Slashdot Log In
Politicians Target Social Sites For Restrictions
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu May 11, 2006 11:21 AM
from the if-you-can-see-this-you're-already-in-trouble dept.
from the if-you-can-see-this-you're-already-in-trouble dept.
cnet-declan writes "Politicians are looking for reasons to convince citizens to vote in November, and polls say suburban parents are worried about the internet. Wednesday top House Republicans announced a bill to make 'social' Web sites unreachable from schools and libraries. The bill is intended to go after MySpace, but the actual text of the legislation covers sites that let users 'create profiles' and have a 'forum' for conversations -- which would include Slashdot and many blog sites. House Speaker Dennis Hastert claims it's necessary to stop 'dangerous predators' out here on the Interweb."
Related Stories
[+]
Your Rights Online: No Space for MySpace? 272 comments
conq writes "BusinessWeek looks at the flaws in the bill proposed by the House of Representatives that would block access to social networks and Internet chat rooms in most federally funded schools and libraries. One big problem with their bill is it is much too vague, it 'could rule out content from any number of Internet companies, including Yahoo! and Google.' What's more, DOPA would prohibit sites that enable users to create their own content and share it. That covers a wide swath of the online world, known colloquially as Web 2.0, where users actively create everything from blogs to videos to news-page collections." This is analysis of a bill we covered yesterday.
[+]
Technology: House Passes Ban on Social Site Access 681 comments
Krishna Dagli writes to mention a C|Net story covering a House of Representatives vote on restricting access to social sites on public terminals. The bill, which passed the House in a 410-15 vote, would bar users from accessing sites like Amazon, MySpace, or Slashdot from terminals in libraries and schools. Adults would be able to 'ask permission' to access such sites. From the article: "'Social networking sites, best known by the popular examples of MySpace, Friendster and Facebook, have literally exploded in popularity in just a few short years,' said Rep. Mike Fitzpatrick, a Pennsylvania Republican and one of DOPA's original sponsors. Now, he added, those Web sites 'have become a haven for online sexual predators who have made these corners of the Web their own virtual hunting ground.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Well that explains Murdoch/Clinton. (Score:5, Insightful)
Utterly fascinating - he's a powerful, ruthless, pragmatic man, normally the kind of person who gets along perfectly with the current republican administration - but it looks like the christian right's prediliction for censorship is starting to ruffle his feathers.
Anyway, for anyone unlucky enough to be using internet access in a library, I'm sure the circumvention techniques good for the great firewall of china [slashdot.org] will work inside the US as well. Maybe the BoingBoing guide to evading censorware [boingboing.net] will be useful too.
Oh - on a side note, check out the spoof Rupert Murdoch Myspace Profiles [myspace.com]
Does not compute (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Does not compute (Score:5, Insightful)
I would hate to see Hillary as a president. Leiberman may lose his seat soon in CT. I hope so.
I'm not a republican or a conservative... I just hate these 2 people, and want to see real American's elected to office. The kind that stand up for free speech, expression and have the fucking courage to tell Americans "NO" like the big babies we are. We need someone to remind us all of what AMERICA is about...
Tolerance... freedom... and a peaceful way of life... not dictated by religion, corporations, or wealth...
I'm tired of the two Americas... the one for the rich, and the one for the poor... Where the laws dont really apply to the rich... and the poor are looked upon as criminals by default.
Hillary and Joe are the kind of wealthy social elites that are disconnected from reality. Their idea of "America" is their happy wealthy communities, where they feel above those of us who enjoy violent movies, porn, and all kinds of language...
They feel they have to save us from ourselves.... they know better than we do.... They know what America should be for you and I...
No fucking thanks.
Tolerance and Freedom... Tolerance comes first
Parent
Broadcast Morgul? (Score:5, Funny)
I think that was supposed to be "mogul."
However, "morgul" would be very appropriate here.
Parent
And this a problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Curses! (Score:4, Funny)
It's that time again... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ah yes, it's another year divisible by two, as you can tell by the haunting call of the red-breasted politician:
From TFA:
That's a rather wide range, and a quick perusal of the web (Google is your friend) gives ample reason why this is such a moronic idea:
And from Speaker Hastert's statement: Well, we've heard stories of various congresscritters involved in all sorts of shenanigans....perhaps we'd better just outlaw Congress.
Now, I'm not trying to deny that online predators exist and are a problem, but a better solution than a draconian ban on all discussion-type websites might be to actually educate your child about the danger...after all, the predator can't molest your child through the computer, and if a child knows better than to give out sensitive info, it's over before it begins. But of course, parents would rather have our legislature raise their children than take a little responsibility themselves, and the legislature is more than willing to pander to the irrationality of the general populace, especially in a year divisible by two. The problem with this approach is that everyone gets treated like stupid children that need to be protected, and that's unfair to those who still have their wits about them (although they seem to be in the minority).
More of nothing (Score:5, Insightful)
Idiots.
Targeted at minors not adults (Score:4, Insightful)
Note the use of the word minors here. If you want to argue whether or not minors should be prevented from accessing sites like Slashdot, that's fine, but the article doesn't say at all that adults will be prevented from accessing those sites.
Re:Targeted at minors not adults (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Targeted at minors not adults (Score:5, Interesting)
Depending on your viewpoint, it's rather creepy to "check in" with someone when you want to access "inappropriate" content at all. On the plus side, librarians, and the ALA [ala.org] in particular, are generally quite opposed to censorship of any kind. You can bet that they'll have something to say about this. Libraries already have all sorts of trouble being compliant with the very vague law that is CIPA, and this will only muddy the water further.
I found a very interesting article [firstmonday.org] (linked to from the ALA website) that goes over the problems that libraries face with internet filtering. Make no mistake; they hate it. Particularly alarming is the librarian from Singapore that wasn't that concerned about censorship:
She casually replied, "Oh yes, we get overblocking all the time. Last week I was helping a patron look for motor vehicle forms but they were blocked, probably because it has a box to check for SEX 'Male/Female.'"
There was something about her casual tone that tripped me up. I usually hear librarians give overblocking examples in tones alternating between outrage, bitterness and amusement. I heard none of that in her voice. Just a relaxed answer, perhaps befitting our tranquil setting.
Nevertheless, I prodded, "As a librarian, doesn't that bother you?"
"No, not really," she said. Noticing the surprised look on my face, she continued, "You don't understand. Everything in Singapore is censored ... our books, our movies. You get used to it. Internet filters are nothing special."
This is purely redundant legislation to collect mindshare for an election year, and will only be used to restrict us further. Once people get used to it, they cease to care. It must be fought.
Parent
Dangerous indeed to politicians (Score:4, Insightful)
WTF? O.o (Score:5, Interesting)
Families are practically becoming prison camps for kids... and you're telling me that the greatest danger are sexual predators on the internet? Are you f*cking kidding me?
Re:WTF? O.o (Score:5, Insightful)
It's been this way since time immemorial. Teenagers are the great misunderstood masses. Their problems are hard for them to deal with because the shine of them being little kids has worn off, but their parents and other adults won't take them seriously.
And kids have been trying to talk about their problems in social groups forever. Now they have a place to do it that allows teens from far and away to share their feelings and try to make sense of their world, and maybe just maybe form some kind of lasting connection that will help them later in life.
Can't have that.
Listen, there have been sexual predators out for kids as long as all this has been going on. Does anyone honestly thing locking down MySpace is going to make them go away? They'll just go back to cruising the streets or hanging out around arcades, movie theatres, and convenience stores. If a sexual predator wants something, he/she will get it, Internet or no.
I think if we were better parents, talked to our teens, treated them like people and not possessions, we wouldn't have to worry about them hanging out in social networks. They might actually be able to take care of themselves. One thing I know: Congress can't run the country, let alone raise my children.
Parent
Why does common sense stop when a computer is (Score:4, Insightful)
I guess this is yet another "save the children" campaign.
But guess what? Most people that abuse children are trusted friends or family members, not some slashdot geek in his mom's basement in Maine going after the poor children looking at websites at the library in California.
The problem is not MySpace or Slashdot, its that the US is full of lonely scared sick people that take it out of the easiest victims that they can, children. And although it is pretty common to do minor pedophilia, severe and chronic abuse is very rare.
So brilliant legislators, what is next? Outlawing telephones, children in public places, school, libraries, music, TV, well, everything besides the privilege of paying taxes?
Dipshits.
Keep taking our liberties, and you will understand what the 2nd amendment is all about.
This should be up to the school . . . (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem is a community driven site has no way to properly police and identify it's members.
I ran a community based website for 8 years where users could create profiles, message each other, participate in tree style board discussions and it became very popular with high school age children. I went through most of the steps that would have made the site COPPA compliant (though it was unneeded) using email based multi-opt in methods to verify the user. The site was policed regularly for content that would have been inappropriate for underage users, erring on the side of caution. I didn't regulate what users sent privately to each other, though there were jobs that ran on the backend that would watch for things that should send up a red flag (ie, adults talking about 'plane tickets' with minors). It wasn't perfect, and most of the time the flags were false positives that I just ignored. Users were aware of the monitoring and generally approved.
I shut the site down about 10-12 months ago because I couldn't handle dealing with the child predators anymore. One of my monitors had gone off and upon investigation I found not just one but three different adults (30+ males) that were all attempting to 'hook up' with girls 13-16... I am not in position to judge, make laws, or anything of that nature. However, this activity is explicitly not what I wanted on my site (and since all parties were in the US, they all were beneath the laws of this country and their respective states). I attempted reporting these activities to the states the individuals were from (California and Indiana in this instance), was given the run around for a while and eventually just told in a round about way that nothing I could submit or do would effect anything. No investigation, no extra monitoring, no research into these individuals who were quite knowingly breaking laws and endangering a child (from at least the law books perspective).
I searched for ways I could as a small website operator (~20000 members) validate a users identity. I figured I could at least prevent some of these activities if users knew without a doubt that their accounts were tied to their real identity (even if it was hidden to other users). I hit a brick wall. I could not find any means to accomplish this and queries on solutions were left unanswered (though my Ask Slashdot question is still in Pending state and has been for the last many months).
I don't see this issue as being something that laws preventing children from getting on these sites is the solution. I *do* however feel the schools should have the right to block access to any sites they don't deem as needed for the education process. I happily blocked access to my site on my side at the request of school administrators that didn't have the technical wherewithall to block it on their side. Social networking websites have as much place in a classroom as cell phones and instant messaging devices. So blocking them I approve of, but at the school administrations discretion.
My biggest point here is the problem: "Sexual predators preying on children" is not solved by their solution "Block access to myspace while at school and put the load on the site delivering the service, not on the site accessing the service".
Most social networking sites ignore the fact that they KNOW their sites are/will be used by predators. Some of us let the guilt get to us and shut down.
As a father... (Score:4, Interesting)
If kids can't get the attention they need from their parents, they'll look for it elsewhere.
You can't legislate that. Parents just have to pull their heads out of their asses and be parents.
Politicians are reactionary organisms that will do anything to please the masses so they can get re-elected. Bills like this are merely placebos that make the government appear that they're doing something about a problem that should be addressed at home.
This is a waste of time and a distraction from REAL issues. But I don't have any stong opinions about it
Proservatives (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:So the purpose of the government.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Guns. Lots of guns.
Just as guns can be used to repress people, they can be used to free people.
Of course, then the whole "throne of bayonets" thing comes into play...
Parent
Re:So the purpose of the government.. (Score:5, Informative)
You might want to ask David Koresh [bbc.co.uk] how that worked out for him... or the folk at Ruby Ridge [wikipedia.org]
Violence only begets more violence. A well educated populace that is active in their community and politics is the only long term defense against corruption & tyranny. Teach your children well.
Or maybe more to the point a violent uprising to gov't only plays into their hands by justifying their use of overwhelming force. The US people would not stand for a Tiananmen Square [wikipedia.org] style crackdown on US soil. Look to the civil rights movement of the 60s. Freedom Riders [wikipedia.org] being attacked on National TV forced JFK to send in the troops. Or look at the Kent State Massacre. [wikipedia.org]
Parent
Re:So the purpose of the government.. (Score:5, Funny)
Terrorists.
Parent
Re:So the purpose of the government.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, that's comforting....problem is, we're under it, and when it collapses, it's gonna hurt.
Parent
Phoenix (Score:5, Insightful)
As another poster mentioned, this is the reason for the second amendment. It's just ironic that liberals might be leading the pack in wishing that it hadn't been all but repealed.
Where were the privacy rights guys when people wanted gun registrations? Now the government has lists of who could oppose, and they'll be the first to go when the red bird rises.
People have been so divided by this "Conservative" and "Liberal" false separation that they refuse to think about the implications of each. We're all guilty of unquestioningly accepting dogma that someone tells us is consistent with our particular "faith". The evidence is the apparent absence of "moderates" in America.
So here's the revolution: Stop thinking in terms of Liberal and Conservative. Stop letting other people speak for you and think for you. Re-think your beliefs, and know WHY you believe what you do.
I think most intelligent people would understand that disarming the populace is the first step of any dictatorship, and it's only now, when something that always seemed impossible in the U S of A now seems frighteningly plausible, that people will see the obvious. That's also when it's too late.
The irony is that liberals may have set the stage for a conservative dictatorship.
Parent
The government IS the people. (Score:4, Insightful)
If you want a different government, you vote for different people.
It's as simple as that.
Parent
Re:The 2nd Amendment. (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe it's the other way around; maybe voting means nothing because 50% of the public is too stupid to take up their part of the process. Maybe it's these kinds of people who let things get bad because their too gutless to take 5 minutes out of their busy day and let their elected officals know what they're thinking.
Everyone who cries that they're screwed (by the government) and that there is no way to change things are right... as long as you keep sitting on your stoop and crying "poor me" you're not going to change anything.
Parent