People are stupid.

[mikester]

Seriously...speaking with my parent hat on;

http://news.com.com/Bush+administration+objects+to+.xxx+domains/2100-1028_3-5833764.html?tag=nefd.top

The conservative right seems diametrically opposed to porn and that's all fine and good and ALL THE MORE REASON TO SUPPORT AND MANDATE THIS TOP LEVEL DOMAIN.

If all porn sites were required to use the .xxx instead of any .com, .org, .net or whatever then it would be insanely easier to block it from your kids view on your home networks. Blocking a top level domain is infinitely easier than blocking singular websites. If the US alone had this restriction even then good US based porn business would use it even including the $60 registration fee ($60 is a drop in the bucket).

It is silly to oppose this and they essentially shoot themselves in the foot in doing so.

Still a parent is faced with off shore sites but a simple US regulation would at least make things better for parents here in the states.

[tabs]

Boy U can say that again!

[bryanthompson]

Yeah, I cant figure out why they'd oppose this either... They are right, it would turn .xxx domains into the red light district, but it's easier to block entire domain sets than individual .com addresses. It's bad for the porn industry though... every mistaken URL that goes to a porn site is bonus for them.

If Bush weren't in the pockets of Big Porn, this type of common sense would have no problem getting support.

[skipdup]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
If Bush weren't in the pockets of Big Porn, this type of common sense would have no problem getting support.

I had to look at your name to see that it was a joke. Sad thing is... To me it seems comments like that are too often spouted literally here.

[FrayAdjacent911]

I'm conservative. I'm right... and I dig porn.

[rcecale]

Originally posted by skipdup
I had to look at your name to see that it was a joke.

Skip, ol' buddy, you and me both! LOL

Randy

[djmcmath]

I'm on the conservative side of the aisle, too, and this seems like a no-brainer. I can't imagine why Big Porn would push this kind of thing, though. The whole mess just seems backwards. Why is the Right fighting this? Why is Big Porn backing it? What are we missing?

[bryanthompson]

Why is Big Porn backing it?

I haven't read enough about this... where'd you hear that they were backing it?? I assumed they were against it... they have nothing to gain from this that I can see. Very strange, indeed...

[mikester]

In my reading I don't see a lot of backing for it but I also don't see a lot of push back. In current form it is optional so the above board folks will do it and the bad guys won't.

Still; that's quite a resource to be able to block. There are millions of web sites that cooperate with this sort of plan and work with the net filter companies to make sure their sites are filtered from the view of minors. This makes it leaps and bounds easier to do by blocking the top level domain entirely. Then all you have to worry about are the bad guys.

[skipdup]

I guess "conservatives" are afraid that by condoning the .xxx they somehow condone porn???

[Drago]

Originally posted by skipdup
I guess "conservatives" are afraid that by condoning the .xxx they somehow condone porn???

No, they just don't want to get caught.

[dhoward]

Actually most of the good porn sites work with the filtering companies such as net nanny, and as such make it much easier for parents who care to block these sites from kids.

[Aurel]

Originally posted by dhoward
Actually most of the good porn sites work with the filtering companies such as net nanny, and as such make it much easier for parents who care to block these sites from kids.

How`d you know that?

Aurel

[cantdrv55]

Originally posted by Drago
No, they just don't want to get caught.

You probably hit the nail on the head.

[bryanthompson]

Originally posted by dhoward
Actually most of the good porn sites work with the filtering companies such as net nanny, and as such make it much easier for parents who care to block these sites from kids.

There are far more 'bad' porn sites who are willing to spam anyone and everyone's inbox with spam & links, including 13-year-olds. They get paid per click, they don't care who it is, and most of them don't want to make it easy for their sites to be blocked.

[widebody911]

I think it makes more sense to name the TLD .cum

[dhoward]

Originally posted by bryanthompson
There are far more 'bad' porn sites who are willing to spam anyone and everyone's inbox with spam & links, including 13-year-olds. They get paid per click, they don't care who it is, and most of them don't want to make it easy for their sites to be blocked.

"Paid per click"?
Uh, no.
Doesn't happen that way anymore. In fact you would be surprised how complex the business models are and how much real work it takes to make any significant money.
Besides, do you really think US legislation makes any real difference on the internet?

How`d you know that?

Aurel

[wludavid]

I think the issue here is one that occurs on both sides of the fence in many arguments - people make kneejerk emotional reactions without considering the implications. Like Mikester said, people are dumb. My favorite example is how a certain group wants to regulate certain women's reproductive procedures, but the same people have a negative reaction to anything that has to do with reproductive issues - the Pill, condoms, the morning after pill, sex education - things that would MINIMIZE the need for that particular procedure.

But as an equal opportunity eye-roller, I'll mock the left as well on gun control. The recent assault weapons ban was just a law that banned certain things that were scary-sounding. Flash suppressors and bayonet clips? Yeah, those are real popular with the gangs. It's just proof that the people who wrote the law are acting from emotional outrage and not actually educating themselves on how to have the law make a real difference.

When stupid people are confronted with a decision, often all they can think of is, "porn = bad, must vote no". It's idiotic.

[bryanthompson]

Originally posted by dhoward
"Paid per click"?
Uh, no.
Doesn't happen that way anymore. In fact you would be surprised how complex the business models are and how much real work it takes to make any significant money.

You're right... it's been awhile since i've been in the porn biz perhaps I should have asked Shaun about their business model first... Seriously, though, I cant figure out what they would have to gain from having to use .xxx domains.

It's really kind of cool, though, how much web-programming technology & methods come out of the web-porn industry.

[mikester]

Even having it as an option; as I said the above board folks who do work with the web filtering companies will use it - no doubt about it.

Then all you have to worry about are the bad guys - which is sizeable but the ability to take worrying about the good guys out of the mix is quite a good thing from an administrative stand point.

This is something I deal with on a daily basis and I would be very happy to see it happen. Web filtering is touch business and a lot of times it is entering in single site names...if I could just block the top level domain. My job would be easier and the net would be a safer place.

I just don't see a valid arguement against.

The right's seems to be that approving this would be condoning porn. Yippe. There are a lot of lifestyles out there I don't really feel I condone but this is a "free" country and if someone wants porn and someone wants to make porn and they are all concenting adults. Well; have at thee!

Otherwise I call shenanagans.

People are lemmings and people are stupid. I just hope I can teach my son two things - do what I say and think for himself. I'll be happy if he really grasps the second thing.