I'd rather have a preactivated and effective US news filter on my phone.
r/animetitties on Reddit is pretty good for news with the US filtered out. Yes the name seems weird - it’s not a joke.
Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
91–100 of 186 posts
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#92I understand the HN crowd may take issue with this, but the ease at which a child can stumble onto pornography or adult content is really scary. Even with google safe search, etc enabled. Growing up watching television in the US, you couldn't see topless women on public broadcast TV, let alone hardcore pornography.
Yes, sure, I understand the concern of having children be protected from things they aren't ready for... ...but is the government mandating this the best way to go about it? Is this implementation even sound?
It's additionally odd given that the GOP is (allegedly) the party of "personal responsibility" . You would think this translates to expecting parents to supervise children, rather than have "government interference" do it for you. Regardless of what you think of the law, it's effective at highlighting that the GOP isn't really the "small government" folks that pundits want to make them out to be.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#93Is there a legal precedent already where a state forced a private company to include specific software on a device? The Microsoft breakup in the late 90s might be one example but even that was not about setting specific kinds of software as the default, just letting users choose the default. Looking down the line at state or federal mandates for this kind of stuff, it's easy to see it venture into backdoor encryption…
Sure, California does it in the auto industry. They mandate a certain miles-per-gallon rating, some safety stuff etc., and since they're the biggest state, all the car companies go along because they don't want to lose that market.
Those don’t seem to have any speech implications in the way that this does.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every single phone manufacturer sans apple allows this. Ever heard of Verizon bloat ware? And yes, they will comply, 1) it’s the law, and 2) they won’t leave money on the table.
Device manufacturers don't have to follow random Utah laws: they can simply not sell phones in Utah and not have corporate operations there. Utah has 3 million people, it's not exactly a major population center. There are many cities in the world with more people than Utah. And I'm pretty sure "Verizon bloatware" is not installed at point of sale. What would stop a random employee from installing keyloggers? This stu…
Sure, they don’t have to.
They will however.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#95I thought Utah was a GOP state? What happened to 'small government'? This seems like shoving gov't down your throat.
This is a clear violation of the first amendment, right?
It might be a violation of the first amendment, but I think that'd be unlikely.
Access to such is already heavily restricted based on the viewers age and the content (including the actors age) and that seems to be generally socially acceptable. I think that the "important" part of the first amendment is usually focused on government control of speech that is made in opposition to the government, this doesn't appear to violate that in any way so I'd guess that the supreme court would probably be okay with this law from a purely first amendment perspective.
A more applicable law would seem to be Article 1 Section 8 (the interstate commerce clause) but that is also pretty weak - I believe that certain states already have widely differing views on adult content so even that might not stand up.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but there have been proposed laws requiring deplatforming of hate speech, and some have even passed: https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/13/tech/french-hate-speech-socia... Many keyboards have been worn out debating about the difference between the first amendment and free speech, but can we isolate to one case or the other here and set that issue aside in one thread?
> French parliament C'mon.
So when debating the merits of government policy, we can’t talk about Utah and France in the same conversation? I understand that this would make it harder to fit into local tribalist conflicts.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#97Is there a legal precedent already where a state forced a private company to include specific software on a device? The Microsoft breakup in the late 90s might be one example but even that was not about setting specific kinds of software as the default, just letting users choose the default. Looking down the line at state or federal mandates for this kind of stuff, it's easy to see it venture into backdoor encryption…
I expect the result here would be 'not intended for sale or use in Utah' stickers.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
(FYI it's Mormon*, named after the Book of Mormon) However, (also FYI), adherents prefer if you refer to the church as "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" and members of said church "Latter-day Saints" or simply "Christians". I know "Mormon" is a long-standing nickname and most people don't intend to use the term derogatorily, but calling Latter-day Saints "Mormons" is like nicknaming Muslims "Mohammeds…
I don't agree that it's like nicknaming Muslims "Mohammeds" or "Qurans". There already exists a short word to refer to Muslims, which is Muslims. Mormon is an effective short form of "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints", which is a mouthful. And sometimes, you might want to refer to a specific type of Christian, such as Baptist, Protestant, Catholic, or in this case, Mormons.
> Mormon is an effective short form of "The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints", which is a mouthful.
I agree, but they've asked not to be referred to by that term. If we extend the courtesy to trans people who don't want to be referred to by certain terms, I don't see why we shouldn't extend the same courtesy to religious people who don't want to be referred to by certain terms.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#99When I think of my 5 year old nephew and all the threats our world faces, it all seems small compared to the threat he poses to himself. And of those threats smartphone porn-addiction seems the worst. It's like giving every child a pot vape pen or alcohol flask and then wishing them "good luck". Seriously how do parents manage this and is there any young reader that cares to comment on how it affected them? If my hig…
As someone who grew up in the "enlargement of the internet" (20 right now), I'd say that porn negitavly impacted me for sure. I think I was like 13 when I first found porn on a nook tablet I was given for my birthday.
The issue, looking back on it, really stemmed from my mom not knowing how to stop me from accessing it, she, and all my mentors, grew up in an era like you described, the infinity of the internet (and therefor porn) did not exist yet.
Today's parents, in their giving of ipads to toddlers as a de-facto baby sitter or whatever, really need to understand the consequences of such, and how easily one can stumble into porn, and what they can do to combat that. Laws like this are doing a service, sure, but in a way that feels like the antithesis of the country/the internet.
I don't know, porn isn't inherintly bad, the porn industry seems to be based on the research I've done, but it really seems to exist in a similar place that any addiction does, and the negative implications that has.
I don't know if this answers your question, never commented on here before, but I thought I fit the bill of what you were asking. Really, parents just need to be more alert, and maybe that's impossible, I've never had a kid, but I know its a huge responsibility, and that you gotta know what you are getting yourself and your child into when you give them the entirety of the internet.
Re: Utah bill would require activated porn filter software on new phones, tablets
#100Let’s compare these sets of people: 1. who reacts most strongly to this story about deplatforming porn 2. who reacts most strongly to stories about deplatforming hate speech and incitement And try to figure out if the two groups have different principles about free expression, or perhaps the principles are irrelevant and only function as justifications when convenient for some kind of tribalism.
I am one of those people who dislikes both. Not least because they complement and reinforce each other, plus the mania of the woke really looks like a redirected religious fervor to me. Perhaps people cannot really exist without some ersatz religion, so if Christianity goes away, something else takes its place.
If you can filter out X, you can filter out Y, and once you have a censorship system in place, the list of banned things will only get longer and longer, especially if the main qualification is that someone feels offended by that.