What does your definition of "gut-spattering violence" entail? If an internet rating system isn't purely on the creator side, there's going to have to be some form of automated process to deal with all of the pages out there--unless you want to hire someone to go through every single page out there...
In the (somewhat obviously necessary) case of automation, what are you going to use for your guidelines? Look for words like "rape" or "violence?" If you apply this indiscriminately (as automated services are prone to do), you'll kill off all sort of services out there to help the particular people you claim to want to protect! Not to mention what this will do to news services, etc.
Keep in mind some of the corporations in on this--IBM, Microsoft, etc.--not to mention various national bodies... This can have a tremendous influence on what can actually get seen--what happens when segments of backbone start blocking sites with ratings they don't like? You can't even protest--you don't know that the sites are really there!
As for morality, why do I have to bend to your preferences? Admittedly, there are many things (murder, theft, rape) that pretty much anyone can agree are crimes--but this type of thing forces people with different beliefs/standards to concede to someone else's... Would you like it if I enforced my ideas of what your children should be exposed to, how they should be brought up, on you? Why should this work in reverse, and on a much broader scale?
As for your "It won't hurt anyone except perverts and violence lovers" comment, I think this covers it:
In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me - and by that time no one was left to speak up.
-- Pastor Martin Niemöller
But wait, this refers to a period of extreme violence--we may not want to let people see it...
While I generally agree with these thoughts, I'm also pleased to see someone actually make something of an empirical argument for something out of the christian bible, rather than simply dogmatically refusing any notions that seem to contradict it. Admittedly, the objective pro-bible view breaks down there at the end, but it is a start--now if everyone can actually take things a few steps further in this direction, it might be possible to have an actual discussion on religion, as opposed to a bitter fight...
Slashdot Mirror
In the (somewhat obviously necessary) case of automation, what are you going to use for your guidelines? Look for words like "rape" or "violence?" If you apply this indiscriminately (as automated services are prone to do), you'll kill off all sort of services out there to help the particular people you claim to want to protect! Not to mention what this will do to news services, etc.
Keep in mind some of the corporations in on this--IBM, Microsoft, etc.--not to mention various national bodies... This can have a tremendous influence on what can actually get seen--what happens when segments of backbone start blocking sites with ratings they don't like? You can't even protest--you don't know that the sites are really there!
As for morality, why do I have to bend to your preferences? Admittedly, there are many things (murder, theft, rape) that pretty much anyone can agree are crimes--but this type of thing forces people with different beliefs/standards to concede to someone else's... Would you like it if I enforced my ideas of what your children should be exposed to, how they should be brought up, on you? Why should this work in reverse, and on a much broader scale?
As for your "It won't hurt anyone except perverts and violence lovers" comment, I think this covers it:
In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me -
and by that time no one was left to speak up.
-- Pastor Martin Niemöller
But wait, this refers to a period of extreme violence--we may not want to let people see it...
-cicatrix
about the chip-reader
about the "wallet"
Just to save people some time hunting...
While I generally agree with these thoughts, I'm also pleased to see someone actually make something of an empirical argument for something out of the christian bible, rather than simply dogmatically refusing any notions that seem to contradict it. Admittedly, the objective pro-bible view breaks down there at the end, but it is a start--now if everyone can actually take things a few steps further in this direction, it might be possible to have an actual discussion on religion, as opposed to a bitter fight...