"It seems the only difference between then and now is that we're up against the part of the movie industry that isn't run by the Cult. (Although MPAA is just as clueless about how the 'net works as the Cult was, they seem to be somewhat more adaptable, albeit far less entertaining.;-) "
Yeah... the PMRC and the Religious Right aren't Cults? Although the Scientologists are more of a cult, really. The MPAA ratings system was a product of the PMRC, just like the PARENTAL ADVISORY tipper stickers on cds.
The scientologists are very entertaining, but the PMRC and the Religious Right are really just as fun to watch. Read their definition of punk rock. See what they classify as occult. They actually told parents "If You find a punk rock cd or tape in your son's room, just replace it with a Phil Collins tape" I'm paraphrasing, but that's close. They actually said Phil Collins. That's how out of touch these people are. What is scary is that these people have real power out there. They control a lot of the media.
Want to hear some more about the PMRC and the Religious Right? Go download some of Jello Biafra's talks about it on napster. Very informative. (Buy the cd too... if anyone needs support, it's him!)
Look at how the MPAA judges movies. Do you know how many people know who judges the movies? 1. Jack does. They aren't worried about their public opinion, because there is no public opinion. Anyone who knows about this is against the MPAA, or Working for the MPAA. The lack of news coverage can be explained just as easily.
I'm taking bets on how high this counter gets by midnight tonight. I watched 250 hits go by in about 5 minutes. The lowest I saw it at was 7442, and at posting it's at 7688. This has been there since december 98.
I'd love to hear what it was at before/. posted this.
"So long as there are TCP/IP PORTS, there will be ways to transfer files. Unless Sony plans on suing every ISP that uses a TCP/IP based internet out of existance in favor of ones that use another protocal"
Ever used any of their stereo equipment? they have a way of changing the look and feel or things just a little so they look like the norm, but are propriatary. Like their earphone jacks on high end cd-player portables. Like what they failed to do with minidiscs.
I can see it now: New! SonyIP! Knowing them, it would be something like SUPERip, or FUNip.
This has to be the first time I have agreed with someone on the use of censorware. No mention of "evils". No false hope that kids won't look (someday). Even the admission that normal people look at porn sites. And for this use, even current censorware is fine. Great post!
The bottom line is that the people trying to censor porn are trying to make it "evil" to look at porn. Pornography is a derrogatory term, so is Smut. "Adult Entertainment" is probably a better term, or even "Adult", but that is neutral. Do you hear them saying the software stops Adult Entertainment? Nope... It stops Smut, Porn, Pornography, Disturbing and disgusting, Inapproriate and Unwanted...
It protects your children from evil.
That's what they want you to see.
It's the same thing enviromentalists did with recycling. "If you don't want to recycle, you don't care about the earth, and that means you don't care about the children, because it's going to be theirs..." clever. Even though the utter ineffectiveness has been shown. Like the huge amount of enrgy required to make a paper cup instead of styrofoam, and the amount of coal that gets burnt to make that paper cup. Coal that is blamed for much more than styrofoam ever will. But enough digressing.
The fact that you know now that you have a babysitter honest enough to fess up is probably more valuable. That had to be a tough call for her to make.
You make it seem like porn was something that wasn't so bad when you were a kid looking at it, though your parents would probably thought it just as horrific as youare portraying the "...graphic and violent depictions of sex that are available on the net." Anyone else see a trend here?
I mean, the magazines that you saw when you were a kid probably amounted, in their minds to the same urgency that you display saying "...that there are mountains and mountains of adult material standing in front of my children and their peers, just screaming out for their attention." and they will probably have the same concerns in a few decades when porn reaches even further.
Nothing is new here, No sexual ideas are being invented here. It's all been done. It's all been seen. Every other form of media is increased, so naturally, porn would too. The one that has been done more than anything else, is the arguement that 'it was different when I was young'
You wouldn't want your child to see what you have seen and make their own informed decision? You would rather that your child not do what YOU obviously did? You saw it, and decided that you didn't like that. What's wrong with letting a child do the same? Face it, kids are going to make up their minds about all of this, just like you did regardless of what your parents said. They'll survive it and be stronger because of it. The ultimate alternative is that your child blindly beleives what you say, and doesn't try to find out for themself... you want that? That's just what we need, more sheep that believe whatever you tell them. Children that aspire to grow up to be spectators.
That's the thing I don't se a lot of discussion about here. There is no possibility of no censorship. It's just where you personally draw the line. Someone in power will project their views of where that line should be. Censorship is just a label people attach to someone that drew that line that obstructs something that you may want to see. The one thing I can guarantee is that if you make a way that the child can't see something, no matter how disgusting you think it is, if the child knows that something is there that you think he shouldn't see, something "forbidden" it will be more alluring to the child. About the best chance you have that the child will accept your views is to let the child know what you think, and let the child see for themself, if they want to. The only stipulation that I would attach is the same thing that my mom told me when I found my dad's stash of magazines: Women are not like that, women are not objects. And above all, leave what you think of these pictures seperate of the real world. Although, I would have figured all that out myself, painfully.
Yeah... I gotta find that song. =) But I am willing to bet that addias didn't pay for that at all, but got a ton of free publicity for it. (Although I only saw that video ONCE.) The other one that I remember was that song about liking a girl that wears abercrombie and fitch. I don't remember the band or details, that isn't my style of music. They didn't play that either. That was a little more blatant though.
Man is a part of nature. Resources are meant to be used. I don't see "Man" hurting himself from using resources. Nature is a luxury item... there is plenty of it where cities are not. Hell, 9 out of 10 people in the world will never make or recieve a phone call in their LIFETIME. You think they are hurting nature? No. Think what we do really has an impact on anything but a very small portion? Get some perspective. "Mother Earth"? Please. Did you get that cute little quote right out of your Greenpeace newsletter?
MTV has a "No-Ad" policy in videos. I remember because Neil Young was told his video for "This Bud's For You" would not be run because it had all sorts of advertising icons in it (Making fun of them.). Eventually, they allowed the video, and he won the Best Video award at their video music awards. Kinda funny huh?
>I think you missed his point. Email doesn't make the USPS irrelevant; companies like FedEx make the USPS irrelevant. Or >would, if the USPS didn't have a legal monopoly on first class mail.
I read somewhere that the USPS, in volume, does what fedex does in a year every day. Does this coincide with your facts? You seem to compare the two as equals here.
Yeah, I know what you mean. Bill Hicks was talking once about how the Fundamentalst Christians said that the world was only 12,000 years old and dinasuars were just put here to "test our faith". Same aruguement. The idea that there is a god above that is putting us through some mental obsticle course becuase "God works in myserious ways!" I'm going to hell for that one... This is nothing, you want hypocrisy in religion? I grew up in Utah. Those guys are the worst... =)
I am going to invent a helmet that kids can wear that digitally blocks out everything that I think is bad. I'll put it on my kids so that they never hear or see anything bad in their life until they are 18. This will make the world a better place. Of course, this will have to be closed source, because I wouldn't want someone using their morals instead of mine! Just think, a few generations of that, no one will even remember what sex and violence and profanity is. Right? (Make sure Orin Hatch never reads this!)
I am going to invent a helmet that kids can wear that digitally blocks out everything that I think is bad. I'll put it on my kids so that they never hear or see anything bad in their life until they are 18. This will make the world a better place. Of course, this will have to be closed source, because I wouldn't want someone using their morals instead of mine! Just think, a few generations of that, no one will even remember what sex and violence and profanity is. Right? (Make sure Orin Hatch never reads this!)
None of this would have even happened if Al Gore didn't go and invent the internet. Jello for president in 2000! If only we could get Henry Rollins to be his VP... =)
It nice to see that there are still free thinkers out there that aren't giving into the greenpeace BS. This sort of thinking is exactly what I think we need more of IMHO. The one question I have in reply is why take the hydrogen here at all? Why not just have the reactor on the moon and pipe energy back? It's probably easier to collect energy than hydrogen. I'll just go get started on the fusion reactor. =) If you want a good source for hydrogen, scientific american reported a story about the sheets of hydrogen laiden ice in the extreme depths of the ocean. Seems a little more practical to me than the moon unless the reactor was there too. There is my two cents...
My Question to Metallica: When CD's were first released, we were told that the price was going to come down to well below the prices of tapes at the time, and the medium just needed to catch on. The price has not fallen, and for the most part remains at $14-$18 for a CD that realy only costs $1-$2 to create, plus a percentage that goes to you. Why hasn't the band fought for this issue if it really goes care about it fans, and you are not just a bunch of money grubbing aging alternative icons? When the band TLC came out with their first album, they sold nearly 7 million albums, and they were screwed so badly on their contract that they went broke while making a lot of record company exec's very rich. This has nothing to do with artists losing money, this is about the RIAA losing a 500%+ markup, and customers finally getting some control over this far too corporate market.
Slashdot Mirror
"...hiring a few minimum security wanna-be rent-a-drunks."
All the sudden it's WRONG to be drunk at work?!?! WTF man... quit pickin on the drunks. =)
"It seems the only difference between then and now is that we're up against the part of the movie industry that isn't run by the Cult. (Although MPAA is just as clueless about how the 'net works as the Cult was, they seem to be somewhat more adaptable, albeit far less entertaining. ;-) "
Yeah... the PMRC and the Religious Right aren't Cults? Although the Scientologists are more of a cult, really. The MPAA ratings system was a product of the PMRC, just like the PARENTAL ADVISORY tipper stickers on cds.
The scientologists are very entertaining, but the PMRC and the Religious Right are really just as fun to watch. Read their definition of punk rock. See what they classify as occult. They actually told parents "If You find a punk rock cd or tape in your son's room, just replace it with a Phil Collins tape" I'm paraphrasing, but that's close. They actually said Phil Collins. That's how out of touch these people are. What is scary is that these people have real power out there. They control a lot of the media.
Want to hear some more about the PMRC and the Religious Right? Go download some of Jello Biafra's talks about it on napster. Very informative. (Buy the cd too... if anyone needs support, it's him!)
Look at how the MPAA judges movies. Do you know how many people know who judges the movies? 1. Jack does. They aren't worried about their public opinion, because there is no public opinion. Anyone who knows about this is against the MPAA, or Working for the MPAA. The lack of news coverage can be explained just as easily.
I'm taking bets on how high this counter gets by midnight tonight. I watched 250 hits go by in about 5 minutes. The lowest I saw it at was 7442, and at posting it's at 7688. This has been there since december 98. I'd love to hear what it was at before /. posted this.
"So long as there are TCP/IP PORTS, there will be ways to transfer files. Unless Sony plans on suing every ISP that uses a TCP/IP based internet out of existance in favor of ones that use another protocal"
Ever used any of their stereo equipment? they have a way of changing the look and feel or things just a little so they look like the norm, but are propriatary. Like their earphone jacks on high end cd-player portables. Like what they failed to do with minidiscs.
I can see it now: New! SonyIP! Knowing them, it would be something like SUPERip, or FUNip.
This has to be the first time I have agreed with someone on the use of censorware. No mention of "evils". No false hope that kids won't look (someday). Even the admission that normal people look at porn sites. And for this use, even current censorware is fine. Great post!
The bottom line is that the people trying to censor porn are trying to make it "evil" to look at porn. Pornography is a derrogatory term, so is Smut. "Adult Entertainment" is probably a better term, or even "Adult", but that is neutral. Do you hear them saying the software stops Adult Entertainment? Nope... It stops Smut, Porn, Pornography, Disturbing and disgusting, Inapproriate and Unwanted...
It protects your children from evil.
That's what they want you to see.
It's the same thing enviromentalists did with recycling. "If you don't want to recycle, you don't care about the earth, and that means you don't care about the children, because it's going to be theirs..." clever. Even though the utter ineffectiveness has been shown. Like the huge amount of enrgy required to make a paper cup instead of styrofoam, and the amount of coal that gets burnt to make that paper cup. Coal that is blamed for much more than styrofoam ever will. But enough digressing.
The fact that you know now that you have a babysitter honest enough to fess up is probably more valuable. That had to be a tough call for her to make.
You make it seem like porn was something that wasn't so bad when you were a kid looking at it, though your parents would probably thought it just as horrific as youare portraying the "...graphic and violent depictions of sex that are available on the net." Anyone else see a trend here?
I mean, the magazines that you saw when you were a kid probably amounted, in their minds to the same urgency that you display saying "...that there are mountains and mountains of adult material standing in front of my children and their peers, just screaming out for their attention." and they will probably have the same concerns in a few decades when porn reaches even further.
Nothing is new here, No sexual ideas are being invented here. It's all been done. It's all been seen. Every other form of media is increased, so naturally, porn would too. The one that has been done more than anything else, is the arguement that 'it was different when I was young'
No need. Go through those sites. How many are already gone, or offtopic? I found one working link in all of that that wasn't BS. kinda funny, huh?
You wouldn't want your child to see what you have seen and make their own informed decision? You would rather that your child not do what YOU obviously did? You saw it, and decided that you didn't like that. What's wrong with letting a child do the same? Face it, kids are going to make up their minds about all of this, just like you did regardless of what your parents said. They'll survive it and be stronger because of it. The ultimate alternative is that your child blindly beleives what you say, and doesn't try to find out for themself... you want that? That's just what we need, more sheep that believe whatever you tell them. Children that aspire to grow up to be spectators.
That's the thing I don't se a lot of discussion about here. There is no possibility of no censorship. It's just where you personally draw the line. Someone in power will project their views of where that line should be. Censorship is just a label people attach to someone that drew that line that obstructs something that you may want to see. The one thing I can guarantee is that if you make a way that the child can't see something, no matter how disgusting you think it is, if the child knows that something is there that you think he shouldn't see, something "forbidden" it will be more alluring to the child. About the best chance you have that the child will accept your views is to let the child know what you think, and let the child see for themself, if they want to. The only stipulation that I would attach is the same thing that my mom told me when I found my dad's stash of magazines: Women are not like that, women are not objects. And above all, leave what you think of these pictures seperate of the real world. Although, I would have figured all that out myself, painfully.
lets see them... www.shouldexist.org
Yeah... I gotta find that song. =) But I am willing to bet that addias didn't pay for that at all, but got a ton of free publicity for it. (Although I only saw that video ONCE.) The other one that I remember was that song about liking a girl that wears abercrombie and fitch. I don't remember the band or details, that isn't my style of music. They didn't play that either. That was a little more blatant though.
Man is a part of nature. Resources are meant to be used. I don't see "Man" hurting himself from using resources. Nature is a luxury item... there is plenty of it where cities are not. Hell, 9 out of 10 people in the world will never make or recieve a phone call in their LIFETIME. You think they are hurting nature? No. Think what we do really has an impact on anything but a very small portion? Get some perspective. "Mother Earth"? Please. Did you get that cute little quote right out of your Greenpeace newsletter?
MTV has a "No-Ad" policy in videos. I remember because Neil Young was told his video for "This Bud's For You" would not be run because it had all sorts of advertising icons in it (Making fun of them.). Eventually, they allowed the video, and he won the Best Video award at their video music awards. Kinda funny huh?
>I think you missed his point. Email doesn't make the USPS irrelevant; companies like FedEx make the USPS irrelevant. Or >would, if the USPS didn't have a legal monopoly on first class mail.
I read somewhere that the USPS, in volume, does what fedex does in a year every day. Does this coincide with your facts? You seem to compare the two as equals here.
Yeah, I know what you mean. Bill Hicks was talking once about how the Fundamentalst Christians said that the world was only 12,000 years old and dinasuars were just put here to "test our faith". Same aruguement. The idea that there is a god above that is putting us through some mental obsticle course becuase "God works in myserious ways!" I'm going to hell for that one... This is nothing, you want hypocrisy in religion? I grew up in Utah. Those guys are the worst... =)
I am going to invent a helmet that kids can wear that digitally blocks out everything that I think is bad. I'll put it on my kids so that they never hear or see anything bad in their life until they are 18. This will make the world a better place. Of course, this will have to be closed source, because I wouldn't want someone using their morals instead of mine! Just think, a few generations of that, no one will even remember what sex and violence and profanity is. Right? (Make sure Orin Hatch never reads this!)
I am going to invent a helmet that kids can wear that digitally blocks out everything that I think is bad. I'll put it on my kids so that they never hear or see anything bad in their life until they are 18. This will make the world a better place. Of course, this will have to be closed source, because I wouldn't want someone using their morals instead of mine! Just think, a few generations of that, no one will even remember what sex and violence and profanity is. Right? (Make sure Orin Hatch never reads this!)
None of this would have even happened if Al Gore didn't go and invent the internet. Jello for president in 2000! If only we could get Henry Rollins to be his VP... =)
Any chance someone has a joystick imput for this?
It nice to see that there are still free thinkers out there that aren't giving into the greenpeace BS. This sort of thinking is exactly what I think we need more of IMHO. The one question I have in reply is why take the hydrogen here at all? Why not just have the reactor on the moon and pipe energy back? It's probably easier to collect energy than hydrogen. I'll just go get started on the fusion reactor. =) If you want a good source for hydrogen, scientific american reported a story about the sheets of hydrogen laiden ice in the extreme depths of the ocean. Seems a little more practical to me than the moon unless the reactor was there too. There is my two cents...
My Question to Metallica: When CD's were first released, we were told that the price was going to come down to well below the prices of tapes at the time, and the medium just needed to catch on. The price has not fallen, and for the most part remains at $14-$18 for a CD that realy only costs $1-$2 to create, plus a percentage that goes to you. Why hasn't the band fought for this issue if it really goes care about it fans, and you are not just a bunch of money grubbing aging alternative icons? When the band TLC came out with their first album, they sold nearly 7 million albums, and they were screwed so badly on their contract that they went broke while making a lot of record company exec's very rich. This has nothing to do with artists losing money, this is about the RIAA losing a 500%+ markup, and customers finally getting some control over this far too corporate market.