mardigras

That is what our Congress is working on today.

Protecting children on the internet is simple...
DON'T allow them unsupervised access!

The hearing is going on now.
It's not on CSPAN, but for those of you with CNN Pipeline it is on feed 4.

TheLegacy

well it would put the responsibility back on the parents to watch where their kids are going. Most of the troubles we hear today of kids meeting strangers etc. from the net would have been avoided if the parents had taken a more proactive role.

I still don't think they fully understand that to stop CP does not imply they need to shut down those within adult that follow the legal codes. They should be asking for our help in order to catch them

__________________

E$_manager

supervising and talking to children will do.

__________________
Enjoy more sales with EnjoyBucks!
Homemade: Asian : Ebony : GFs : Voyeur : Nudist : Public : 3D

E$_manager

because you can't rely the responsability of bringing up your child on government or someone else.

__________________
Enjoy more sales with EnjoyBucks!
Homemade: Asian : Ebony : GFs : Voyeur : Nudist : Public : 3D

rants

I don't ever want children.

notabook

Phase 1. Insert boot in ass of every irresponsible parent.
Phase 2. ???
Phase 3. Internet is safer for children.

__________________

BluewireAngie

It's the parents responsibility.

__________________
Web Design & Programming - Creative Mainstream Style Web Design and Programming PORTFOLIO
Custom Cartoons - High Quality Cartoon Studio PORTFOLIO
Offshore Staff - Save Money & Grow Faster With Dedicated Offshore Staff PRICING

ICQ:282-072-512

dynastoned

thank god somebody agrees with me...

the internet is a public place. thats all people need to understand.

mardigras

I've been proactively saying that for years. The real problem is parents who use the internet as a babysitter, especially when they are unfamiliar with it themselves or allow the child to have it in a private area so it doesn't "disturb" the parents.

Trixxxia

Give Kids their own TLD - .kids .teen
When a computer is brought into the home, there has to be a fingerprint scanner or one of those intelligent mouse to recognize who's using it and allow them to only go into their designated areas.

The only people allowed to buy .kids & .teen domains have to apply to a special authority in their designated countries with proof of who they are and with verification processes/content available/downloads available.

Then parents have to do their due diligence and check what their kids are seeing & doing online. Keep the communication lines open and stop making their kids out to be the victims of the world - if they are victims online, it's the parents' fault for not educating and for not looking over them like a hawk.

E$_manager

so this problem really exists? Course muy child is 5 now. Do i have to expect her to search for porn in net in 8 years?

__________________
Enjoy more sales with EnjoyBucks!
Homemade: Asian : Ebony : GFs : Voyeur : Nudist : Public : 3D

scottybuzz

i was always looking at porn as a youngster, it did me good

__________________
$$$$$ MAKE HUGE MONEY IN CAMS - CLICK HERE $$$$$

bringer

the answer is.... SUGGEST microsoft implement filtering in their os where the childs birth date is an option when creating the account. then SUGGEST companies such as dell and gateway put information on the packaging informing parents to RTFM before handing it over to their child. it really isnt that difficult but unfortunately congress has no idea what they're doing regarding this issue and will try and legislate the destination rather than the source.

__________________
333-765-551

Tdog

Congress needs to stop trying to make the internet safe and start talking about how they are going to stop spending, and spending, and spending....

The republicans are worse than the Democrats with all this spending.

Dagwolf

Not necessarily. I don't have a problem with my kids; I keep them aware that I can check up on their internet history; I keep the family computer in an area where they can't hide what they're doing.

__________________
Sleep well, and dream of large women.

mardigras

Filtering software is a horribly lazy and not 100% reliable way for parents to approach the issue. If they must use filtering software I would never recommend they use one that filters out content, only that which will let them add lists of safe sites of their own choosing, then allow the child to request any additional sites they wish to access be added to the safelist (after parental review, which includes investigating what links on otherwise safe sites lead to).

mardigras

Excellent!

bringer

parents are lazy fuckers which is why we have all these problems. if MS had a built-in filtering software simular to what aol offers, one that parents input their childs age/range, the software would unlock websites as they age. site lists could update real time or monthly with auto updates so parental supervision could be what it is now... zero.

__________________
333-765-551

cool1

Ban children from the internet
get the little buggers back outside!
Leave the net for adults only

__________________

mardigras

I'm all for that!

tony286

no internet connections in kids bedroom, thats one way but no one takes responsiblity .Its easier to blame us, takes less work.

czarina

WHAT HE SAID!

SmokeyTheBear

the way to do it is so simple its silly..

You lock them in a dmz basically a tld like .kids would help but not really needed.

As long as you hand approve sites and all the links are inbound , theres not much area for fuckups.

__________________
hatisblack at yahoo.com

Tanker

thats a great idea.

I also agree getting kids on TLD .Kids , make parents responsible for thier children its not congress's job to watch them or we would have free day care too

__________________

Tanker
ICQ 3427575

CCBTools Now featured in the CCBill.com APP STORE

ScannerX

A) Require everyone under the age of 21 to be temporarily sterilized. After 21 you must take a How to raise children class in order to be made fertile again
B) Do away with welfare
C) Permanently sterilize anyone with an IQ of less than 100

minusonebit

1). Kill all the children.

- or -

2). Kill the internet.

Since neither is happening, lets get over this. The internet is not safe for children. It never has been. It never will be. It shouldnt be.

Jon Clark - BANNED FOR LIFE

Great Idea!

ronaldo

1. .kids-been saying that for a LONG time.

2. Educate our children about the potential dangers of the internet and discuss ANYTHING that comes up that your child feels the need to ask you about.

3. Keep family computers in an open environment, periodically look at the history of what your children are looking at on the internet and again...DISCUSS it with them, and lay down the rules for internet access.

4. HELP to educate parents about the internet. As much as we hate it when congress blames US for inundating the internet with porn and subsequently being the downfall to society as we know it, it's equally disturbing to me that WE as an industry constantly blame the parents. Are we simply passing the buck? Parents DO only have so much control over their children. In our house? Great. What they do OUTSIDE the house, we can only HOPE we've taught them right from wrong.

I have children and am smart enough to know what I need to do to keep my kids safe and away from porn or whatever. Most people in this industry would know how to protect their children. But it's our profession. I don't claim to know everything about everything, so don't expect parents that work in a factory or a daycare setting to know everything about the internet.

In an ideal world they would, but perhaps WE as an industry should step up and make true what we've said for years...find a technological solution to the problem and be a step ahead of everyone so noone has anything to complain about (obviously that would never happen, but you get my point).

If we leave shows like Dateline and their "Internet Predators" shows to teach and inform parents, WHO is going to be the scapegoat? Naturally, we are. If WE'RE the leaders in informing and educating parents, we'll probably do a better job of it than the government ever could, and it would show that we're TRYING to work to keep children safe on the internet, instead of being the boogeymen the media and government are currently making us out to be. (Don't ask me how to implement this. I also don't claim to have all the answers)

bdld

easy to implement filters on browsers. then its the parents responsibility to activate them. if something isnt done soon the govt is going to have to step in and come up with their own solution.

madawgz

parents should know what their kids are doing on the web

__________________
TAEMDLRMSKRJIXMRLSMRJ.

VicD

A lot of parents don't even know what internet is...

mardigras

Today they have set their sights on social networking sites like myspace.com. CNN Pipeline, feed #4.

I wish they would put the person speaking's name on the screen... when I first tuned in some woman seemed to be suggesting that if we gave our credit card # to every site we surf the problem of protecting children on the internet would be solved

Dirty Dane

keep the internet away from children - and keep the children away from internet

mardigras

Some geniuses at this hearing today... one guy wants to ban surveys on myspace pages.

Joan

current hearings - http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/...55/hearing.htm

__________________
ASACP - Protecting Your Business By Protecting Children

Joan

(http://asacp.org/townhallboard/viewtopic.php?t=19)

Another Proposed Bill - Labeling and Disclaimer Pages

Knowing that it would protect both children and the industry, over two years ASACP addes to its Best Practices (http://www.asacp.org/best_practices.php):

On Index (warning) page: include all disclaimers, age verification, etc., and exclude images to prevent children from unknowingly viewing adult material.

Well, just like with spam (and now we have the CanSpam bill) many companies have not included this type of warning page. What we were concerned is starting to happen: if the industry didn't do it, it would be mandated.

So now, there is another bill but this time a communication bill that would require this.

http://news.com.com/Senators+adopt+W...l?tag=nefd.top

During a day of debate on a wide-ranging communications bill, the Senate Commerce Committee approved an amendment backed by the Bush administration that proponents claim would help clean up the Internet and protect children online.

It says that commercial Web sites must not place "sexually explicit material" on their home pages upon pain of felony prosecution--and, in addition, they must rate "each page or screen of the website that does contain sexually explicit material" with a system to be devised by the Federal Trade Commission.

"This will protect children from accidentally typing in the wrong address and immediately viewing indecent material," said Sen. Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican who is the co-founder of the Congressional Internet Caucus.

Based on the political climate and the various proposed bills, ASACP believes that the industry needs to adopt a standard label ? your thoughts

http://www.asacp.org/townhallboard/

__________________
ASACP - Protecting Your Business By Protecting Children

mardigras

Cool! I tried earlier to find it elsewhere for those who don't have Pipeline

bobbyjuly

Fighting with CP and regulating Adult industry is two different things. Why they put the apples and oranges in the same basket? thats the million dollar question...

__________________
http://www.whoisnexxxt.com Where Adult Stars come to play!

Joan

Those of us involved with the industry know that, but legislators don't.

__________________
ASACP - Protecting Your Business By Protecting Children

mrkris

It's easier to impose laws on an industry rather than educating the parents.

__________________

PHP-MySQL-Rails | ICQ: 342500546

Quickdraw

Tools>>Internet Options>>Content--ContentAdvisor>>Settings(modify)--Enable.

If websites aren't rated and ContentAdvisor is on, then access is denied. So it seems that even if websites that don't label themselves for whatever reason still won't be seen if parents would simply utilize the tools that have been available for years.

Another thought for adult type sites that are not blocked by 'NetGear' type filtering(which is pretty simple as it uses and blocks specific strings within a URL)
Instead of using www.thehun.com(just an example domain without any 'adult' words within it), it would be simple to add to/change the 'www' to another adult word, say like 'adult' with a simple mod of the server config.
So now instead of www.thehun.com it could be adult.thehun.com, which would help some of the simplest filtering technologies.

Then one might also be able to use software utilized by sites like WebmasterWorld. They allow Google to spider all this content on their sites which allows them to be found within the search index. But when coming from outside links you are required to login or join in order to see it. In the typical link type site that join/login could simply be an age verification type deallybob.

Aly

WHY is usually a rather redundant question... I encourage everybody to acknowledge that 'they' DO... and respond accordingly. Make a proactive effort to educate society in general as best you can, and also make sure you protect yourself in the meantime.

They told us this was going down back in February... Debating the flaws in the logic now is still important, sure... but seriously, also do what you must right now in order to stay in business.

My somewhat simplistic article about this is in the March issue of GayVN Magazine.

__________________
.

mardigras

I think of the many times that I argued with some at this forum who insisted there was not a coming crackdown on online content. When the people who have the authority to do so say they are going to do it why would you not believe them?

jollyperv

B and C are good ideas.

Mediachick

It depends from what exactly you want to protect them from... Online molesters? unproper images? internet addiction?

__________________
--MC--
Live High Def Video Chat Converts!



ICQ: 276456001

The Complete Live Video Chat Solution

EZRhino

Congress have no idea what they are doing. Backwards idiots cant protect our borders how the fuck can they figure out how to protect our kids.

mardigras

Well this week the hearings are pretty much covering all of the above.

There is no need to protect children online. Online is not a child's arena.

Want a law? Make allowing children unsupervised access to the internet illegal, as is allowing them to do other things they are by law not legally old enough to do (drink, drive, smoke, etc.).

Joan

http://energycommerce.house.gov/108/...55/hearing.htm

If you think that they only attack the adult industry, you should listen to this hearing

__________________
ASACP - Protecting Your Business By Protecting Children

uno

I'd say not letting a child use the internet unsupervised is the first step. The fucking internet is not a babysitter. How bout some god damn parental responsibility?

__________________
-uno
icq: 111-914
CrazyBabe.com - porn art
MojoHost - For all your hosting needs, present and future. Tell them I sent ya!

Socks

Catholic priests hurt more children every year than online pornography does.