namelesstavern.net

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8064734/

I think that's a great idea, but how much do you wanna bet the porn industry will raise holy hell because it "violates" their First Amendment "rights?"

Good idea but I doubt many sites will switch since it costs more and they can't 'trap' you into going there.

I highly doubt that they will pay more to be more controled. Think about it, would you pay more then somone else for the same product while at the same time making your product easier to be blocked from use?

Too me, you shouldn't get into censoring the internet in ANY way. Don't go if you don't want to be offended. It just seems like a real slippery slope(I know I sound like a conservative).

Maybe they should make a domain were people AREN'T aloud to put crap on it. Then they can censor the shit out of it and put a bunch of church group meet ups and shit.

i see your poin zan, but conversely dont you think that a porn site with the url http://www.whitehouse.com should be allowed? (yes its no longer existant)

i remember typing that into the school computers when we were doing research on the electorial process during bush/gore. They didnt have the filters up for that one yet.

Zanchief wrote:Too me, you shouldn't get into censoring the internet in ANY way. Don't go if you don't want to be offended. It just seems like a real slippery slope(I know I sound like a conservative).

Maybe they should make a domain were people AREN'T aloud to put crap on it. Then they can censor the shit out of it and put a bunch of church group meet ups and shit.

I think part of the problem is that they intentionally misrepresent their URL's and or spam the shit out of you with pop up's if you happen across the wrong site by accident. As though you're suddenly going to pay for access to their site.

I like porn as much as the next guy, but when I am trying to do, or look for something in particular I don't want to see that shit.

From the article: "It will further help to protect kids," said John Morris, staff counsel at the Washington-based Center for Democracy and Technology.


Who the hell is this moron? Protect kids by gathering all the sites theyre trying to sneak onto into a convenient naming convention..... Yeah, makes good fucking sense to me. Here's a radical idea for all the bleeding ass liberals - instead of trying to "glass wall" the internet, develop a *mandatory* program that has to be completed to own a computer. Program would have "simple" shit like basic internet security, firewall filtering, spam blocking technology... ya know, how to use the internet like you have a fucking clue.

Yeah it worked out so well for driving vehicles as well!

Not to be a dick, but regulations do squat and we all know it. A dumbass with a license is no more qualified to drive than a 14 year old who has no license.

A dumbass is a dumbass.

Diekan wrote:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8064734/

I think that's a great idea, but how much do you wanna bet the porn industry will raise holy hell because it "violates" their First Amendment "rights?"

I think its a stupid fucking idea. Like parents need anymore help slacking off in their duties raising children.

If you don't want your kids surfing porn try being a parent for a fucking change or pop for a 99 dollar Norton Internet Security Suite. It takes about 2 mouseclicks to block 99.9 percent of all porn sites.

Drivers license is an interesting comparison but I disagree on the effectiveness of a computer ownership program. Licensing has no true standard, the questions asked are of such a nature that any asstard with a 3rd grade education can answer them and unfortunately common sense goes completely to shit when most people close the car door. Given the prevalent threats of the internet (everything from spam to identity theft) a mandatory program would probably do wonders to curb the worst of the rampant stupidity on the web. Is the idea of parents actually knowing what their kids are doing really so frightening to so many people?

Harrison wrote:Not to be a dick, but regulations do squat and we all know it. A dumbass with a license is more qualified to drive than a 20 year old who has no license.

i'm all for making driving tests much much harder

fewer people would earn licenses

which would cut down on necessary road maintenance and construction

which would free up public funding for more widespread mass transit programs

too stupid to get a license? no problem, get a 24/7 bus pass for $5 a month!

which is not even to mention the decreased exhaust emissions

i like that idea actually

They really should raise the driving age to 18 at least. Too many kids get killed or kill someone else just because they are just too young and irresponsible.

The thing is, despite what people say - you can't globally regulate the intarweb, it easily evolves to move around regulations. Governments can somewhat control the flow of data into and out of their respective countries, but in the end if someone really wants something it doesn't take much (other than the know-how and sometimes the money) to get around it.

That said, providing "xxx" TLDs is a good idea - unfortunately i predict it will probably get used more by regular nerds that just want a hip new TLD for their domain. =p

nm, misread.

Btw, adding XXX domains seems pointless for the most part, as why would anyone pay more for no extra benefits --- aside from the very few who get key names (Sex.xxx ect) for extra traffic.

The problem is a simple matter of experience. A 17,18,19 year old guy has too much testosterone and too little driving experience.

The problem isn't the driving test, it's the people who do not comprehend they are driving a several thousand pound weapon at speeds that can easily kill.

Yeah, some adults drive stupidly, but once you've been driving for 20 years you understand driving and tend not to do the teenage things like stare at your radio or stop watching the road.

What's even scarier (or more darwin award material) are teenagers on crotch rockets.

I like .xxx but it'll never fly. Too easy for parents to block.