I don't blame you for trying to do what you can. I just know that I never sought out violent and gross content, but I definitely saw it. When I was in elementary school, no one had access to the internet, but kids were finding ways to get their hands on "Faces of Death" on VHS. There's no software to prevent that. I wonder if you wouldn't be better off exposing your kids to violence in a controlled setting and then talking to them about what they saw than you are keeping them totally innocent, and then leaving them to deal with their initial exposure to horror on their own.
Furthermore, I know that when I was a lad, as soon as I was aware that I was being "restricted" in some way, getting past that restriction became my new mission in life. I'm sure your children are clever. They will probably defeat the software in some novel way that you didn't imagine.
What the software does get you is the ability to say "ah well, I tried". And that does have some value, I suppose.
I share your skepticism regarding the mental health industry. I can't think of too many other highly paid professions where it is acceptable to fail most of the time. But the facts that Zimbardo is attempting to explain are pretty unambiguous: women now outperform men at every level of education. Why? It's easy to take potshots at "shrinks", but a lot harder to come up with your own theory to explain the phenomenon.
I also remember being about 10 years old and complaining to my mother that Chico and the Man did not look "real". My mother had no idea what I was talking about, but my father figured out that they had switched from video to film. What looks "right" is usually a matter of what one is used to. I seem to recall hearing that some people complained about color films when they came out. Higher frame rates will be the norm in a decade, I am absolutely convinced.
Bob Wallace is a drug dealer. Do you think he would have earned 100 thousand a year without those "Beavis and Buttheads" buying his product by the case? Surely not. He profited from the sale of harmful drugs to anyone with cash. No, he wasn't out on the street, but he was only a couple of levels removed. I don't think the law was nearly harsh enough on him.
If you don't agree with me, you may not have seen first hand the damage that meth does. Perhaps you have not lost someone you dearly love to meth, as I have.
Clearly, the law as it stands now is a total failure at controlling meth use. I'm open to trying new approaches. But allowing retirees to line their pockets with the suffering of others is not the way forward.
If you feel under-valued, then demand more pay. Take action. Making angry and incorrect assumptions about me isn't going to change things.
A dollar a person is low? Thinking like that is why Bill Gates is so rich.