Protecting children on the Internet

mkpdavies · 03-12-2004, 03:26 PM

But not all parents are good, some parents are not even on the scene, and other parents try their best, but everyone needs a hand now and then.

Thats a lot of kids left open to use and abuse by the shady side of society.

Julian Morrison · 03-12-2004, 04:44 PM

And how will passing a law help? There already are laws against neglect.

Assisting parents is a job for civil society - neighbours, friends, the extended family. Not the state!

Julian Morrison · 03-12-2004, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anthony Butcher

I am not sure that you would find many parents keen to find their 8 year old looking at images of a woman having sex with a dog (just one of my recent delightful discoveries that arrived in my inbox).

Sexual subtext goes over kids heads. Overt sex amuses, disgusts or bores them. The instincts simply aren't there. I'd be infinitely more worried about protecting any kid of mine from watching scary movies they can't yet handle (which is not a hypothetical but a direct and obvious cause of nighmares and fright).

Quote:

Do you mind me asking if you are a parent?

I have younger siblings but not kids. Doesn't make a difference.

Intbel · 08-12-2004, 01:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julian Morrison

I have younger siblings but not kids. Doesn't make a difference.

You will find, when the time comes, being a parent changes one's perspective.

Carl Faulkner · 08-12-2004, 07:43 AM

Quote:

You will find, when the time comes, being a parent changes one's perspective.

True. Including the menace of drugs.

Julian Morrison · 08-12-2004, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Intbel

You will find, when the time comes, being a parent changes one's perspective.

I've heard people say that, but I extremely doubt it. My opinions don't change just because my priorities change.

The fuss about porn etc is a cultural thing. It makes neither historical nor bio-evolutionary sense. Basically we picked up prudishness via the victorians, via the puritans, via the Christian church, via the Roman empire and the jewish culture. The meme has leapfrogged down the centuries, dying back and re-seeding. It's by no means an inevitability.

Intbel · 08-12-2004, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Faulkner

Quote:

You will find, when the time comes, being a parent changes one's perspective.

True. Including the menace of drugs.

Agreed. I have three daughters.
They were raisd with a responsible attitude toward all menaces.

gimlet · 09-12-2004, 09:49 PM

AB

I think the internet should be totally unregulated. The content protection Internet Explorer offers is excellent - once you learn how to use it - should the content advisor by default be turned On?.

Maybe it should be mandatory for all sites to use 'tags' to denote content ( these are in use now ) and if the sites do not use them, then it should be easy to have no hosting / no transmission protocol. For misuse of tags, ie a porn site transmitting under a tag for a kids site, there should be a severe punishment - call Ms Whiplash.

Julian Morrison · 09-12-2004, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gimlet

Maybe it should be mandatory for all sites to foo [for any foo]

...is not enforcible.

You think a UK edict could rule sites based everywhere from Albania to Zimbabwe? Even the USA doesn't swing that big a bat.

Anthony Butcher · 09-12-2004, 10:06 PM

Quote:

I think the internet should be totally unregulated.

Just not for kids. Children do need protection.

Quote:

The content protection Internet Explorer offers is excellent - once you learn how to use it - should the content advisor by default be turned On?

It just isn't sufficient for proper protection. The nanny software available currently is very good.

Quote:

Maybe it should be mandatory for all sites to use 'tags' to denote content ( these are in use now ) and if the sites do not use them, then it should be easy to have no hosting / no transmission protocol

As Julian pointed out, it can't be enforced outside the EU/UK. Blocking transmission for a lack of tags would also remove 99.99% of all content, because most website owners will never implement it.

The solution has to be at the user's end.

03-12-2004, 03:26 PM	#11 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,841 Party: Libertarian Party	But not all parents are good, some parents are not even on the scene, and other parents try their best, but everyone needs a hand now and then. Thats a lot of kids left open to use and abuse by the shady side of society. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

03-12-2004, 04:44 PM	#12 (permalink)
Julian Morrison Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Banbury, England Posts: 198	And how will passing a law help? There already are laws against neglect. Assisting parents is a job for civil society - neighbours, friends, the extended family. Not the state!

09-12-2004, 09:49 PM	#18 (permalink)
gimlet Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Shropshire Posts: 832	AB I think the internet should be totally unregulated. The content protection Internet Explorer offers is excellent - once you learn how to use it - should the content advisor by default be turned On?. Maybe it should be mandatory for all sites to use 'tags' to denote content ( these are in use now ) and if the sites do not use them, then it should be easy to have no hosting / no transmission protocol. For misuse of tags, ie a porn site transmitting under a tag for a kids site, there should be a severe punishment - call Ms Whiplash.