PDA

View Full Version : Question for the Tech Savvy



Belinda Williamson
03-22-2007, 2:51 PM
This is not a SHOULD it be done question, but a CAN it be done question. This thread is in no way intended to be political.

Why can't there be a new domain ".porn"? All of the porn sites could/would be registered there which would eliminate all of the "unintentional" viewing of porn sites.

Just curious.

Ron Wessels
03-22-2007, 3:16 PM
Ok, let's suppose that I run a porn site. What incentive/benefit to I have to switch to a .porn domain? It means that, much more likely, customers will not be able to access my site (eg. workplace blockage of .porn domain sites), causing them to switch to another provider.

It also means that it's more likely that advertisements for my site will be blocked while surfing at the workplace, resulting in a loss of potential customers.

It's a benefit for people that do not partake of my services, and does not aid people that do partake of my services. Therefore, it makes no sense for me to switch.

Note: I do not run a porn site in real life.

jeremy levine
03-22-2007, 3:23 PM
I think the creators of such sites would argue "rights" , "free speech" ,and/or "free trade". Also keep in mind that the internet is international so what passed for "ok" in "Country Z" might be thought of as porn in "Country A".

There are other tech issues but the above a the first non-tech issues that come to mind.

Joe Pelonio
03-22-2007, 3:30 PM
There is no reason other than the one mentioned by Ron (less hits)
and I remember reading in the paper a few years ago that it has been proposed. There's no way to force it since they are on servers all over the world.

I'm glad my kids are all adults now. My wife works at an elementary school and once in a while and even with all the filters being used by the school district once in a while a kid ends up with something nasty on a school computer.

Art Mulder
03-22-2007, 3:31 PM
This is not a SHOULD it be done question, but a CAN it be done question.

Belinda,
There is no technical reason whatsoever why this cannot be done.

The reasons are all political, or organizational, or greed-related, or afraid-of-the-voter reasons (both sides) and so on.

examples:
- government employee X (voted in or not) refuses to okay it since it can been seen as condoning porn.
- internet governing group X refuses to cooperate since they don't know how to police it - would they be expected to force people to join the domain?
- company X opposes it since they don't believe that what they are doing is porn
- civil liberty body X opposes it since it will allow people to "restrain free speech"
- foreign government X opposes it since it represents the US trying to enforce control of the internet, or enforce their values on the world.

Belinda Williamson
03-22-2007, 3:55 PM
Thanks for all the great replies guys!

Silly me, I thought maybe the porn sites would want to be grouped together or something. Maybe there would be more traffic if they were "easier" to find. I guess that wouldn't make them any easier to find than they already are!:eek:

I do realize there is not way to police/enforce the net, but hadn't really thought about all the civil liberties issues that would arise.

Thanks again!

Randal Stevenson
03-22-2007, 4:51 PM
Thanks for all the great replies guys!

Silly me, I thought maybe the porn sites would want to be grouped together or something. Maybe they would be more traffic if they were "easier" to find. I guess that wouldn't make them any easier to find than they already are!:eek:

I do realize there is not way to police/enforce the net, but hadn't really thought about all the civil liberties issues that would arise.

Thanks again!

They don't want to be grouped. How many businesses want to be on the same street, with all their competitors. (normally choose just one to build across from/ or over by).
They are already easy enough to find, between things like domain names (Whitehouse.GOV not COM), or even my MOTHER searching for collectibles, dealing with her favorite, childhood comic (her and dad were searching for Little Lulu).

Belinda Williamson
03-22-2007, 5:20 PM
They don't want to be grouped. How many businesses want to be on the same street, with all their competitors. (normally choose just one to build across from/ or over by).


I didn't think of it as all of them being on the same street. Pretty much everyone else on web is on the same street - all the plumbing supply houses at .com, lumber yards at .com, etc, but I see your point.

Those sites are pretty easy to stumble across, aren't they? A number of years ago Honey and I owned a bar. We booked a lot of our bands through an agency (don't think I can mention the name here). Last year we were going to book a band for an event and Honey couldn't remember the agency's name. He thought he knew the name so he Googled that name. BOY, did he get a surprise. He started yelling "How do I clear the screen?!?!?! How do I clear the screen?!?!? I got a good chuckle, he was not amused. :D

David G Baker
03-22-2007, 9:03 PM
Belinda,
There has been talk about creating a dot porn and forcing porn sites to the dot porn area. At some point this may very well happen depending on how much the public complains about the existing set up.
David B

Belinda Williamson
03-22-2007, 10:20 PM
Thanks for your reply David. It seems like there should be some way to "child proof" these sites. I understand the argument that it is the responsibility of parents to police their children, but I worry about the kids who have no parental guidance.

Jim Becker
03-22-2007, 10:55 PM
Counter question...how would you get any of the sites currently with .com or other top level domains to abandon them and move to a dedicated domain? There is just too much money involved in that industry, especially with established domains. Your answer can't be anything about legislation since the Internet is global and it's doubtful or impossible to legally force the issue, IMHO. (Trust me, I'm not suggesting that the dedicated domain is bad...to the contrary, I'd prefer it that way, if only to help take away the ambiguity that currently exists)

Belinda Williamson
03-23-2007, 9:39 AM
Counter question...how would you get any of the sites currently with .com or other top level domains to abandon them and move to a dedicated domain? There is just too much money involved in that industry, especially with established domains. Your answer can't be anything about legislation since the Internet is global and it's doubtful or impossible to legally force the issue, IMHO. (Trust me, I'm not suggesting that the dedicated domain is bad...to the contrary, I'd prefer it that way, if only to help take away the ambiguity that currently exists)

Jim,

Thanks for the post. An answer to your question is what I am actually interested in. I just didn't post a question as well phrased as yours. :) I have absolutely no understanding of how the Net actually works, :( so I am seeking knowledge from you guys with the brain power.

Mitchell Andrus
03-23-2007, 11:05 AM
How about getting Google to eliminate all links to porn sites.

I did a Google search for "gothic carvings" and got an eyeful of "gothic sex" sites.

The porn guys are seeding their sites with common terms so they'll pop up. Luckily my kids are older, but what about the 11 year olds???

I know... freedom of speech.

Doug Shepard
03-23-2007, 11:09 AM
I'd have to change all my bookmarks to my favorite tool porn sites.:D

Belinda Williamson
03-23-2007, 11:22 AM
How about getting Google to eliminate all links to porn sites.

I did a Google search for "gothic carvings" and got an eyeful of "gothic sex" sites.

The porn guys are seeding their sites with common terms so they'll pop up. Luckily my kids are older, but what about the 11 year olds???

I know... freedom of speech.

It is amazing how the most innocent of searchs can yield such interesting results isn't it? Sometime you just gotta' close those eyes!;)

Belinda Williamson
03-23-2007, 11:23 AM
I'd have to change all my bookmarks to my favorite tool porn sites.:D

Shame, shame, shame!;)

Art Mulder
03-23-2007, 11:51 AM
How about getting Google to eliminate all links to porn sites.

I did a Google search for "gothic carvings" and got an eyeful of "gothic sex" sites.

The porn guys are seeding their sites with common terms so they'll pop up. Luckily my kids are older, but what about the 11 year olds???

I know... freedom of speech.

Huh, I just entered "gothic carvings" and got ... Gothic carvings. :p

Seriously... it's not perfect, but you can go to Google, and to the right of the seach box, click on "Preferences", and then you can turn on "SafeSearch" filtering. It is easy to turn on and off, so it is not really much help in protect kids, but it can keep you from seeing things you don't want to see.

Joe Pelonio
03-23-2007, 11:59 AM
Huh, I just entered "gothic carvings" and got ... Gothic carvings. :p

Seriously... it's not perfect, but you can go to Google, and to the right of the seach box, click on "Preferences", and then you can turn on "SafeSearch" filtering. It is easy to turn on and off, so it is not really much help in protect kids, but it can keep you from seeing things you don't want to see.

But then that only works for google, there are a lot of other search engines, and the kids know it.

Mike Cutler
03-23-2007, 11:59 AM
It is amazing how the most innocent of searchs can yield such interesting results isn't it? Sometime you just gotta' close those eyes!;)

Sometimes you gotta close the eyes,and sometimes you gotta laugh.

A few years back I did an Internet search on "Spring Peepers", the little frogs that come out in early spring.
The #1 hit for "Spring Peepers" was a guaranteed, previously worn, womens underwear for sale site. I never knew there was a market for used underwear.:eek: :eek:.

While the porn sites might be the most obvious visual of social abnormality on the net. I'd worry more about chatrooms myself. Just exactly whom are your kids talking to in these chatrooms.

Belinda Williamson
03-23-2007, 12:02 PM
Thanks Art.

Soon as I get my new reading glasses broken in I'll turn that filter on!

Seriously . . . I don't have kids but will share this with friends who do - in case they don't know about "SafeSearch".

Mark Singer
03-23-2007, 12:38 PM
I kept telling my wife it was not my fault......"The Computer just seems to go to these sites automatically almost and once there the virus's are so strong the mouse and keyboard are disabled and I am stuck on these awful sites":rolleyes:

Belinda Williamson
03-23-2007, 1:02 PM
I kept telling my wife it was not my fault......"The Computer just seems to go to these sites automatically almost and once there the virus's are so strong the mouse and keyboard are disabled and I am stuck on these awful sites":rolleyes:

Seems I've heard something similar before. Is there some site you men go to for the purpose of brainstorming excuses, then disseminate the excuses to all of the less creative males out there? Maybe if five or six women get to talkin', and we have all heard the same excuse, we'll believe it. :eek: ;)

Mark Cothren
03-23-2007, 2:52 PM
Let's just get Al Gore to reinvent the internet and solve all this...:D ;)

The broad topic of internet filth that is adding to the corruption of young minds is something that burdens me greatly. Belinda, the question you ask is a good one - although for the reasons stated, I don't see it happening.

Chuck Saunders
03-23-2007, 3:29 PM
But then that only works for google, there are a lot of other search engines, and the kids know it.

And now you move from the easy, preventing accidental exposure, to preventing determined and motivated teen hormones.
good luck
Chuck

Belinda Williamson
03-23-2007, 3:35 PM
Sometimes you gotta close the eyes,and sometimes you gotta laugh.

A few years back I did an Internet search on "Spring Peepers", the little frogs that come out in early spring.
The #1 hit for "Spring Peepers" was a guaranteed, previously worn, womens underwear for sale site. I never knew there was a market for used underwear.:eek: :eek:.

LOL, fallin' out my chair . . . and now we know the answer to the age old question "Jeepers, Creepers, where'd ya' get those Peepers?":D :D :D

Joe Chritz
03-23-2007, 4:37 PM
Sometimes you gotta close the eyes,and sometimes you gotta laugh.

A few years back I did an Internet search on "Spring Peepers", the little frogs that come out in early spring.
The #1 hit for "Spring Peepers" was a guaranteed, previously worn, womens underwear for sale site. I never knew there was a market for used underwear.:eek: :eek:.

While the porn sites might be the most obvious visual of social abnormality on the net. I'd worry more about chatrooms myself. Just exactly whom are your kids talking to in these chatrooms.

That reminds me of a story from work. Actually a couple of them but they are certainly not appropriate for here.

Here is my take on the internet and the like.

The responsibility for the safety of the children is the parents and none other. Everything that is available today was available for a long time. It is just easier now. Easier for kids to find, accidently or otherwise, porn. Easier for predators to find kids, easier to hide, easier to share.

Believe me when I say there are some really bad people and things out there.

Even if we could regulate something like the net I am not convinced it would be a good idea.

Educate your children, it will keep them safe.

Joe

Jerry Clark
03-23-2007, 4:41 PM
Vote on `.xxx' Internet Address Nears
Friday, March 23, 2007 2:25 PM EDT
The Associated Press
By ANICK JESDANUN
NEW YORK (AP) Online pornographers and religious groups are in a rare alliance as a key Internet oversight agency nears a decision on creating a virtual red-light district through a ".xxx" Internet address.
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, which has already rejected similar proposals twice since 2000, planned to vote as early as next week on whether to approve the domain name for voluntary use by porn sites.
The decision ultimately could hinge on whether ".xxx" has the support of the adult-entertainment industry and many porn sites have been strongly opposed.
"One of the criteria is that it (must) have general support among the industry it's supposed to serve, and it does not," said Mark Kernes, a board member with the industry trade group Free Speech Coalition. "I have not met one single webmaster or adult video producer that is in favor of `.xxx,' and I've met a lot of them."
Porn sites are largely concerned that the domain name, while billed as voluntary, would make it easier for governments to later mandate its use and "essentially ghettoize sexual information on the Web," Kernes said.
ICM Registry Inc., the company behind the proposal, has vowed to fight any government efforts to compel its use and cited preregistrations of some 76,000 names as evidence of support. Kernes said many Web sites reserved names simply to prevent someone else from having it.
The Free Speech Coalition believes a domain name for kids-friendly sites would be more appropriate.
Given its voluntary nature, ".xxx" is unlikely to have much effect on parents' ability to block porn sites.
And because a domain name serves merely as an easy-to-remember moniker for a site's actual numeric Internet address, even if a government were to mandate its use, a child could simply punch in the numeric address of any blocked ".xxx" name.
Religious groups worry that ".xxx" would legitimize and expand the number of adults sites, which more than a third of U.S. Internet users visit each month, according to comScore Media Metrix. The Web site measurement firm said 4 percent of all Web traffic and 2 percent of all time spent Web surfing involved an adult site.
"They will keep their `.com' domains, and I have no doubt they will buy their `.xxx' as well," said Patrick Trueman, special counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian public-interest law firm. "There will be twice as much pornography on the Internet."
Trueman and other critics say ICM will be the only beneficiaries.
The startup, founded and funded by four entrepreneurs with backgrounds in domain names and U.K. Internet companies, plans to charge $60 to register a name 10 times the fees for ".com." Ten dollars of it would go to a companion nonprofit group that would set policies for ".xxx" use and recommend business practices for combating child pornography and promoting child safety.
ICANN tabled and effectively rejected a similar proposal in 2000 out of fear the ".xxx" domain would force the body into content regulation.
ICM resubmitted its proposal in 2004, this time structuring it with a policy-setting organization to free ICANN of that task. But many board members worried that the language of the proposed contract was vague and could kick the task back to ICANN. The board rejected the 2004 proposal last May.
ICANN revived the proposal in January after ICM agreed to hire independent organizations to monitor porn sites' compliance with the new rules, which would be developed by a separate body called the International Foundation for Online Responsibility.
ICM revised it again a month later to clarify ICANN's enforcement abilities and to underscore the independence of the policy-making body.
Despite the vocal opposition, ICM Chairman Stuart Lawley said he preferred a quick vote, adding that the complaints come from "the same people saying the same things time and time again."
"ICM has done more to demonstrate the existence of a strong community than any other application the (ICANN) board has approved," Lawley said. "We have been singled out for special treatment. From the word `go,' ... we were put in the slow lane."
If approved, ICM would be required to help develop mechanisms for promoting child safety and preventing child pornography, and porn sites using ".xxx" would have to participate in a self-rating system, labeling sites based on such criteria as the presence of nudity and whether it is in an artistic or educational context.
ICANN already has discussed the proposal during three, closed-door teleconference meetings this year. It indicated it would be ready to vote at a public meeting next Friday in Lisbon, Portugal.
But delays are possible if ICANN's Governmental Advisory Committee raises last-minute objections when it meets next week. Last March, the committee called for stronger language in ICANN's contract with ICM, and Lawley said those points have been addressed in the latest version of the contract.
ICM believes the domain would help the porn industry clean up its act, and Lawley said he has gone through great lengths to put its promises into writing.
"We are confident we have dotted every `i' and crossed every 't,'" he said, "and the contract deserves ratification."

Mark Singer
03-23-2007, 5:32 PM
"My Dear you are wrong "(this time:rolleyes: )..."I am researching a subject that was brought up on SMC and it does not require a bit of sawdust.....just concentration!":rolleyes:

Mike Cutler
03-23-2007, 7:05 PM
"My Dear you are wrong "(this time:rolleyes: )..."I am researching a subject that was brought up on SMC and it does not require a bit of sawdust.....just concentration!":rolleyes:

Ahh.... let me know just how far that flies in your house. In mine the distance could be measured in nanometers.;)

I will say one thing, this is the most genteel discussion on internet porn I've seen online.

Belinda Williamson
03-24-2007, 12:11 PM
Jerry,

Thanks for posting the article, it was very informative.


The responsibility for the safety of the children is the parents and none other. Everything that is available today was available for a long time. It is just easier now. Easier for kids to find, accidently or otherwise, porn. Easier for predators to find kids, easier to hide, easier to share.

Educate your children, it will keep them safe.

Joe

Joe,

I agree, but as I stated earlier I am concerned for those children whose parents won't or don't educate them. Dipping a toe into the political here - I have never been in favor of things the "government" does for "our own good". I don't think it should be something that is enforced, but if it could be voluntary - even with minimal compliance - maybe it would help.

My parents are good people, and the "did the best they knew how to do" in raising me. However, both were very young and my mother very naive. She was raised in a rural area, surrounded by a good family, and just didn't realize the level of depravity in our small town 35 to 40 years ago. Without going into too many details, there were events in my childhood that she does not know about to this day. She basically turned a blind eye to many warning signs. I was also the vicitm of a stalker in high school. He was paroled about ten years ago. I was not his only victim. For several days after his parole I constantly looked over my shoulder.

Sorry, a little off post here. All of your replies have been great and I am developing a much better understanding of why governing the Net isn't possible or practical.

BTW, Mark, that dog won't hunt!:D

jeremy levine
03-30-2007, 9:07 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6509885.stm

Check this out

Belinda Williamson
03-30-2007, 9:31 AM
Jeremy,

Thanks for the post. Depending on your stance, that's either one in the win column, or one in the lose!:)

I really appreciate all of the responses and efforts to enlighten me on this subject.