|
Confirmed User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Virgin - nee
Posts: 3,162
|
RawAlex and I hashed out the .xxx extention debate about a month ago over on the Pond. Me for, him against.
He had some interesting points to think about :
Quote:
Alien, you don't think you make sales when some southern baptist hick goes out, drinks a little too much, comes home horny, and surfs porn? People don't want to admit they surf porn - make it too hard, and they won't surf porn.make it too easy for ISPs to block (and carriers to decline to carry) and it won't be long before your porn sites won't be accessible to huge parts of the marketplace.What would you do tomorrow if AOL decided not to carry .sex or .xxx domains? Or MSN? Or BOTH?What would you do if the individual states started to pass laws (like pennsylvania did) to block access to certain sites? Once porn is boxed into an easily defined area, it is VERY easy for these people to pass laws (that might not standup in court, but could take YEARS to get struck down) that would limit people's access to porn by obliging ISPs to block these sites, unblocking them for certain users "only on request, where proof of age can be shown, and only to households where no minors can access the material".Sorry, once you are marked as different, you can be treated different.Alex
RawAlex ::: link2x
Fri Apr 11 20:53:56 2003 - 67.68.201.130 - message #211552
_______________________________________________
More important question: What would you do if the state you are in makes it illegal to provide access to .sex and .xxx domains without written request, proof of ID, etc in EACH and every case? What if those domains are not available in any house with a minor? Not available without a government issues ID card?How many porn surfers are really going to jump through hoops to get their porn?Think of it like zoning strip clubs and adult bookstores out of business - in net terms, it is easy.Think about this: Take one of the major carriers, say "Worldcom", as an example - New York Company. State of New York passes a "cannot carry or distribute adult material that might be viewed by a minor" law. Perhaps does it by declaring that adult material passes through networks that pass within 500 feet of a school (or whatever the NYC rules are on adult business zoning). All of a sudden, your sites cannot be seen by anyone on their networks.Do this about 5 times, and suddenly adult material cannot be viewed by a large majority of people - there are not that many pipe providers anymore. When we are mixed in with the general population, we cannot be singled out. As soon as we are marked and seperated, it won't be long before states, counties, and cities in the US will attempt to use new found marking to their advantage. Anyone want to bet how long it will take Utah to ban porn sites in the .xxx and .sex range? I would guess SECONDS.Ways to do it:Make it illegal to have those domains in DNS serversBlock / refuse any outside network request for those domains (use reverse DNS lookups to stop IP accesses as well).Use polluted DNS to redirect porn surfers to government operated anti-porn sitesIt technically isn't hard once porn sites are easy to spot.Alex
RawAlex ::: All Porn Links
Sat Apr 12 01:03:04 2003 - 67.68.201.130 - message #211564
_______________________________________________
Carrie, it went through virtual unopposed because it is a tack on to the amber alert bill - and nobody wants to be on record as being against the amber alert thing. That is why these things get tacked on here, because they know they will get passed. If they were out there in the open by themselves, they would never see the light of day.US politics 101.As for "what's worse"... consider that Pennsylvania already as a law requiring ISPs to block certain sites, and it feels no reason to release that list to the public. There are already huge regulations as to where an adult business can be located. Very simply, any ISP offering .sex and .xxx access is considered an adult business. Most of them would fail the zoning restrictions, and there you go.More importantly, the upstream providers would fail the "adult business" test as well. They could be forced to move or discontinue offering "adult products"."zoning" is a very neat way to get around writing obscenity laws.Alex
RawAlex ::: findpics
Sat Apr 12 09:56:14 2003 - 67.68.202.130 - message #211569
_______________________________________________
Carrie, it could be argued that a bookstore with adult material isn't a producer... just providing access to the material. It doesn't stand up.Once the material can be segregated, someone will work to make it be blocked... it won't take long at all, I am sure...LB, I think that it might actually be acceptable as a law, but the wording is vague enough that it will be hard to prove. Sites like whitehouse.com and a few others are clearly attempting to profit from people not looking for porn, and as such, might get hit. Alex
RawAlex ::: findpics
Sat Apr 12 10:47:57 2003 - 67.68.202.130 - message #211572
_______________________________________________
Carrie, the ISP is directly profiting by selling access - this would be DOUBLY true if there starts to be "adult ISPs" and "regular ISPs"...Even if it won't stick, it still will make some close, block, or go out of business... and that would suck.Alex
RawAlex ::: findpics
Sat Apr 12 11:16:33 2003 - 67.68.202.130 - message #211575
_______________________________________________
Carrie, article for ya (note that terra.es was blocked... )http://news.com.com/2100-1023-959045.html
RawAlex ::: all porn links
Sat Apr 12 11:17:56 2003 - 67.68.202.130 - message #211576
|
I know that's a lot to read but you need context to make his case, and copy/paste doesn't preserve formatting.
If you want to look up the discussion with everyone's replies, he starts his side of the issue at message #211548 on the Pond's main board. |