on end.
How do I get there?
Predating Christianity, popular Jewish folklore concerning Lillith makes it pretty clear that the practice of reverse cowgirl is not good, god fearing behavior from a woman, and will lead to wanton sexual debauchery. (And thus, a woman's place is beneath the man. While not necessarily missionary position, it does put limits in place. Man must be on top, it's tradition!)
More likely they are trying to prevent a backlash - get them pulled quick before some state congressman introduces another 'ban the porn' bill or the local tabloid fills with stories of how Google is endangering children.
Well, no one could have anticipated this. Or at the very least the organization that put up these kiosks would have needed a lot of Internet experience to think that this might happen.
If the problem is that porn is being left on equipment when a user is done I might suggest simply resetting and rebooting the device after each use. That would be easy enough to do with one or more simple sensors and should be done for the security of all users anyway. If it is that Google doesn't like what the users are using the service for, I would suggest stop spying on your users.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
No, the christian bible revises that with no he story of On an.
That dirty bastard refused to get his dead brother's wife preggers, and sprayed his spunk on the ground instead after doing the rhythm method.
God struck him blind for it. ;)
Because Christians don't like nude or sex.
Oh, they like it just fine. They just won't admit it, and the absolutely hate anyone who will.
At least said homeless guy doesn't have time to mug you if he's on the internet kiosk all day.
This space intentionally left blank
Who would have guessed that a free service would be abused? It's almost like there should be a word or saying for that. Oh yea, there is: Tragedy of the Commons
Tragedy of the Commons isn't about this case. Tragedy of the Commons when there's a common resource, and individual self-interest results in that resource being depleted even though that's contrary to the collective group-interest.
This doesn't apply at all in this case. The only plausible resource is "time on the tablet". It's not being depleted at any faster rate by one person using it exclusively then it would be if everyone shared time more equally.
Web browsing, email, and other non video streaming apps take a trivial amount of bandwidth. I allow video streaming on my open wifi for about 10 minutes and then traffic control kicks in making streaming not very pleasant for that user but regular Internet access still works for everyone. Users eventually get with the program and realize they can watch short Youtube videos or stream music all day long but they can't watch Netflix or porn all day. It doesn't matter if it's Netflix or porn anyway.
As opposed to places where people who deny being wankers hang out? Pretty much everybody on the planet is a wanker or a wanker and a liar. If you really aren't masturbating, you probably need to see a doctor or psychiatrist.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
Wow. So much wrong. Let me count the ways...
1) The account of Tamar is in Genesis, which is about as pre-Christian as it gets in the Bible.
2) There is no support for the "sprayed his spunk on the ground", as the exact phrase means something more along the lines of "wasted his semen". He basically didn't do what he was supposed to do with it and wasted it.
3) God didn't strike him blind. Instead, his punishment was death.
4) Why was he killed? Greed and covetousness. He was greedily having extramarital sex with his brother's widow. Covetousness applies as well, since sex with someone other than your wife is evidence of desiring something that isn't yours to have. The provision of brother-in-law marriage was a one-time-only, conception-only arrangement. Onan deviated from that arrangement and was punished with death.
Sadly, many of the people in power pushing for Utopia have no understanding of Human Nature. Lots of suckers fall for the same rhetoric they do, and the same delusional beliefs. "Lone Star, now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb."
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I'm not sure how what is clearly an exaggerated description of some men's genitals or levels of fertility is supposed to indicate that positions other than 'missionary' are disallowed.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Iirc, it was Jewish common law for a brother to take his deceased brother's wife as his own, and then sire a child in his brother's name. The intent was to assure that his brother's widow was cared for (because she likely couldn't remarry in the normal way, having had sex), as well as assure an heir to his brother's lands and flocks.
onan did not want to sire such a child.
Yes it does, it's your stuff. If people abuse it, even in just your opinion, it's your prerogative simply stop making it available. Unless you're promoting that once offered the "community" can *force* you to keep making it available instead of ponying up the resources you were. Is that your position?
Said someone who obviously doesn't know any Christians.
That's mostly my position. 2 distinct points:
* If you offer a community service, that makes you a good person, unless there are a lot of strings attached to the "gift", in which case it makes you a bad person.
* If you offer a community service, and people come to depend on it, you incur a responsibility to keep doing it. You chose to become responsible, and congrats you succeeded.
It's the nature of responsibility that you are required to plan ahead.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Said someone who obviously doesn't know any Christians.
In the biblical sense? Is that plural for a group or serially over a period of time?
There is no right to feel safe thru security vaudeville at the expense of everyone's freedom, privacy and tax money.
Yes it does, it's your stuff. If people abuse it, even in just your opinion, it's your prerogative simply stop making it available. Unless you're promoting that once offered the "community" can *force* you to keep making it available instead of ponying up the resources you were. Is that your position?
They were GRANTED the right to install it on the streets. That comes with a responsibility.
But what they grand-parent post said though was that, it at least takes away the value of the gift. It is like giving your kid a car but then saying it can only be used to vist grandmom and fetch you yourself when your are too drunk at the pub. Sure it your gift and your kid, so you can set any rules you want, but it does take away nearly 100% of the value as a gift.
isn't directed at the abusers.
Was the abuse defined upfront? If I go to an all you can eat dinner is it abuse if I eat all I can eat? If I use a free service, is it abuse that I do what I want with it for free when no restrictions are placed on it up front?
There is someone doing some abusing here, but it's not the people using the service.
That is basically what the tragedy of the commons is about--what happened isn't like giving your kid a car, it's like giving your kid keys to the family car...and having your kid decide that hey, since it's not their car, there's nothing wrong with doing things to it that run up mechanics' and body shop bills...and rarely bringing the car home so you can see what the damage is this time.
See also 'diffusion of responsibility' and other related concepts, though honestly most places deal with this overall problem by having sessions be of explicitly limited length. (As for filters? I'd go with it only applying if you're using the free tablet--or just make it so the sole option you got for browsing on it is a lightweight text-only browser.)
Gee you must be real fun at parties...
If you offer free potatoes, you must take into account that somebody will come with a truck.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
This is just a temporary measure until they come up with a better solution.
Sorry, I don't buy that. If the problem is that some people are over-using the systems preventing others from using them, then completely disabling them for everybody while you look for a better solution is worse than doing nothing. You've turned unavailable for some people in some places at some times to unavailable for all people every place all the time.
No, they're not. You can still use the other functions - wifi services, free calls, and maps - as the poster you responded to points out! You can't do any of those things while someone is hogging the booth with porn (or anything else).
Or simply filter it through a content firewall... just a thought.
I find it shocking that you find it shocking that little people (this includes dwarfs and midgets, I assume) respect others!
In fact, I find it disrespectful to call them 'little people'. :-p
--- "To pee or not to pee, that is the question." ---