But you realize that you are criminally liable, with the potential to wind up on a sex offender registry, lose your job, your family, your home, EVERYTHING
Even with that risk in play, I have to note that I believe that logic very similar was used at Penn State. Bring the tapes directly to the police. Cowardice, however shrewd in its self-interest is still cowardice. I maintain the belief that the judicial system would ultimately do right, and if it did not that the legislative would. Even if I never lived to see either of those two things happen, at least I wouldn't go to my grave knowing that I am a coward who could have stopped more children from being raped and instead did nothing.
If you still support the ban on child pornography then why isn't there a ban on obscene "teen erotica" literature? Why not ban text descriptions, or ban stories which encourage child abuse?
No actual people are physically harmed.
And how is preventing your children from being able to view pornographic content not parenting?
Because in this case it delegates the responsibility of what is and what is not porn to the filter providers, instead of being a conversation between parents & children.
I know, I know.. I'm old-fashioned. Now get off my lawn etc.
Old-fashioned because you only do one of two sensible things and act like a choice between the two is the only viable path? I don't think so. The idea that your child is capable of making adult decisions and in fact should be exposed to adult situations at extremely young ages is very new.
What kind of typo brings you to a porn website?
whitehouse.(choose carefully here)
however (having just thought of this point once clicking "submit") it would be far easier, and less expensive to just have the parents, um... parent.
And how is preventing your children from being able to view pornographic content not parenting?
I just wanted to note that long-range RFID (such as would be used in this type of application) does require the RFID chip to be powered. The ones that don't need a battery only work at very short ranges.
I have no expertise in RFID chips, but I'd be curious what defines "long range". According to this paper, a passive (non-powered) 15cm RFID antenna is effective at a range up to 4.9 meters (and I believe this number assumes a non-directional scanner). That is certainly less distance than is between the windshield and the readers above the road.
Can you provide more insight into how you are defining "long range" and "very short range"? It looks like modern RFID tech can passively be scanned up to 40 feet in "normal conditions", and I'd have to assume that interstate, windshield-mounted, directional travel is rather normal.
Any circuit design must contain at least one part which is obsolete, two parts which are unobtainable, and three parts which are still under development.