Posted on 06/15/2005 9:43:12 AM PDT by hinterlander
True, but it only works if all porn companies are required to use the ".xxx" domain. Which is not part of the plan. Which makes this useless for filtering sites.
If this is a purely voluntary, then it's worthless. It would be like asking strip clubs to voluntarily not open near schools. Maybe they will and maybe they won't.
Internet Explorer could do this today. That's the beauty of requiring either a .xxx domain name, or including xxx somewhere in the title, it makes it easy to set up a simple filter to block all instances of .xxx.
Programs like NetNanny and Cybersitter rely on a constantly changing list of domains to avoid, much like virus software. Think how much easier it would be to avoid Viruses if they all had to have .vir in their file name!
> It isn't as much a regulation problem as much as a definitional problem. How do you define "porn" or whatever material requires the xxx designation?
Maybe...it's pron if you have to pay for it?
There's a lot of non-porn pay for content sites. The Wall Street Journal, for example.
I disagree. They're exactly the same. Zoning is a way of controlling where business and residential development occurs. A domain name if the cyber equivalent since it acts as the "location" on the World Wide Web in the mind of the user. Telling a Web site developer that he must use the xxx extention for his porn site is exactly like telling the strip club owner that he can't build his club next to a school or church.
That definitely wouldn't be an adequate definition. Umm, just guessing..
I think they would support the *.xxx domain BECAUSE it is filterable. It is just good PR.
Besides it seems that somehow a www.*.com and a www.*.xxx that uses the same website could be more filterable somehow because both were being used.
I like the idea. I'd think it would be useless if it wasn't mandatory though.
my thing is there should be some way to protect kids from stumbling on this while trying to do regular research.
once popular example I remember was that for some time, www.whitehouse.com ( as opposed to www.whitehouse.gov ) was a porn site. I wonder how many kids stumbled into THAT. . .
On the Web, the domain name IS the location in terms of how the user interacts with the Internet. So it's not just a labelling device. The domain name is how we identify, locate, and find resources. That's exactly equivalent to how we identify, locate, and find physical resources in our community. For the needs of the public we physically segregate certain resources from others. The cyber equivalent would be to segregrate resources based on their domain names.
Exactly! Government only has to interfere where people are unwilling to govern themselves. This one of those areas where it is elementary for people to have a voice and avoid government involvement.
Frankly, that is the ONLY way to make filtering effective. Of course, the smut peddlers will cry over the cost of changing everything, to which I say "SO??". We had the area codes in NC changed twice in the span of a few years and businesses all over the state (except for the Capital, of course) had to change letterhead, business cards, etc. We hear about how profitable the porn business is, so what is this minimal cost to them? Not much.
They also say they aren't trying to target kids, well, this would prove it. Let ANY website that has access to nude pictures of anyone be required to use the .xxx domain. This would also discourage linking to illicit pictures on message boards and prevent some kid from putting up a personal site and giving his "friends" access to his porn scans.
If someone does put up a site where people can access nude pictures or worse, they get hit with a fine for the first offense. If they don't change or take it down within a certain time period, a BIG fine. If they do it again, or fail to take it down after another designated time, they get time in Pound-Me-In-The-Rump Prison, where their "fans" can show their appreciation for the person's handiwork.
Sorry, I work in IT and have NO tolerance for some of these smut peddlers. Access for kids to all kinds of stuff is way too easy and something needs to be done to make it more difficult.
I know how the web works. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
You don't have to fine them: just revoke their domain name.
I can agree to that! :-)
:) Sometimes i wonder how we got to the pseduo-socalist country we have today, and then I read threads like this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.