Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Did anyone read the article? (Score 1) 328

This article clearly is not censorship. It is rather ironic that Slashdot users are so quick to criticize when they have often been pushing for the same goal... consumer protection.

Essentially the bill is trying to make companies who claim to provide child filtering own up to their promises.

Let's try this in reverse. Most on Slashdot hate Comcast for cutting bit torrent traffic. Comcast promises a customer 6 Mbit internet yet throttles or even severs the connections. Government is stepping in to slap their wrist and we're all happy.

Some families in Utah want to purchase internet service that provides a filtering service so they don't have to deal with updating filters on their own computers. Companies claiming to block content get their business and families don't get what they paid for. So now the government steps in and (from the original article) "providers would be subject for fines up to $10,000 for violating requirements."

This is a completely voluntary program, so it's not censorship; it is consumer protection because people aren't getting what they think they paid for.

P.S. I don't live in Utah.

Slashdot Top Deals

Term, holidays, term, holidays, till we leave school, and then work, work, work till we die. -- C.S. Lewis

Working...