The .XXX Saga Continues in Wellington 302
netrover writes "CircleID is reporting on the latest developments on the .XXX top-level domain as the related ICANN meeting is currently underway in Welligton, New Zealand. From the article: 'The .XXX TLD was widely expected to receive its final approval at the ICANN's last meeting held in Vancouver about 4 months earlier but the discussion was unexpectedly delayed as the organization and governments requested more time to review the merits of setting up such a domain.' But as it has been reported, it appears the discussions at ICANN Wellington are in limbo once again."
Is this necessary? (Score:5, Interesting)
Slashdot's 15 millionth comment! (Score:1, Interesting)
local blogger at ICANN (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/ [kiwiblog.co.nz]
mixed in with his other stuff of course.
Useful stuff like:
But what is interesting is who else is against the proposal. I had lunch yesterday with the Communications Director of the trade association of the adult entertainment industry. And they are not in favour of
Their fears are the opposite of the US Government. They fear
Go crash his server.
Re:More Appropriate Name? (Score:5, Interesting)
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19980509 [userfriendly.org]
Two issues (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Define porn. Any definition will have to involve questions of artistic merit, like they deal with in other cases.
2) What do you do with hybrid sites? I mean, wikipedia has several graphic illustrations in the human sexuality articles. Does wikipedia have to move fully to
Re:Is this necessary? (Score:3, Interesting)
My company pays a lot of money for filtering software. On top of that, we fire dozens of employees a year for doing shit they shouldn't online. Most of those are porn-related. It would be so nice if I could just block everything, then allow
There should be a better catagorization of the internet. We should purge all
Re:Is this necessary? (Score:2, Interesting)
It just occurred to me that the domain system has similar flaws as the DOS/Windows drive letter system. The top-level
I have a better idea (Score:2, Interesting)
And what about doorway sites? Could somepornsite.com stay open to redirect people to their new domain? If so, could it be an automatic redirect?
Forcing porn sites to buy another domain is, in my opinion unreasonable. I don't think the government ought to be trying to put such regulations on the industry to begin with, but if they are going to make such regulations, they ought to do it with the subdomain rather than the TLD. For example, at the top of this page you see politics.slashdot.org. The porn sites could keep their domains and not have to pay anything extra, the only restriction being that they have to use xxx.somepornsite.net instead of www.somepornsite.com. It wouldn't cost them anything, and it would give the politicians what their looking for by creating something that's easy to block.
As I say, I'm very much opposed to any of the above regulations, but I think my suggestion is a less obtrusive method.
Is it really a bad idea? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Is this necessary? (Score:3, Interesting)
Who would be responsible for determining which domain sites would belong to? Would it be up to the sites themselves?
In a sane system, yes.
It doesn't seem like such an opt-in approach would do much to segregate pornography away from less potentially objectionable content.
But it would. Difficult as this is for anti-porn crusaders to comprehend, the people selling porn really have no interest in aiming their products at a) adults that aren't interested in looking at porn (small as a such a group is) and b) children.
I would expect porn sites to exodus to a .xxx (or equivalent) domain en masse, were it to become available (although obviously this process would take several years). Mainly because then the people trying to filter porn out would have a much easier job, and their biggest opponents would, largely, not have a leg to stand on.
Where do you draw the line? What about sexual education/health web sites?
You make the system voluntary. 99% of porn sites would take advantage of that, because its better for them as well as everyone else.
More formally, local laws *could* be implemeted saying the "porn sites" must be in .xxx, depending on whatever their local definition of "pornography" was. Personally I would have no problem with that.
Re:Is this necessary? (Score:3, Interesting)
Should Microsoft be allowed a
Should Slashdot?
How about me? Should I be allowed to run a
Once he started selling ads, should he have lost the
Amazon.com should be disbanded.
Amazon.co.ca would buy/sell in Canada,
It's that fucking simple.
Where to apply? (Score:4, Interesting)
Seriously, when the DNS is used to push for stances a group of people may have, I doubt it's used for the right purposes. It's not a political tool to censor content "unpleasant" to some, it's a tool to build hierarchies.
Re:It is cowardly to do nothing about pornography (Score:4, Interesting)
Whose laws? In some places, a topless woman on the main street of town would be arrested or even stoned; other places no-one would pay her any attention. Which of those societies gets to impose their laws on the other?
Feel free to legislate your section of the internet, but keep away from everyone else's.
If there's a strip club on Broadway and Main they have signs to indicate what the content on the inside is going to be like so my kids can't accidently walk inside.
Actually they have those signs up to try to entice adults to go in, not to keep kids out. The bouncers keep kids and other undesirables out, yes, but in the case of the kids it's mostly because
a) they don't have much money
b) the strip joint will lose their licence if they get caught letting kids in too often
It's not like that on the Internet but it should be.
Every single porn site I've ever seen has had a warning along the lines of "Explicit content past this page - if you're too young or offended by this stuff, keep out!". That's analagous to your signs. Most sites also require a valid credit or debit card to gain full entry; that's analagous to your doorman. True, it's no guarantee that a kid can't get in, but then you'll be wanting to ask the parents why they have a credit card (or why the parents weren't careful enough with their own).
Do you have the moral courage to take a stance or are you a coward?
Yes, I have the moral courage to take a stance. As another respondent already said, I have the courage to take a stand for my morals, which are clearly not identical to yours. I'm sorry, but I really don't see anything particularly wrong with graphic depictions of sex. No, I don't want my six year old viewing hardcore porn; that's one of the reasons why I make sure I'm with her when she's using the Internet, so she doesn't accidentally stray from disney.com or nickjr.co.uk on to a porn site. But then I'm odd like that; I take responsibilty for what my kid is exposed to.
Re:Is this necessary? (Score:4, Interesting)
Whereas most would agree that the current TLD system has been totally abused (I count myself as one of the guilty people, having several
Back to the topic in hand.
Of course those of us who like and enjoy pr0n on a regular basis, wont be affected by the
Personally, I get my pr0n from usenet, it's free
-Jar.
* I know
** I once worked for a UK broadcast company (one of the big-five) and they had a whole dept dedicated to maintaining their own pr0n sites.
Re:Think again. (Score:2, Interesting)
The origin of these crosses is not known but historians believe it is a reference to 3 plagues (water, fire and smallpocks) that killed a lot of inhabitants.