This makes entirely too much sense. Why didn't I think of this? Specifically target mobile devices and tablets since kids don't use laptops and desktops. I don't think they even know how to turn them on... laptops and desktops that is. Apple famously proved definitively that kids don't even know "what's a computer" so it's appropriate to exclude irrelevant devices.. So yeah, I'm all for this nifty piece of legislation. Pure genius.
My grandson has been using laptops since at least the 4th or 5th grade and has his own MacBook.
Yes, he feels more comfortable on his iPhone and can type much faster on it. But he knows how to use a laptop better than his parents and almost as well as I do. I doubt that he is exceptional in his school (but then his school is well within the top ten in the state). And, cyberschool has pushed the use of laptops even further -- they even gave one (a 2 in 1) to each student this past fall.
Poe's Law strikes again. George, you've fallen victim to what I thought was obvious sarcasm that didn't require emoticons as an indicator. I was just joking. The legislation is dumb and would simply be ineffective political theater.
There's this new invention old folks don't know how to use. It's the "/s".
Good lord, talk about paranoia! Nobody is saying you can’t have your precious porn. The bill only requires a filter be available. (I don’t even see that it’s required to be on by default.) The FCC has been doing the same thing on public airwaves for decades and somehow we have all managed to live.
Talk about your nanny state, isn’t that te responsibility of parents?. Why don’t they just cancel the internet while they are at it? QOP rum amok
If you’ve ever surfed YouTube, you would know there are only about 4 degrees of separation between Barney and hard core porn. As a parent I would welcome any tools that help be be a better parent.
Maybe read the bill. The bill requires automatic enabling of the filter at device activation. Filters are already available for phones and tablets so if that's all the bill was requiring it wouldn't even be necessary. It's not necessary anyway, but that's beside the point. Trying to conflate government prohibitions on public airwaves with control of private devices doesn't make sense at all.
No one's being paranoid. They just read and understood the implications of the bill.
I read the article, not the bill - but so what? If you’re really that worried about surfing porn you have to be troubled to turn the filter off? Just what “implications” are you exactly worried about?
this is nothing but a bunch of people hollering about nothing.
You should have read the article more thoroughly since it paraphrases the bill's contents. I'm not worried about porn or anything else for that matter. I am refuting your incorrect claim that the bill only requires the filter to be available. You're simply wrong. As I stated, filters are already available... right now... on the phone and tablet you already have.
Comments
There's this new invention old folks don't know how to use. It's the "/s".