Looks like I'm the unlucky one here. Unfortunately my Thinkgeek order still hasn't arrived. And after waiting 6 weeks since ordering and 4 weeks since the bill hitting my CC I'm not too hopefull of ever receiving it (with airmail posting)
Well under existing rules for classification of video content something like Jennicam would be classified at the 'highest possible classification' for possible content.. So it is possible that she will be naked at any time, therefore it will get a rating that reflects that 'possibility'. So Jennicam would definately be a 'prohibited' site. Bye bye slashdot.
Of course you can not watch a child 24 hours a day, that would be unreasonable. It is also unreasonable to have the government do this for you either.
Think of it like this in terms of going to the movies:
A child can not go to the movies and watch an 18+ movie, and as parents you know this to be the case, so you feel safe letting them go to the movies alone/with friends. This 18+ rating of course still lets adults watch any movie they want without restriction.
With the proposals this situation changes (of course it doesn't actually apply to movies). A child will be unable to watch any 18+ movie but neither will any adult! Is this what you want? To have a government dictate what you can and can't view? I understand you wish to protect your children but there ARE other solutions that don't restrict the basic rights of other individuals.
No I am not a teenager, no I'm not a 'prime consumer of porn'. I am mearly a person who sees this proposed legislation as an attack on my basic rights as an individual to view/access any material that I wish.
My ultimate concern is the enforcement of proxy use at all ISPs to filter material on a 'best guess' basis. Can you imagine how many non-offensive sites could be blocked? A please don't tell me this won't happen, we already know it does/will.
Legislation is good if it is implemented for a sound reason, this legistlation is designed for the sole purpose to cater for the demands of an indivudual independant senator who holds the balance of power over the government. If the government did not require this individuals vote to pass the proposed GST then this 'censorship legislation' would not be at the stage it is now.
Slashdot Mirror
Looks like I'm the unlucky one here. Unfortunately my Thinkgeek order still hasn't arrived. And after waiting 6 weeks since ordering and 4 weeks since the bill hitting my CC I'm not too hopefull of ever receiving it (with airmail posting)
Sigh, such is life.
-Brad
Well under existing rules for classification of video content something like Jennicam would be classified at the 'highest possible classification' for possible content.. So it is possible that she will be naked at any time, therefore it will get a rating that reflects that 'possibility'. So Jennicam would definately be a 'prohibited' site. Bye bye slashdot.
Of course you can not watch a child 24 hours a day, that would be unreasonable. It is also unreasonable to have the government do this for you either.
Think of it like this in terms of going to the movies:
A child can not go to the movies and watch an 18+ movie, and as parents you know this to be the case, so you feel safe letting them go to the movies alone/with friends. This 18+ rating of course still lets adults watch any movie they want without restriction.
With the proposals this situation changes (of course it doesn't actually apply to movies). A child will be unable to watch any 18+ movie but neither will any adult! Is this what you want? To have a government dictate what you can and can't view? I understand you wish to protect your children but there ARE other solutions that don't restrict the basic rights of other individuals.
No I am not a teenager, no I'm not a 'prime consumer of porn'. I am mearly a person who sees this proposed legislation as an attack on my basic rights as an individual to view/access any material that I wish.
My ultimate concern is the enforcement of proxy use at all ISPs to filter material on a 'best guess' basis. Can you imagine how many non-offensive sites could be blocked? A please don't tell me this won't happen, we already know it does/will.
Legislation is good if it is implemented for a sound reason, this legistlation is designed for the sole purpose to cater for the demands of an indivudual independant senator who holds the balance of power over the government. If the government did not require this individuals vote to pass the proposed GST then this 'censorship legislation' would not be at the stage it is now.
Brad.