FCC Chair To Push Free Porn-Free Internet
The proposal to allow a no-smut, free wireless Internet service is part of a proposal to auction off a chunk of airwaves. The winning bidder would be required to set aside a quarter of the airwaves for a free Internet service. The winner could establish a paid service that would have a fast wireless Internet connection. The free service could be slower and would be required to filter out pornography and other material not suitable for children. The FCC's proposal mirrors a plan offered by M2Z Networks Inc., a start-up backed by Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers partner John Doerr.
The proposal faces objections from consumer groups -- who say the FCC's filtering will go too far -- and the wireless carriers, who complain that a free Internet would interfere with their own radiowaves (and customer-base).
See Also:
Obama's CTO: Here's Who's In The Running
ISPs To Speed Up P2P Transfers
FCC Approves 'Wi-Fi On Steroids': Good News For Consumers, Bad News For Telcos
Not porn - but often carry naked pictures of members.
Is porn free - sex free as well ?
WAKE UP people! One more way for the GOVT to take over the free Airwaves. IT DOES NOT BELONG TO ANYONE OTHER THAN THE PEOPLE!!
Martin is a Bush Cheney sphincter who has been criticized for by many for secrecy and political activity.
In one short month, it will be time to retire to some white shoe lawfirm and his daily tee time at the Congressional.
And if you ban that, what else?
Don't like it? Don't look at it.
Kids? That's the parent's job.
You can tell that the Bushies at CPB were also in pushing the agenda mode this weekend. We had a PBS pledge drive this weekend in Chicago. They jabbered endlessly about how their programming provided enlightenment on the Gospels, the development of Christianity and the History of JC. I feel that this is important-in the right place and context.
I had to wonder if a producer was screaming in the earpiece that he heard televisions all across Chicago clicking off....or if someone from Homeland security was standing behind him with an M-16 to asssure that he didn't go 'off message'.
'scum-up the internet'? I thought you were kidding. The internet has been one of the major reasons that the number porn stores have been going out of business in droves. Getting them off the internet would drive them back to people's neighborhoods. Can we put one next to you Theresa?
And who gets to decide what counts as smut? There are scores of books in most libraries that at one time, in one or more places, were deemed obscene.
There are a dozen Net Nanny type filters already available for free to keep smut out of the hands of kids.
Like most of this administration's ideas this is a thinly disguised plan to increase government control and make their already rich friends a little richer.
I am not worried, this guy will be out on his kiester in a few weeks anyway.
Apparently the wireless guys have been fighting this because they want to protect their profit margins. We have a choice of free TV and subscription cable/satellite. Why not the same for broadband? Have you ever heard Comcast claim that it cannot compete with NBC? That is the kind of argument that T-Mobile is making.
I have no love for the companies that are trying to gouge us everyday.
www.fcc.gov/comissioners/martin/
What gives the FCC the right? what will they take away next? LGBT websites? this sounds way to much like China's censorship, information should be free, choice of information should be free.
before people jump on board with this "wolf in sheeps clothing" they need to sit back and really see it for what it is. it's the buying of the FCC by verizon, att&t and comcast.
NET NEUTRALITY ONLY PLEASE. RAISE YOUR OWN CHILDREN.
Today it's porn, tomorrow it's ...?
For those that say that this will drive the porn pushers back into the streets and stifle technological breakthroughs, do you really think that internet pornography will disappear? What John Doerr is proposing is simply a free alternative. His one stipulation is that it will be smut free (and please don't kid yourself in thinking that defining porn will be that difficult). If you want porn then don't use it.
I promise that internet porn will still be available to those that want it.
Also, though, too, also there... You have got to believe that this guy is WAY into porn. Larry Craig anyone? Those who bash it are usually the most guilty.
Please, O beneficent federal government, do tell me what is wholesome and good for a human being to see and hear! I am not capable of making those decisions on my own and need thy sage guidance.
Too many men sit on the computer for HOURS on end watching porn and ignoring their own wives and not spending quality time with their children - just ask Agent Mulder about that. The eradication of first, internet porn, and then porn altogether is the first step in creating a better society where women are seen as actual humans instead of nothing more than body parts for a man's pleasure only.
In the name of LiberT,
Take your fake morals and keep them to yourselves.
You cannot control how a man views a woman and with whom he compares her. Your reasoning is beyond flawed.
There is a reason prohibition was done away with.
Quite honestly I'd rather be with a guy who actually has se.xual drive then someone like yourself who is obviously null. OH and just because someone watches porn doesn't automatically mean they devalue who they are with. Perhaps for some it's abusive but for many it is not. Same with alcohol, food and gambling. Shall we get rid of those things because a few people are irresponsible? I'll let you tell the people to their faces if that does happen.
I mean, CocksureMen.com is a porn site, of couse, but how about a collection of Michallangelo paintings? That's got a lot of naked men too.
"Twilight" is meant for a teen audience because of it's sexual undertones.. do we filter that out? What is the threshold?
There's a few scenes in the Harry Potter books where Harry is naked. Is that porn now? Photographs of women in bikinis?
How about safe sex information? I mean.. should it only be people who can afford it that get to have access to information about how to protect themselves against STDs and pregnancy? Information about breast feeding? Should only rich people be able to learn about that on-line?
How about breast and testicular cancer self examination information? That requires pictures of naked people... should that only be accessible to people who can afford it?
And who gets to decide? Who's going to have the control over what I see and what I don't see?
But this is dumb. Just because there are children in New York we're supposed to ban porn or sex? Yeah right.
Even prisons, controlling what goes in and out and where the inmates physically are, can't control morals or vulgarity. Shawshank, anyone? What a clean place that was...
Internet porn will be there for those who are willing to pay for it, just like they pay for it today. Nothing really will change except a safer place for our children to research papers.
Make free internet IPv4 (the current standard), make all "pay" for porn sites IPv6. IPv4 can't access IPv6 sites and visa/versa. Other non pay for porn sites will have IPv4 access and IPv6 access.
Any one with Windows Vista already has to uncheck IPv6 to surf todays internet. Some people are fighting over words, the system is already in place, it justs needs to be tweaked a little.
Companies and consumers may have to upgrade their computers and servers to be able to access the new IPv6 internet.
My 2 cents
If you look at Fox News closely, you will find a lot of soft porn that masquerades as "ain't it awful" journalism. They present a soft-core scene of scantily dressed people on a yacht engaged in "dry rape" in order to say, "Now isn't this just disgraceful."
There will probably also be a lot of non-porn things like public suicides. Utah, the Mormon state that prides itself on its "virtuous" citizens, has the highest rate of suicide and depression of any state in the Union.
Keep your filters--I'll pay for and filter my own information, thank you very much. AND no, I'm not worried about my kids accidentally accessing porn, because I haven't conveniently forgotten that we can install filters on our own computers, and I'm not too lazy to monitor my own children. I don't need Daddy Government to do it for me.
To the person who said that porn is mostly mental,I beg to differ! to most men ,it is the physical aspect,to women it is more mental.
You know who else has a nationalized internet....China
Ok course Kevin Martin is a Bush crony, a thief, a looter and a liar.
And of course the definition of porn and other content not suitable for children is a slippery slope that should not be ventured.
But the reason to oppose this is that the foundations of the FCC's authority over content no longer exist. The airwaves are not scarce. Spread spectrum technology could allow near infinite diversity.
There's also the problem of where these people intend to draw the line: *My* definition of "porn" (I don't have one, actually), or the opinion of some Southern Baptist Sunday School teacher? Hey, if you don't like it, don't look at it!
The government needs to keep its hands the hell off the Internet!
And why is it that Martin doesn't want the market to decide? Isn't he a free market Rethuglican?
They're always setting regulations when it's good for them, but eschew regs when it gets in the way of making money.
Martin has been a travesty as FCC head.
If he wants to get rid of some porn, why doesn't he suggest that J. W. Marriott, good LDS Church members that they are (working hard every day to take away my civil rights) stop selling porn in their hotel rooms?
That and video games do drive technology. There are far more pressing issues for a government agency to address than a no win one like censoring porn. That battle had never been won at any time in any society's history. With prepubescent girls dressed up like sluts and 12 year old pregnant girls that battle is already lost. On social mores one can only set the example. One cannot legislate behavior.
An issue I'd really like addressed is an international conference among government agencies to make the infection of computer systems with viruses through the internet an extraditable criminal offence. Viruses cause extensive economic damage and is an invasion of privacy and theft of data that is often used to commit significant crimes.
First, HOW are they going to define "pornography"? According to SOME of the Republican bent, Michael Angelo's David is "pornographic". Second, how are you going to identify, globally, sites that are "pornographic"? See, the powers that be keep refusing to allow a *.xxx URL identifier exclusively for adult entertainment yet then bemoan the fact that it is virtually impossible to prevent access to much of the media.
Finally, leave it to PARENTS to decide what their children will have access to. THEY can apply filters (after the *.xxx URL identifier is FINALLY accepted) to their own systems rather than forcing the GOP's misbegotten sense of "morality" upon me and everyone else who doesn't blush at the slightest hint of a boob or buttock.
The FCC clown LOOKS like the smarmy, puritantical dork that he actually is. No doubt, as per GOP rules, he is either a secret pedophile or a closeted homosexual (not that there is anything wrong with that...it's the hypocrisy).
Porn, porn, porn."
Sorry guy, but the internet is for porn.
If this goes through, they will!
IMHO, this is a back door attempt to create a non-neutral Internet. The free service will favor those "approved" interests, at the expense of everyone else.
Because it's free, it will get more exposure and traffic as pay per providers operate at a disadvantage for a large fraction of the population.
In addition to being non-neutral, this free Interent will embody the discussion over what is porn. From there we find other things regulatable, and the debate then is about how to regulate the Internet, not just the FREE Internet, because at the end of the day, there is just THE INTERNET.
Bad call.
If we are to provide net access to people for free, then we do it for that value alone, not to advance some lame ass "Let's make the choices for the people because we know better than they do." agenda.
Do not support this.
Do we need an internet that runs like our economy. Time to get a FCC Commissioner who cares about more than corporate profits and control of the message.
Free and non censored only! This is a free country and that is basic censorship. Parents need to control their kids better. End of story.
Let parents, schools, libraries and individuals implement measures to control age appropriate content, IF THEY CHOOSE TO DO SO.
The internet needs to remain free, this is the last refuge many people have to gain knowledge from multiple sources without being passed through so many filters. Who gauges what is appropiate for you, who deems what you can or cannot read or see? I do not want to live in a world where others decide what is right for me to learn about, what is right for me to speak about, or read about.
Any manipulation of this can and will lead to corruptive practices who will lead to the disfrancisment of some and to the benefit of others
Just another attempt for the "morality cops" teamed up with big business to try and filter everything you see and hear. I'd rather pay for open internet than get free cr@p filtered by some ideological group of idiots that can't just let people live their own lives and decided for themselves what they want to watch and hear.
GO AWAY! Nobody wants you baby sitters sticking your nose in everything! You people are pathetic and sickening. Get a life!
Support Net Neutrality.
I don't really look at porn online, however, it's not up to me to decide that for everyone else. What the hell happened to our free society? We are now a society where everyone, even adults, are treated like children. Corporations run by corrupt billionaires want to decide EVERYTHING for you, and write that into law so no one can resist.
Give me liberty, or give me death.
Government "moralists," (as they hail ya)
Keep your hands off my genitalia
Or I'll start movements to disrobe ya
For your purulent pornophobia.
Is there a way for the sane to convince ya
That both the subnormal and the intelligensia
Need a carnal cornucopia?
No delusion could be dopia
Than to believe such things deprave ya.
Pics of mammalian behavia
Offer relief and often relax ya.
You're headed for locomotor ataxia
Yourself if you don't get some fantasia
Besides imagining mine, which dismays ya.
I don't wanna shame ya, I don't wanna shock ya,
But smut from Frisco, Brazil, and Slovakia
Just visualizes what all men includin' ya
Think about anyway, so just shut up, shouldn' ya?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"Dear Lord: Please save the rest of us from your followers in the American Talibangelical movement. Thank you. Amen."
Please, toss this sorry turd out before he does more harm than good for the government.
But I'm also a MOM. WITH cyber nanny software installed on all of our computers. Unfortunately when I ask other parents if they have it on their computers as well, they are usually clueless.
And even our public elementary school has internet filters. Really good ones. But you know what? Stuff still slipped through. I know because my kids were honest enough to tell me and I had to report it to the principal so they could update the software.
So for everyone who says "it's the parent's job" I totally agree. But give us a break and give us some tools to make that job possible to do well.
Do you realize that about half of 12 year old have seen online porn? Do you think that's OK, or too young?
What's wrong with having an OPTION for parents who want to have some extra help? Sometimes for no reason our cybernanny stops working and we have to reboot the computer and trouble shoot it.
One of my best friends was sitting right next to her daughter in front of their home computer (can't get much more supervised than that) and her eleven year old daughter typed in "Hillary Duff Pictures" and explicit nude photos of a look alike popped up. She was horrified and covered her eyes.
So, it's not so simple folks. Don't blame everything on lazy parents. Some of us are trying really hard and the system we have isn't working so well.
I have been asking for years why we can't come up with a service exactly like this. I would actually PAY big bucks for the peace of mind.
I am tired of having to go into our cyber sitter software and temporarily suspend it and look over my 14 year old son's shoulder when he has to research something on the net for a school paper.
I have told both of my kids "I hope they have something in place by the time that you are parents that makes this easier than what we are having to go through". 'Cause I'm sorry, but our parents did NOT have to worry that porn was going to slip in front of us inadvertantly when we were in elementary school.
It gets really shady if they broaden their definition of pornography over time. Who knows what freedoms we stand to lose as other FCC commissioners filter access to other content. We could be setting down the same path that China took with their internet services.
There are ways around net censorship, and every grade-school kid knows them."
Haha; I remember back in high school when NetNanny or something like that was first added. We were probably among the first few iterations of that type of software, and it wouldn't let you access anything. Literally, things like National Geographic and the Weather Channel were blocked...within a day all the students were passing around ways to circumvent the software, and several times students initiated hacks that disabled the program campus-wide.
The notion of blocking the modern child from internet from my generation and younger ignores the fact that we eat source code for breakfast. If kids want to get around a silly internet blocker they'll just hack it or go find an unrestricted computer.
I quote: "A males job is to fuck, fuck and reproduce (females, that is)"
-John Dick Dickens
Also, I believe that we should be taxed according to penis size. It should follow the following rules:
-9-11" (Nuisence Tax) $55.00
-7-9" (Special Tax) $45.00
-4-7" (Mini Tax) $35.00
-3" or less (Chode Tax) $100.00
***NOTE: Males exceeding 12 inches may file for a federal gains return!!!
Sincerely,
Pecker Checker
Internal Revenue Services
Washington DC
Questions/Comments? Call me at: 1-800-CHODE-MASTERS (or) 9-1-1
Thank you and my warmest and most personal (sexually) regards.