The thing is though, 90% of the time I agree that the problem could be solved by parents being parents. But perverts don't just target kids that are being sexually innapropriate on sites like myspace (although a lot of them are), they will use myspace to get info on kids that are being perfectly appropriate and conservative.
So do you forbid your kids from using myspace entirely? I would say that is just punishing the victims, plus you can't track your kids every minute of every day, you have to let them have some independance as long as they don't abuse it (ie being sexually explicit). You can try to teach your kids to not put up any personal information, but that would defeat the purpose of the site and teenagers lack the wisdom and experience to know what not to say or to pick up on when someone may be tricking them.
Is banning social sites the answer, I don't think so, and it will never pass as legislation. Is more responsible parenting the answer? It would probably help a lot in most cases, but ultimately you can't keep your child locked in the basement, protected from the world, forever. IMO, the best solution (I guess this IS parenting) is teach your kid good morals (don't be sexually explicit), and to lock the doors and don't let people in when they are home alone (and teach them WHY). Also, stricter punishment for pervs.
UGH this thread is the equivalent of those 'send this to 100,000 people or Tom will shut down myspace"
Quasmo
Diamond Member
- Jul 7, 2004
- 9,631
- 1
- 76
We be a hell of alot better with Libritarians IMHO, centralist government FTW!Originally posted by: Marlin1975
That usualy holds true but seeing thet Republicans control all 3 branchs of the goverment right now stupid sh1t like this has no way of being stopped. If Democrats control just one then it could be held up like you said. Maybe thats why Dem's are polling double digits for the next election.
If you are epectining people to read the article and understand the entire picture I suggest you leave now because your time here will be one disappointment after another
Well the answer to this problem is really rather simple... Lock our children in little metal boxes until they're 18... they could still attend classes... we could put wheels on the boxes so they can move around, but we as parents would hold the combination to the box locks.
This way our children would be free to experience all the world has to offer from within the safe confines of their bulletproof, sexual predator-proof boxes.
-Max
This way our children would be free to experience all the world has to offer from within the safe confines of their bulletproof, sexual predator-proof boxes.
-Max
Originally posted by: Injury
It seems most of you didn't even read the article. You don't even have to read past the FIRST FREAKING PARAGRAPH to know that the topic title is beyond misleading. It doesn't ban the f'ing sites...
it bans MINORS and MINORS ONLY from using the sites.
So if you guys what to cry about rights and stuff go ahead, but personally I think it will help take care of some of the neffing around here and some of the trolling in FS/FT
Ahh yes, that makes perfect sense... women get raped alot... so in order to prevent rape, lets make it illegal for women to frequent public places. Ahhh laws against the victims... perfectly logical.
-Max
PingSpike
Lifer
- Feb 25, 2004
- 21,732
- 561
- 126
This is a retarded way of going about it though, it will be difficult and expensive to pass and implement and would only mildly reduce the problem at best. Most likely it will have no effect, simply resulting in kids going back to lying about their age on internet forms.
This is like banning women from bars because some of them get slipped roofies in their drinks.
And if lawmakers had half a brain between them, they wouldn't even be considering this awful idea.
Edit: whoops, I just noticed my analogy was already used.
Originally posted by: goku
Originally posted by: Injury
It seems most of you didn't even read the article. You don't even have to read past the FIRST FREAKING PARAGRAPH to know that the topic title is beyond misleading. It doesn't ban the f'ing sites...
it bans MINORS and MINORS ONLY from using the sites.
So if you guys what to cry about rights and stuff go ahead, but personally I think it will help take care of some of the neffing around here and some of the trolling in FS/FT
</end your self>
That's really great, make everything in this world for people over the age of 18.. I think it's a stupid idea, an it's even more stupid that you can't see the perspective of other people.. I wish darwinian theory was applied to everybody in practically every age group, but no, our society caters to the ignorant masses, creating an even more ignorant and clueless society.. The parents blame everybody but them selves and with this attitude our society is going to crumble.. 'injury' you're only helping in perpetuate this degredation of our society. Thats all we need, MORE government involvement in our everyday lives, we tried to fight off socialism but it looks like we're succuming to it anyways..
:roll:
Children have NO rights. Literally. It's already the job of the government to protect them, so it sounds like that is what they are doing. Yes, parents should teach their kids not to give out their address or talk about personal stuff online... but do you ALWAYS do EVERYTHING your parents tell you? No, you don't.
I fail to see the harm in not allowing kids to register for un-approved sites. You can cry "OMG SOCIETY IS STUPID LET THEM KILL THEMSELVES OFF!" but that's a pretty piss-poor attitude. It sounds to me like what you are saying is "If a kid is stupid enough to give out their address who cares if they get abducted... their parents should have done a better job with them!" It's not like it's taking kids off the internet entirely, so I fail to see how it's "making everything for people over the age of 18". It would be perfectly reasonable if this bill was passed and there was an approved list of sites kids could register for where the moderation is top notch.
Yeah, I know that it could sound like a bit of an extreme to do, but at least someone has proposed a bill to do SOMETHING about what is a notable problem. You got a better idea? Great! Stop sitting there in your comfortable chair behind a computer screen screaming about society crumbling and a clueless society and write the congressman with a better proposition. It's funny how so many people on this forum bitch about the state of the government but very few of them actually do more than type to Anandtech about it. The joy of our government is that you have the right to let our elected officials know what you think and what you would like to see happen. They call them "representatives" because they represent YOUR opinion, not because they want to go there and do only what they want.
This bill only applies to schools and public libraries that receive federal funding.
The bill states that minors will not be allowed to access these sites on computers in public schools and libraries that receive federal funds.
This doesn't apply to what you do on your own computer or anywhere that is not a federally funded public school or library. So all of you morons getting all worked up about the government sticking their nose in your business should just stfu and read more than just one biased, half-assed news article.
The bill states that minors will not be allowed to access these sites on computers in public schools and libraries that receive federal funds.
This doesn't apply to what you do on your own computer or anywhere that is not a federally funded public school or library. So all of you morons getting all worked up about the government sticking their nose in your business should just stfu and read more than just one biased, half-assed news article.
- Oct 10, 1999
- 30,880
- 12,386
- 136
Originally posted by: Injury
Originally posted by: goku
Originally posted by: Injury
It seems most of you didn't even read the article. You don't even have to read past the FIRST FREAKING PARAGRAPH to know that the topic title is beyond misleading. It doesn't ban the f'ing sites...
it bans MINORS and MINORS ONLY from using the sites.
So if you guys what to cry about rights and stuff go ahead, but personally I think it will help take care of some of the neffing around here and some of the trolling in FS/FT
</end your self>
That's really great, make everything in this world for people over the age of 18.. I think it's a stupid idea, an it's even more stupid that you can't see the perspective of other people.. I wish darwinian theory was applied to everybody in practically every age group, but no, our society caters to the ignorant masses, creating an even more ignorant and clueless society.. The parents blame everybody but them selves and with this attitude our society is going to crumble.. 'injury' you're only helping in perpetuate this degredation of our society. Thats all we need, MORE government involvement in our everyday lives, we tried to fight off socialism but it looks like we're succuming to it anyways..
:roll:
Children have NO rights. Literally. It's already the job of the government to protect them, so it sounds like that is what they are doing. Yes, parents should teach their kids not to give out their address or talk about personal stuff online... but do you ALWAYS do EVERYTHING your parents tell you? No, you don't.
I fail to see the harm in not allowing kids to register for un-approved sites. You can cry "OMG SOCIETY IS STUPID LET THEM KILL THEMSELVES OFF!" but that's a pretty piss-poor attitude. It sounds to me like what you are saying is "If a kid is stupid enough to give out their address who cares if they get abducted... their parents should have done a better job with them!" It's not like it's taking kids off the internet entirely, so I fail to see how it's "making everything for people over the age of 18". It would be perfectly reasonable if this bill was passed and there was an approved list of sites kids could register for where the moderation is top notch.
Yeah, I know that it could sound like a bit of an extreme to do, but at least someone has proposed a bill to do SOMETHING about what is a notable problem. You got a better idea? Great! Stop sitting there in your comfortable chair behind a computer screen screaming about society crumbling and a clueless society and write the congressman with a better proposition. It's funny how so many people on this forum bitch about the state of the government but very few of them actually do more than type to Anandtech about it. The joy of our government is that you have the right to let our elected officials know what you think and what you would like to see happen. They call them "representatives" because they represent YOUR opinion, not because they want to go there and do only what they want.
Oh hell yes.. I agree 100% let's implement steel cages for our children so we can keep them safe.
i'm an emo kid, non-conforming as can be. you'd be non-conforming too if you looked just like me.
Specop 007
Diamond Member
- Jan 31, 2005
- 9,454
- 0
- 0
Banning libraries from visiting such websites is unconstitutional, plain and simple. It's free speech, and it's protected by the 1st Amendment. Even porn sites are still in libraries. Trying to block minors from websites just to protect them from perverts is noble but far too flawed to be effective or prudent.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 10K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter