South Carolina will debate bill to block porn on new computers

Citizens who wanted to opt-out of porn filter would have to pay $20 fee.

Read the whole story

 

[FactsAreMyReligion]

It's amazing the amount of tax dollars people will spend to not have to have a conversation about sex with their kids.

 

[theycallmetatersalad]

FactsAreMyReligion[/url]":3glezd4c]It's amazing the amount of tax dollars people will spend to not have to have a conversation about sex with their kids.

It's difficult. Look at how much effort the guy on the sign is putting into catching those kids to talk to them about sex. Granted, I think he wants to talk to them about having sex with him, but still.

 

[TheFu]

Alyeska[/url]":ealwohvy]Hello First Amendment of the Constitution.

Also completely unenforceable and technologically impossible.

Agreed, but there are more church signs and christian radio stations in SC than I've seen anywhere else.
Laws are made all the time that can't be enforced 100% - just look at speed limits.

It is possible to significantly reduce porn access by accident by using local, DNS, and ISP filters. Would that be a bad thing? I dunno. It isn't my place to say. Sure, anyone who wanted to get around it could, but that would take a deliberate act. Sure, there would be gaps in the coverage, so the law would have some sort of reporting built in, certainly. Then we'd get to the different ideas as to what "porn" is - after all, we all know it when we see it. The hard part is getting any community to agree on what is and is not porn.

Not trying to solve a problem doesn't make it go away. I can believe that porn IS an issue for some people, just like cocaine and pseudoephedrine and other formerly easy to get drugs is issues for some people.

As a people, shouldn't we at least attempt to address the issue?

Perhaps the right answer is to mandate that ISPs make porn filters accessible, perhaps with a $20/month added fee?

 

[Jurrasic]

Pusher of Buttons[/url]":v1ufmtzh]

loquacio[/url]":v1ufmtzh]Apparently the sign depicts children running away from this legislator who is coming to take away their freedom.

Commenting has been won, everyone can go home now!

What ever that channel is, it uses the exact same logo as my bank, Coast Capital.

 

[NYCundrgrnd]

...from the party that demands SMALLER GOVERNMENT!

 

[Biceps]

I bet you 50 bucks this senator watches a lot of porn, then feels really bad about it.

 

[Jim Salter]

RickyP784[/url]":34po4iwg]I mentioned before that people under a certain age have grown up with computers, mobile devices, and the Internet. They've never lived in a world without those things

You're describing "digital natives". As a group, they're more likely to be intuitively adapted to long running graphical interface conventions, to long periods of multitasking, and to be accustomed to high connectivity with few or no periods of solitude.

They're *not* any more likely to understand abstract concepts or the underlying infrastructure of the devices they use.

WITHOUT GOOGLE, can you succinctly describe the workings of an internal combustion engine? What weight oil is your car rated for? What do the numbers mean? What are the pros and cons of different oil weights, either in your engine or in engines in general?

That's just the engine, of course... How does an automatic transmission work? Be specific. How does it differ from a manual transmission? Are there any automatic transmissions that work *like* manual transmissions? How does a continuous variable transmission work? What are the pros and cons of a CVT? Why aren't CVTs used everywhere - or, conversely, why are they used anywhere?

... This just scratches the surface, of course. Cars have been around for your entire lifetime, and you've likely driven them nearly every day as an adult. So why don't you innately understand how they work?

(Maybe you're a gear head, and you can take a credible stab at every last bit of that. No worries, we can talk about HVAC instead. Or three phase power, or broadcast television, or...)

 

[Dilbert]

Biceps[/url]":ykval5vk]I bet you 50 bucks this senator watches a lot of porn, then feels really bad about it.

No bet.

 

[NYCundrgrnd]

Just admit to the truth, republicans don't really want smaller government or less regulation rather they DO want a micromanaged totalitarian government and THEIR regulation aka some sort of bastard-child regulation of religion + oppression + shame + guilt.

 

[Shavano]

cdclndc[/url]":1nmvqf3g]

If a purchaser wants the filter lifted, he or she has to pay $20 to have it taken out—provided the person is over the age of 18

Or you know, give the phone to any hormone fueled teenager anywhere on the planet and have them subvert it for you if you're not technically inclined.

Never underestimate the power of teenagers, porn, and hormones. They'll find a way to circumvent the system.

It simply won't happen. If they pass the bill, which is a big if, companies simply would not comply and they'd file suit the the next day in Federal court and they'd get an quick injunction blocking the enforcement of the law.

 

[traumadog]

Novae DeArx[/url]":2ain4wlz]

Alyeska[/url]":2ain4wlz]Hello First Amendment of the Constitution.

Also completely unenforceable and technologically impossible.

Not at all technologically impossible, just not feasible *yet*.

This kind of initiative actually terrifies me, simply because in a decade-ish machine vision/learning will have progressed to the point where it really can filter out 100% of porn (or any other content you care to name), plus or minus a very small fraction of a percent.

A lot of search engines already try to filter out illegal content (CP, etc.) with this tech. Just wait until the tech evolves and is made user-friendly enough that pretty much any moron can implement it and suddenly we're in a dystopia where anything that a lawmaker doesn't like is simply disappeared from the internet, at least as far as your state or country is concerned...

Reminds me of Potter Stewart's concurrence in Jacobellis v Ohio regarding "pornography"...

I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description, and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.

 

[Shavano]

NYCundrgrnd[/url]":2enjeboj]Just admit to the truth, republicans don't really want smaller government or less regulation rather they DO want a micromanaged totalitarian government and THEIR regulation aka some sort of bastard-child regulation of religion + oppression + shame + guilt.

They want smaller government if and only if it means overturning laws that people who live in cities support. It's a war of bumpkins vs cityfolk.

 

[orangpelupa]

Marusame[/url]":1po4jgzq]Is this a block on DNS side, if so then you can bypass that, is this a HOSTFS file change? Is it an ISP block? Is it software? If its software is the software SAFE?! Is the software open to malware? What does the software do? HOW does it do it?!?!?

Jesus Christ from a computer security standpoint this is already a disaster... So what this is going to do is kill brick and mortar PC sales business and people will just buy from out of state or they have a deal with walmart or other companies to ask 20$ at the counter, which means that computers will have to be sold 20$ less or else people will go elsewhere.

Honestly nothing more than a 1$ refunded activation should be necessary and even that is stupid and overkill.

Heres what you do, buy a windows 8 or 10 PC, go on microsofts site download the iso maker software I forget the name and create a USB key or DVD of windows 8 or 10... and reformat the pc, you will lose all the preinstalled BS which is usually garbage and get a nice clean build of windows. Also apparently Windows 10 is supposed to be getting or already has the ability to do a windows clean slate format aside from factory reset in which it ignores factory files and installs a standard from microsoft install of windows.

Someone needs to create youtube videos and news articles explaining how to bypass this and not spend the money before it even comes out.

You can do what Indonesia did. They poison ALL dns.

So the only way to bypass the dns banning are by using DNS Crypt. Or proxy or VPN...

Or you can simply use VPN that has been built in in opera web browser for ease of use.

But the majority of my friends don't know to use any of them.

Btw my country blocks everything that's not inline with their view. Imgur.com is blocked, reddit is blocked, etc

 

[Lagrange]

strangeland[/url]":2qtu6x0u]Typical stream of echo-chamber responses in the comments. Not a single even cursory acknowledgement of the increasing harm pornography is causing to society in general, and especially to women and even directly linked to human trafficking. Take half a minute to educate yourselves at least a little bit. You're supposed to be ars commenters after all. The bill may have it's issues but you're all acting like there is no wider social issue trying to be addressed here at all. Far easier just to laugh at the Republican luddite neo-Christian prudes. So much easier to mock them when they are just labels.

"Just as long as they don't touch my freedom to use my computers or porn! 'merica!"

You sound exactly the same as the people you're mocking.

Evidence for any of that? What increasing harm is pornography doing and what does it have to do with human trafficking?

The same BS is said about prostitution and countless other 'vices' with little or nothing to back it up beyond "I don't like the thing those other people are doing."

Fact is, if you want to find where most trafficked people end up, you need to look at agriculture, the casual labour market, and the restaurant trade. You are far more likely to have contributed to the earnings of the scumbags who run the human trafficking industry if you've bought some fruit or got a takeaway meal than if you consume porn or even visit a prostitute. The problem is that trafficked labour is so cheap that too many companies in the industries that use it (which are often low-margin businesses) are willing to turn a blind eye to keep their costs down.

 

[Schnookums]

With the advent of the internet (now decades old), and if the negative effects of porn (and free movement of information in general) were true, society would have already ceased to exist.

 

[Lagrange]

klarg[/url]":1em1rnga]So why does the sign show an evangelical minister running after children?

You've got it wrong. The sign is trying to convince people that if you're going to chase after kids to molest them, at least wear a suit and tie

 

[Oldmanalex]

Think of the civil liberties. Nah. Think of the state legislators voting for a $20 tax on their next computer. Think of 8 year olds watching porn on Dad's computer, while he cannot work out how to get around the filters.

 

[Neep33]

AMR- Another Moronic Republican

 

[loquacio]

Lagrange[/url]":a0t6jimq]

strangeland[/url]":a0t6jimq]Typical stream of echo-chamber responses in the comments. Not a single even cursory acknowledgement of the increasing harm pornography is causing to society in general, and especially to women and even directly linked to human trafficking. Take half a minute to educate yourselves at least a little bit. You're supposed to be ars commenters after all. The bill may have it's issues but you're all acting like there is no wider social issue trying to be addressed here at all. Far easier just to laugh at the Republican luddite neo-Christian prudes. So much easier to mock them when they are just labels.

"Just as long as they don't touch my freedom to use my computers or porn! 'merica!"

You sound exactly the same as the people you're mocking.

Evidence for any of that? What increasing harm is pornography doing and what does it have to do with human trafficking?

The same BS is said about prostitution and countless other 'vices' with little or nothing to back it up beyond "I don't like the thing those other people are doing."

Fact is, if you want to find where most trafficked people end up, you need to look at agriculture, the casual labour market, and the restaurant trade. You are far more likely to have contributed to the earnings of the scumbags who run the human trafficking industry if you've bought some fruit or got a takeaway meal than if you consume porn or even visit a prostitute. The problem is that trafficked labour is so cheap that too many companies in the industries that use it (which are often low-margin businesses) are willing to turn a blind eye to keep their costs down.

Even assuming there is a problem of human trafficking for pornography, going all War on Drugs on it won't help anyone. Well, it'll help cops. Imagine, they won't even have to "smell weed" to steal your shit now. They can just force you to fingerprint unlock your phone and call your nude selfies illegal porn, then civil forfeiture all your stuff and make you a sex offender.

 

[jdigio]

RickyP784[/url]":2roj5991]How...what...huh?! I don't understand the rationale of his "thought" process.

Pornography = human trafficking = child endangerment?

Segmentation fault. Core dumped.

Edited to add: At this point, I think anyone over the age of 40 50 (unless they have a technical degree AND/OR must have at have least 5+ years of technical experience) should be banned from voting on any kind of Internet/computer/technology regulation because they obviously don't understand how this shit works.

Edit 2: See bold/strike. Better?

There is no clear relationship between human trafficking, porn, and child endangerment. Poor Chumbly tries to do good, alas everyone still laughs at his greatest ideas.

Lawmakers that create or vote on legislation that concerns computers, the internet, information technology, should be required to pass a series of aptitude tests that show that they understand the laws in question.

If I want to be stockbroker I will need to pass examinations that prove I have a basic understanding of financial markets.

Age is a red herring. Many young people don't understand information technology, (using kik, snapchat, facebook, twitter doesn't qualify as being an IT guy) and there are many mature individuals who have the capacity to understand complex information technology and computing concepts.

 

[soulsabr]

*head-desk-keyboardbroke*

 

[traumadog]

soulsabr[/url]":3unpu86a]*head-desk-keyboardbroke*

"I'm sorry... head-desk-keyboard is considered internet porn. That'll be $20, please..."

 

[jdigio]

loquacio[/url]":17mfcf6q]Apparently the sign depicts children running away from this legislator who is coming to take away their freedom.

It's an evil human-trafficking zombie that was summoned by using the internet. Because of porn.

 

[Peace_Man]

Chumley seems to have a serious problem with porn. And, like many other legislators, this must be everybody's problem. The main thing I get out of seeing news about this law is that SC's mental health care is sadly lacking.

 

[Falos]

The human trafficking thing has exploded

I've never sunken to doing this until now, thanks Chumley.

[CITATION NEEDED]

 

[cbar.tx]

good. if it's illegal I'll finally be able to pull myself away from that thing

 

[Mr_B]

mmiller7[/url]":1bx1hn1r]My computer, my rules. No crapware regardless of it's intent.

This kind of nonsense is why I get an official Microsoft disc and clean-install on a new computer if I plan to keep it Windows. Or just install Linux.

Wonder if they'll run around arresting people if they install a different OS or reinstall with different media?

The very, _very_ first thing I do when I get a computer is boot to USB and erase every disk on the system. So yeah, this is completely meaningless.

 

[soulsabr]

loquacio[/url]":1nbndn35]

Lagrange[/url]":1nbndn35]

strangeland[/url]":1nbndn35]Typical stream of echo-chamber responses in the comments. Not a single even cursory acknowledgement of the increasing harm pornography is causing to society in general, and especially to women and even directly linked to human trafficking. Take half a minute to educate yourselves at least a little bit. You're supposed to be ars commenters after all. The bill may have it's issues but you're all acting like there is no wider social issue trying to be addressed here at all. Far easier just to laugh at the Republican luddite neo-Christian prudes. So much easier to mock them when they are just labels.

"Just as long as they don't touch my freedom to use my computers or porn! 'merica!"

You sound exactly the same as the people you're mocking.

Evidence for any of that? What increasing harm is pornography doing and what does it have to do with human trafficking?

The same BS is said about prostitution and countless other 'vices' with little or nothing to back it up beyond "I don't like the thing those other people are doing."

Fact is, if you want to find where most trafficked people end up, you need to look at agriculture, the casual labour market, and the restaurant trade. You are far more likely to have contributed to the earnings of the scumbags who run the human trafficking industry if you've bought some fruit or got a takeaway meal than if you consume porn or even visit a prostitute. The problem is that trafficked labour is so cheap that too many companies in the industries that use it (which are often low-margin businesses) are willing to turn a blind eye to keep their costs down.

Even assuming there is a problem of human trafficking for pornography, going all War on Drugs on it won't help anyone. Well, it'll help cops. Imagine, they won't even have to "smell weed" to steal your shit now. They can just force you to fingerprint unlock your phone and call your nude selfies illegal porn, then civil forfeiture all your stuff and make you a sex offender.

Soooo .... basically what they do now but all at once? Talk about convenience!

 

[soulsabr]

NYCundrgrnd[/url]":14tbizha]...from the party that demands SMALLER GOVERNMENT!

Much in the same way some stripper demands you stop throwing hundred dollar bills at her.

 

[Einstein76]

Alyeska[/url]":12h8pivn]Hello First Amendment of the Constitution.

Also completely unenforceable and technologically impossible.

None of that seems to stop politicians from trying though.

 

[Einstein76]

RickyP784[/url]":f9zku2c7]How...what...huh?! I don't understand the rationale of his "thought" process.

Pornography = human trafficking = child endangerment?

Segmentation fault. Core dumped.

Edited to add: At this point, I think anyone over the age of 40 50 (unless they have a technical degree AND/OR must have at have least 5+ years of technical experience) should be banned from voting on any kind of Internet/computer/technology regulation because they obviously don't understand how this shit works.

Edit 2: See bold/strike. Better?

Some of the smartest people I know are in their 80's.

Some of the dumbest in their late 20's to mid 30's.

It's important to remember that human stupidity has no bounds. Also remember that no one is immune to stupidity and the more you speak the more prone you are to saying stupid things, for proof of this see any number of my previous posts here.

 

[Velma Velvet]

RickyP784[/url]":2jdkl7ul]

Hot Jupiter[/url]":2jdkl7ul]

RickyP784[/url]":2jdkl7ul]How...what...huh?! I don't understand the rationale of his "thought" process.

Pornography = human trafficking = child endangerment?

Segmentation fault. Core dumped.

Edited to add: At this point, I think anyone over the age of 40 50 (unless they have a technical degree AND/OR must have at have least 5+ years of technical experience) should be banned from voting on any kind of Internet/computer/technology regulation because they obviously don't understand how this shit works.

Edit 2: See bold/strike. Better?

As long as anyone under 50 cannot vote on S.S./Medicare benefits...

While we are negotiating:

>30 gets AMA and <30 gets MTV awards...

To be fair you all get all the War votes...

If I'm paying for your Social Security benefits, I damn sure get to vote on how much I have to pay.

The rest, I don't care about. The lion's share of music produced after 1995 is rubbish anyway.

That's the point of social safety nets everybody pays. Sometimes they use it and sometimes they don't. Everybody is eligible. If you are disabled in a car accident, even if you're only 30, you'll get money so you don't starve to death or end up homeless. I didn't go to college and I don't have children but my tax dollars contribute to the tens of thousands of dollars it costs to educate every student in the public college and university system. When those college and university students get old a younger generation will pay for them. Everyone thinks if only they do the right things they'll have no problems. That's never the case. Everyone wears out, healthy or not. It's for the greater good.

 

[Einstein76]

chadnt[/url]":v9708qc7]

SteveJobz[/url]":v9708qc7]So, basically you can either pony up $20 or spend 5 minutes on Google to find step by step instructions to remove it. So, how exactly is this going to fight sex trafficking again?

Would probably result in a conviction under the overly-broad Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.

That is a scary thought that I had not considered. Well thanks for that, that makes me feel so much better about this.

 

[mgforbes]

Tom Lehrer said it best....

http://www.metrolyrics.com/smut-lyrics-tom-lehrer.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaHDBL7dVgs

 

[pika2000]

Maybe they should start adopting Sharia law.
I mean why take baby steps?

 

[Einstein76]

Bondi Surfer[/url]":3386mcx2]If I wasn't watching so much porn, then I'd have so much more time to sex traffic

I tried sex trafficking but the wife didn't like the stop and go lights.

 

[BigAssRat]

Teamsprocket[/url]":74lok6dz]Why would I pay $20 to remove software from a computer when I can:
A) do it myself, or
B) use Google to learn how to do it myself for free
?

I am sure that part of the bill be:
1) Felony for removal of filter without paying the $20 removal tax
2) Require Google to filter all instructions on how to remove said filter

 

[RickyP784]

hestermofet[/url]":35j23lmb]

RickyP784[/url]":35j23lmb]

With that, I'm done. Time for our maintenance window.

I wish people who wrote stuff like this put this at the top of their post, so I wouldn't have to read the rest of their garbage, because clearly they don't like having their opinions challenged.

wtf? I wish people like you would take into account that people like me have a job and a life outside these forums. I simply couldn't dedicate my attention to an argument that ultimately has no conclusion while performing a series of server and SAN upgrades. I actually have no issues having my opinions challenged otherwise I wouldn't have continued arguing my point as long as I have.

If anything, people like you who diminish everything people say tend to have the most difficult time being challenged.