Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Internet

Why ISPs' "Stand" Against Child Porn Is Actually Not a Stand Against Child Porn 283

TechDirt has an insightful article on the recent push for ISPs to turn off Usenet access under the guise of fighting child pornography. Unfortunately, the "stand against child porn" isn't actually a stand at all, it seems — more like ignoring the issue while trying to snag some headlines and good will. "Taking a stand against child porn wouldn't be overly aggressively blocking access to internet destinations that may or may not have porn (and there's no review over the list to make sure that they're actually objectionable). Taking a stand against child porn would be hunting down those responsible for the child porn and making sure that they're dealt with appropriately... Also, this sets an awful precedent in that the ISPs can point out that it's ok for them to block "objectionable" content where they get to define what's objectionable without any review."

Comment Lukewarm Response? (Score 1) 400

I'm a bit befuddled as to why the story submitter considers Madden 2006's response to be "lukewarm".

Firstly, as mentioned by other posters, the rankings he linked to were for the PC version, the PS2 version got an 88% rating and the Xbox version an 87% rating, both respectable scores and hardly 'mediocre' (I would also argue that 79% is quite respectable).

I also am unsure of why the submitter is referring to Madden 2006 Xbox/PS2/PC as a "next-generation title"...

And as to the "what are players to do?" comment, it appears that they are running out in droves to buy this game. After all, they did sell 1.7 million copies in the first week alone...

Slashdot Top Deals

Pascal is a language for children wanting to be naughty. -- Dr. Kasi Ananthanarayanan

Working...