yes, fortunate for me that it was, I bought Hitman 2 on Wednesday, and UT2003 on Friday, and both these games were completely unplayable, as none of the optical drives on my system were compatible with the SecuRom copy-protection method they both use. I've been forced to download the no-cd cracks for both these games in order to prevent them crashing to desktop after 30 seconds.
similarly to a previous respondent, i have now come to realise what is wrong with my life
my parents were unfit to look after children despite the fact that my mother is a respected teacher and my father a senior civil servant
i have been doing the equivalent of taking class A drugs and playing with automatic weaponry since i was 16
despite the fact that most of my time on the internet is spent reading/., satirewire and many other wholesome and fulfilling pursuits, i am a maladjusted socially inept male whos only use for his wonderful broadband connection which is capable of so much is to download porn
porn may or may not be wrong
of all the possible gifts to mankind that god may have given, the ones i would have put at the top of the list would have been misplaced
famous people are always right (including john wayne bobbit
there is an entire sewage works contained in my room (which only has about 60 sq ft of floor space)
because im not american i am a lower form of life
it is worth giving up any amount of freedom to stop people seeing other people naked
anyone who is not a christian is wrong
now the rebuttal
apart from the obvious "what?!"
if you were to take heroin yourself, then authorities wouldnt be too chuffed, similarly with the mucking around with semi-automatic weapons bit - cant just pick them up in the street
. are you saying the same is true of any use of the internet? are you sure? then why has your government invested millions in its web infrastructure?
are you a maladjusted socailly inept male?
does your mum have the same opinion?
if porn is a degradation of gods gift (although i would have thought that intelligence, happiness, health, whatever would have been more likely to be gods gifts) then how come you know all these links to sites which i can only assume (not having visited them) are porn related?
and why are the links not clearly displayed (e.g. http://www.somewhere.tld) , but hidden in a way that is often used to trick people into visiting pornsites?
if all these things are unChristian, as you put it, then what relevance does the opinion of a rabbi have?
i could write a lot more, but what's the point?
im going to sleep, perchance to dream of a day when i can take my place as a well adjusted, socially able male and hold my head up high
...not the point to it, i'll readily admit that trying to ensure your child doesn't see something that may actually be harmful to them is worthwhile.
But the chances that she finds something out there which can do her actual harm (psychological, emotional, intellectual or otherwise) are very remote.
She may find a lot of stuff which is shocking, or disturbing, but you cannot honestly expect a person to grow up (as the current jargon goes) "well adjusted" if you have insulated them from anything which challenges the bounds of their experience.
At the end of the day, I think that any form of monitoring of your' children's activities online is excessive. By all means discuss with them what they have been looking at, talk over what they may find out there on the 'net, and in the real world far that matter. But if you attempt to insulate them from anything, and I do mean anything out there, then you are effectively stunting whatever emotional, intellectual etc growth they can gain through use of the internet. Yes by all means it would be nicer from a parental viewpoint if one could be sure that ones' darling offspring were safe from the various depravities that the internet has to offer, but it must be remembered that in every possible sense, the internet is a mirror for the "real world", in which they have to live. If you're concerned about what they see on the internet, surely you should be equally concerned about every other aspect of their life?
It is sad that the internet, and more specifically the web, is now regarded as one of the supreme evils against which shildren should be guarded, when the truth is that the only thing that use of the internet can bring is enlightenment (or maybe confusion). Whether this enlightenment is as a result of reading an enriching article on the benefits of cleaner fuels, an in-depth review of some chemical process, or the revolting vision of someone's hairy arse (or any other way) is irrelevant. The point is that all these experiences are ones which your children are going to have to deal with constantly throughout their lives, and trying to hide these experiences from them only delays their discovery.
Why should we assume that just because a person is legally classed as "a Child", they are less able to deal with everyday life than someone who, in an instant, has passed the boundary and is thought of as an "Adult"? The question surely should not be "how can I monitor my kid's access?" (ethically or otherwise), but "how can I better prepare my child to deal with experiences that they will face throughout their life?"
I'm not a parent (although my mum and dad are), but one thing I relished while living at home, with my own computer, was the privacy it gave me, and the opportunity to experience new things without someone looking over my shoulder and judging me. I have for instance come to the conclusion that animal sex is not particularly pleasant, would I have reached that knowledge if the existence of bestophila had been denied to me?
I have not been lessened by my knowledge that some people indulge in practices which I find to be revolting (and I'm not judging those people). I have merely reached the conclusion that their habits are not for me. In that, I have overcome a challenge, learned something in the process, and have not (except for a few moments nausea) been harmed in any way.
For pity's sake, don't attempt to restrict your child's discovery of any aspect of the world around them. Not merely because it only delays the discovery of whatever it is you are trying to "protect" them from, but because life is made up of all the experiences one has. Denying someone knowledge in any form is preventing them from learning, even if all they learn is that some people have foot fetishes, that knowledge will form a part of their life, and will become part of the jigsaw of experience which lets them evaluate and value every subsequent experience.
As for the argument that people are being introduced to sex, violence, profanity or whatever your particular sounding post, at a progressively younger age, would it be possible for you to stop and think about that for a second? Firstly, introducing someone to knowledge can never, ever be wrong (you may have noticed that I quite value knowledge), but secondly, and more tellingly, look back to the past. As was mentioned in an earlier post, Juliet was only 14 when she consummated her marriage to Romeo, and even if they were merely characters in a play, that does not mean their actions do not typify the actions of the time. Alternatively, look at the various "primitive" (i don't mean primitive, but I can't think of a better way to express it, I certainly don't mean to demean them) tribespeoples that are scattered throughout the less developed areas of the globe. Do you think they insulate their children from any aspect of life? I don't. Most tellingly of all, look back to your own youth. When was the first time you learned about sex? I bet it was before your sixteenth (or whatever) birthday. Similarly with your first sexual experience, your first drink, the first time you told someone to go fuck themselves. I'll wager that these all took place at a younger age than many people would deem "suitable" today. Are you a maladjusted person? Are you a knife wielding psychopathic killer? Would you honestly say that your experiences as a child are what defines you? In a way, I envy you, those of you with wider experiences than myself, I wish I could look back and a) know that I had that much texture in my life, and b) realise that my exposure to things that are now decried as inappropriate has better prepared me for life. I'm "only" nineteen, but I've lost my innocence, and I'm the better for it, in fact I lost it years ago, and I think that's one of the things which has allowed me to succeed so dramatically in my life. I wouldn't erase any experiences I've had, or at least, I wouldn't erase the knowledge of those experiences. Like everyone else I have things I wish I hadn't said, things I'd rather I hadn't done, but each of these has taught me, and for that reason, I wouldn't give them up for anything.
To return slightly to the point of this discussion, and to reiterate my point (as I seem to be doing repeatedly), please don't attempt to restrict your children's access to anything (except heavy machinery, broadswords and nerve gas), the restriction will do them more harm than its absence. That's not to say ignore it, just don't restrict it.
btw, before someone flames me, this is not the post of some spotty young kid who got repeatedly caught viewing porn sites and wants other kids to avoid that embarrasment, these are my opinions, and if you don't like them, well you can fuck off and...
Slashdot Mirror
yes, fortunate for me that it was, I bought Hitman 2 on Wednesday, and UT2003 on Friday, and both these games were completely unplayable, as none of the optical drives on my system were compatible with the SecuRom copy-protection method they both use. I've been forced to download the no-cd cracks for both these games in order to prevent them crashing to desktop after 30 seconds.
noticed you were moderated to "flamebait", nice
similarly to a previous respondent, i have now come to realise what is wrong with my life
now the rebuttal
apart from the obvious "what?!"
i could write a lot more, but what's the point?
im going to sleep, perchance to dream of a day when i can take my place as a well adjusted, socially able male and hold my head up high
----
v = (u+v')/(1+[(uv')(c^-2)])
...not the point to it, i'll readily admit that trying to ensure your child doesn't see something that may actually be harmful to them is worthwhile.
But the chances that she finds something out there which can do her actual harm (psychological, emotional, intellectual or otherwise) are very remote.
She may find a lot of stuff which is shocking, or disturbing, but you cannot honestly expect a person to grow up (as the current jargon goes) "well adjusted" if you have insulated them from anything which challenges the bounds of their experience.
At the end of the day, I think that any form of monitoring of your' children's activities online is excessive. By all means discuss with them what they have been looking at, talk over what they may find out there on the 'net, and in the real world far that matter. But if you attempt to insulate them from anything, and I do mean anything out there, then you are effectively stunting whatever emotional, intellectual etc growth they can gain through use of the internet. Yes by all means it would be nicer from a parental viewpoint if one could be sure that ones' darling offspring were safe from the various depravities that the internet has to offer, but it must be remembered that in every possible sense, the internet is a mirror for the "real world", in which they have to live. If you're concerned about what they see on the internet, surely you should be equally concerned about every other aspect of their life?
It is sad that the internet, and more specifically the web, is now regarded as one of the supreme evils against which shildren should be guarded, when the truth is that the only thing that use of the internet can bring is enlightenment (or maybe confusion). Whether this enlightenment is as a result of reading an enriching article on the benefits of cleaner fuels, an in-depth review of some chemical process, or the revolting vision of someone's hairy arse (or any other way) is irrelevant. The point is that all these experiences are ones which your children are going to have to deal with constantly throughout their lives, and trying to hide these experiences from them only delays their discovery.
Why should we assume that just because a person is legally classed as "a Child", they are less able to deal with everyday life than someone who, in an instant, has passed the boundary and is thought of as an "Adult"? The question surely should not be "how can I monitor my kid's access?" (ethically or otherwise), but "how can I better prepare my child to deal with experiences that they will face throughout their life?"
I'm not a parent (although my mum and dad are), but one thing I relished while living at home, with my own computer, was the privacy it gave me, and the opportunity to experience new things without someone looking over my shoulder and judging me. I have for instance come to the conclusion that animal sex is not particularly pleasant, would I have reached that knowledge if the existence of bestophila had been denied to me?
I have not been lessened by my knowledge that some people indulge in practices which I find to be revolting (and I'm not judging those people). I have merely reached the conclusion that their habits are not for me. In that, I have overcome a challenge, learned something in the process, and have not (except for a few moments nausea) been harmed in any way.
For pity's sake, don't attempt to restrict your child's discovery of any aspect of the world around them. Not merely because it only delays the discovery of whatever it is you are trying to "protect" them from, but because life is made up of all the experiences one has. Denying someone knowledge in any form is preventing them from learning, even if all they learn is that some people have foot fetishes, that knowledge will form a part of their life, and will become part of the jigsaw of experience which lets them evaluate and value every subsequent experience.
As for the argument that people are being introduced to sex, violence, profanity or whatever your particular sounding post, at a progressively younger age, would it be possible for you to stop and think about that for a second? Firstly, introducing someone to knowledge can never, ever be wrong (you may have noticed that I quite value knowledge), but secondly, and more tellingly, look back to the past. As was mentioned in an earlier post, Juliet was only 14 when she consummated her marriage to Romeo, and even if they were merely characters in a play, that does not mean their actions do not typify the actions of the time. Alternatively, look at the various "primitive" (i don't mean primitive, but I can't think of a better way to express it, I certainly don't mean to demean them) tribespeoples that are scattered throughout the less developed areas of the globe. Do you think they insulate their children from any aspect of life? I don't. Most tellingly of all, look back to your own youth. When was the first time you learned about sex? I bet it was before your sixteenth (or whatever) birthday. Similarly with your first sexual experience, your first drink, the first time you told someone to go fuck themselves. I'll wager that these all took place at a younger age than many people would deem "suitable" today. Are you a maladjusted person? Are you a knife wielding psychopathic killer? Would you honestly say that your experiences as a child are what defines you? In a way, I envy you, those of you with wider experiences than myself, I wish I could look back and a) know that I had that much texture in my life, and b) realise that my exposure to things that are now decried as inappropriate has better prepared me for life. I'm "only" nineteen, but I've lost my innocence, and I'm the better for it, in fact I lost it years ago, and I think that's one of the things which has allowed me to succeed so dramatically in my life. I wouldn't erase any experiences I've had, or at least, I wouldn't erase the knowledge of those experiences. Like everyone else I have things I wish I hadn't said, things I'd rather I hadn't done, but each of these has taught me, and for that reason, I wouldn't give them up for anything.
To return slightly to the point of this discussion, and to reiterate my point (as I seem to be doing repeatedly), please don't attempt to restrict your children's access to anything (except heavy machinery, broadswords and nerve gas), the restriction will do them more harm than its absence. That's not to say ignore it, just don't restrict it.
btw, before someone flames me, this is not the post of some spotty young kid who got repeatedly caught viewing porn sites and wants other kids to avoid that embarrasment, these are my opinions, and if you don't like them, well you can fuck off and...
...form your own, of course
thanks for your time
----
v = (u+v')/(1+[(uv')(c^-2)])