Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship The Internet Your Rights Online

Thailand Bans Teen Info On the Net 137

Posted by kdawson
from the no-myspace-for-you dept.
Reservoir Hill writes "Internet providers in Thailand have been prohibited from disclosing personal data about anyone under the age of 18 in a way that would allow others to gain access to them — including disclosure of their age, gender, phone number, email address, chat logon name, photo, or name of their school. Violators will face six months in jail of and a fine of $1,900. Web sites have been given one month to come into compliance." The article isn't clear on whether or not the prohibition applies to foreign sites that carry information about Thai kids.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Thailand Bans Teen Info On the Net

Comments Filter:
  • by hedwards (940851)
    I don't see the problem here, I don't see any particular reason why kids should be allowed to put their contact information up on the web.

    As far as I can tell, this just applies to ISPs and not necessarily to teens themselves.
    • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Karl0Erik (1138443)
      No, God forbid kids should talk to people.
      • by Nullav (1053766)
        Isn't that what IRC is for? There's no need to plaster a page with your name, address, phone numbers, and everything up to and including your shoe size, if you just want to speak with friends.
        • Isn't that what telephones are for?
          There's no need to use the internet, if you just want to speak with friends.
          • by Nullav (1053766)
            Seems a bit of a stretch. Phone conversations could be rather confusing with four or five people, not to mention that file transfers are out the window. Regardless, the point I was trying to make is that people don't have to put personal information out there just to socialize with others. It's not that hard to give out your contact details in person, is it?
        • How can you allow under-18's to use IRC and comply with this rule? The article is very vague, but it sounds like they just won't be allowed to make the information available at all, and they're expected to magically know if you're under-18. Both of which are of course impossible.
    • It's not clear to me from the article, whether this prohibits kids from making web pages through their ISP's website hosting, or not.
    • by DigitAl56K (805623) on Sunday November 25, 2007 @12:18AM (#21468465)
      In many countries people under the age of 18 can have student loans, drive cars, drink, have sex, but now we won't let them put their contact information on the net? Teenagers are people too, and they should have the right to make contact with whomever they choose.

      Governments shouldn't muscle in as parents. If you want to reduce the abuse of minors via the Internet educate parents to help them understand the risks, and educate teens to help them understand the risks and how to avoid them. Show them some episodes of Dateline: To Catch A Preditor. Warn them about the lack of privacy on social networking sites and how easy it is to locate someone based on some simple searches. Run a mandatory 4 week annual course for all high schoolers with updated materials reflecting current threats.

      Help people understand what they're getting into, but don't start censoring them.

      If there is one thing you should understand about tech-literate teenagers, it is that they will find a way if they want to. It's better to educate and let them protect themselves than to try and protect them all with laws like this.
      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by timmarhy (659436)
        i don't think that's a good answer either. my faith in education being a tool to prevent things like this is failing. people are just too fucking stupid to be told at times.

        I can't see any reason for kids to be giving out their contact details online. if you can justify them giving out phone numbers and address's i'll concede it's a bad ideaa...

        • by DigitAl56K (805623) on Sunday November 25, 2007 @01:01AM (#21468715)
          people are just too fucking stupid to be told at times

          Yes, some people are. And the problem of teen predators will never go away no matter what we do.

          Now, do we:
          A) Educate people, have a population that largely understands privacy risks, and still have teen predators, or,
          B) Put this law into place, have a population that expects their Government to look after all their privacy concerns, and still have teen predators?

          Predators aren't going away any time soon. On the other hand, the rights of the people all around the world appear to be.
          • by mpe (36238)
            Predators aren't going away any time soon. On the other hand, the rights of the people all around the world appear to be.

            Does taking away people's civil rights make it harder for such "predators", make no difference to them or make things easier for them. Given the apparent inability of many politicans to critically evaluate proposed legislation, something which should be a fundermental part of their job, it wouldn't exactly be suprising for laws intended to "protect children" to do the exact opposite.
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Pie-rate (1098693)
          Then let the people who are too fucking stupid to learn these things get what's coming to them. It's called natural selection, and it is AWESOME. If you're too fucking stupid to survive, you don't, and you (hopefully) don't make stupid babies.
      • by GauteL (29207)
        "Governments shouldn't muscle in as parents. If you want to reduce the abuse of minors via the Internet educate parents to help them understand the risks, and educate teens to help them understand the risks and how to avoid them."

        1. Sometimes no amount of education is going to stop people from being terrible abusive or uncaring parents. At what stage should the government intervene? At the stage where the parent(s) spend most of their days out of their skull on drugs?

        2. Thailand suffers from enormous proble
        • by ultranova (717540)

          Thailand suffers from enormous problems with child slavery in the sex industry.

          Yes; and this move is not going to do anythign to close it down. Why focus on online predators rather than offline child bordels ? Unless, of course, this is either a feel-good gesture or a prelude to something sinister disguised as such.

          That, or my cynicism is finally starting outgrow even politics... nah, that isn't possible.

      • by stoicfaux (466273)

        In many countries people under the age of 18 can have student loans, drive cars, drink, have sex, but now we won't let them put their contact information on the net? Teenagers are people too, and they should have the right to make contact with whomever they choose.

        Teenagers don't have (full) rights for a couple of reasons:

        When teenagers screw up, who foots the bill? The parents. Until someone is fully on their own and fully responsible for their own mistakes, they're not free of parental oversight.

      • I am with the Thailand government. Only in the USA can students be treated as adults, with major loans / indebted ness, and freedom to drink, etc. Other countries still have respectability as part of their culture. That is, respect for parents, neighbours, and others in general. So, since the under 18 kids are really just ready to enter university, it is better that they be protected. No harm can be done as it is limited to 18 years and under. It is not over-protection
    • Allowed??? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Capt. Skinny (969540)

      I don't see any particular reason why kids should be allowed to put their contact information up on the web.
      Not to flame the parent author here, but what kind of whack job thinks any person should need explicit permission to do what they will with their contact information?
      • Considering that kids aren't even allowed to do what they will with their own genitals, it seems that limiting children's rights is an established form of whack jobbery.
    • E-mail address? "Chat login name" (read: AIM/MSN screen name)? That's ridiculous.
    • by nurb432 (527695)
      There is a problem here. Several actually.

      1 - email isn't truly 'contact' information.
      2 - no school? Technically that would mean that 2 kids in the same school couldn't tell each other their email addresses to help out with homework or plan the next school party )
      3 - why should a kid be 'non contactable' in the first place? Why isolate them? Just monitor the child's email and teach them not to respond to perverts and the real problem is solved.

      Want to restrict phone numbers and addresses, well thats more a
    • I don't see any particular reason why kids should be allowed to put their contact information up on the web.

      From when I was only 14 years old I was maintaining my own websites, including e-commerce sites, I was developing my own shareware games and I was promoting them, I was also maintaining forums and mailing lists, and I was also publishing/selling articles and short scifi stories to magazines (and I was also trying to publish my scifi in book form by approaching publishers, but I failed in this, because publishers did not believe in teenage authors). Giving out some contact info, carefully, was required.

    • by mdwh2 (535323)
      Home address might be one thing, but assuming TFS is accurate, we're talking age, gender, email address, chat logon name, photo, or name of their school.

      Presumably "hedwards (940851)" would be your contact information - let's hope everyone on Slashdot is over 18.

      There is also the issue of excessive punishment. I'm all for increased data protection laws, especially for companies - but sending individuals to prison?
  • Seriously, why? Does disclosing personal information of your clients classify as freedom of speech, too? Don't you think there are other risks involved?
    • by Pinckney (1098477)
      Because it restricts what information someone (this is probably targeted at corporate entities, but individuals as well) can distribute. There is no magic line between information which serves the general good and information which is detrimental to the general good, just as there is no magic line between sedition and patriotism.
      • "informational self-determation" - a term coined by the german federal constitutional court - is not censorship. it means that you can decide which informations about yourself is given to other entities. the "right to privacy" is actually a subset of informational self-determination.

        of course, the government isn't you and therefore should not decide which information can be (or cannot be) out there.
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Hal_Porter (817932)
          I agree for adults, who should be allowed to make their own mistakes. But children aren't adults. There was an interesting article in slate about this in slate -

          http://www.slate.com/id/2174841 [slate.com]

          He proposes three boundary ages, and has studies to justify each one.

          12 - when you can physically have sex - when women reach puberty
          16 - when you're intellectually mature - people under 16 score quite badly on intelligence tests
          25 - when you have some kind of emotional maturity - people under that age don't have prope
          • this argumentation is doomed to fail, an arbitrary limit for maturity is stupid. actually, i know a sizeable number of people who would not fit into this scheme - for example, roughly a third of my former classmates.

            == first, sexual maturity ==

            i know girls who were sexual before being 12 (even before having their period). not all of them fully knew what they were doing - to hear "you can always put it out" from a slightly stupid girl is probably a huge turn-off for a young boy w
            • So the jist of your objection is that because there is variation between people we should have no limits?

              Presumably there is some sort of normal distribution [wikipedia.org] of the age people reach each milestone - i.e. most of them reach it in +- one standard deviation. The people my brother and I went to school with matured at a very similar pace - so the standard deviation should be much less than one year. And this is despite the fact we went to very different types of school because I passed an exam and he failed it.
              • So the jist of your objection is that because there is variation between people we should have no limits?

                certainly arbitrary limits based on age are bullshit. limits based on actual skill (driver's license) are perfectly acceptable.

                Early developers would need to wait for a year to have a sexual relationship unless they wanted their partner to go to break the law but I don't see a problem with that.

                but i see one. you are arguing that because the law is unjust only to "few", it is acceptable.
                while this may so

                • certainly arbitrary limits based on age are bullshit. limits based on actual skill (driver's license) are perfectly acceptable.

                  How would that work instead of a fixed age of consent? Would you have Sex Licences tests for teenagers, analogous to Driving Licenses? I suppose like driving lessons they'd have dating lessons and once they have reached a certain level of proficiency the Sex Police would allow them to have sex. A few retards would never pass the test and the Sex Police would prevent them having sex ever, eugenics style. If you're out on a date and you forget your Sex License the Sex Police could arrest you, regardless of a

                  • How would that work instead of a fixed age of consent? Would you have Sex Licences tests for teenagers, analogous to Driving Licenses?

                    you are certainly misunderstanding me (maybe on purpose ?): i was arguing for intellectual maturity. sexual maturity is easy - if they have these urges and act upon it, they are sexually mature. it is a matter of fact, therefore no license necessary. sex ed is taught here in school, it was part of the curriculum of biology when i was in secondary school. see, no problem.

                    guess

            • In many ways, you are correct and the age limits are not ideal. However, it is important to understand that what you propopse is a sex permit. Sure, you didn't use those words, but that's what it is. An individual would need some kind of permit or license, or it would be illegal to have sex with them. This is a very very very bad idea, for the same reason "literacy tests" were struck down.

              How are you going to get such a license? You'll have to undergo a physical examination; pass a sex-ed test; and p
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      Does disclosing personal information of your clients classify as freedom of speech, too? Don't you think there are other risks involved?

      Yes, it is a form of free speech. However, freedom is not absolute. We commonly recognize that you cannot yell fire in a theater, use certain "fighting words", or perjure yourself, all acts of free speech that we consider unreasonable. Many people (although not many people on slashdot) believe that freedom of speech can be limited by intellectual property laws. So, the

      • by Kjella (173770)
        While there is also a "information wants to be free" brigade on slashdot that truly desire abolishing all the restrictions, I also think there's a lot of general resentment in the tech community over "restrictions on free speech" proposals because they involve technical and practical impossibilities or that would otherwise require massive and intrusive surveilance, centralized and totalitarian infrastructure and so on. I can within five minutes whip up an application that'll share bits and bytes with absolu
  • by ILuvRamen (1026668) on Saturday November 24, 2007 @11:21PM (#21468061)
    Sorry, couldn't help it, I'm a programmer. What they need to do to encourage kids to not find ways around this is design the filter so when it senses under 18 related form data leaving the computer, it re-routes the kid to another page with a flash file of Michael Jackson saying "You're an idiot!" and kissing the screen. Now that would send em a message.
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by weighn (578357)

      What they need to do to encourage kids to not find ways around this...

      I first read this as

      encourage kids to find ways around this

      which I think is just as funny, but consider for a sec. Society benefits when the kids are encouraged to participate in official-type stuff like this. Something about feeling included. More governments should try it. I can't remember where I read - and a couple of searches aren't bringing it up - but one section of (from memory) a state government in Australia has recruited the teen "hacker" who took a few minutes to bypass the bajillion dollar government-issue "net nanny" filter. Thi

    • The sad part is, Michael would do it as he hasn't gotten a gig in years.
  • The article isn't clear on whether or not the prohibition applies to foreign sites tht carry information about Thai kids.
    From TFA, "Local website operators will be given a one-month deadline to ensure the privacy of people under the age of 18 on the internet or face legal action."
    • And of course, with the magic ESP chronometer, they'll be able to do just that.

      What I'd like is a law where every politician that votes for idiotic and impossible to enforce legislation is forced to eat a lit stick of dynamite. I think that would solve a great many more problems.
      • From what I can tell, the law isnt saying that users under 18 cannot reveal their information themselves.
        Its just the companies/websites which cannot reveal the information. MySpace pages are still fine.
  • WTH, KDawson? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Eddi3 (1046882)
    What's with the negative spin? This sounds like a good thing; They're stopping ISPs from giving out the personal information of minors to everyone on the internet. This isn't an increase in Censorship, it's an increase in Privacy.
    • by AySz88 (1151141)

      They're stopping ISPs from...

      It's not just ISPs, but all websites. (The summary probably shouldn't have said "internet providers".) From TFA:

      Local website operators will be given a one-month deadline to ensure the privacy of people under the age of 18 on the internet or face legal action. Deputy Prime Minister Paiboon Wattanasiritham said they must make sure that their websites displayed no personal information about under-18s in a way that would allow others to search the data to gain access to them.

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by AySz88 (1151141)
        ...in case my meaning wasn't clear, "all websites" means all Thai websites, presumably including those sites that publish user-submitted data (i.e. social networking sites?), for some definition of "Thai website".

        So the interesting questions I can think of are: is this retroactive to information already published, such that a site might have to verify the ages of existing users? Is the site responsible moderating content and users before potentially publishing personal info, or only remove things that t
    • Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)

      by tietokone-olmi (26595)
      It's also an Increase in seemingly Random capitalization of Words that are usually not Capitalized in written English.
  • In America and other countries, we have laws that mandate that sex-offenders have to register as such, effectively ruining them for life. I wonder if that's the case in Thailand? There are plenty of sick bastards who would be willing to deal with the temporary consequences as long as they could continue to satisfy themselves in the future.

    An interesting side note: The biz has crept into American pop culture [mtv.com].
  • Seems weird for a country who's major import is pedophiles. Maybe this is some kind of marketing strategy.
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by mboverload (657893)
      hay boyz! lol come over to my house i have a sister too Profile for hotgirl8989 Name: Chrisy Hansen State: NY Address: 30 Rockefeller Plz
    • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Good grief, learn to spell. You're still allowed to use the internet to check your spelling and grammar. Oh, and "who's" = WHO IS or WHO HAS. The possessive is WHOSE. I know, I know, so difficult...
    • Who gives a shit about pervs. Thai women are beautiful and exotic. I think the cutest in Asia. Hell the ones 40 years old look like they are 30. And they love older Western men. So I would say the major import is Western men looking for a woman >18 years old.
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by mjwx (966435)
        Parts of Thailand's economy is fairly reliant on Western (Primarily Australian and European) and Asian tourist dollars. The tourist industry is eager to get rid of the paedophile stigmata which mostly seems to come from North America these days, as I said earlier Thailand is a popular tourist destination for families, couples and singles alike in Australia mainly due to the fact that a two week holiday in Thailand is cheaper than most one week holidays in Australia.

        Having recently been to Phuket I can say t
    • by Daengbo (523424)
      Not a marketing strategy. I'm sure it has to do with the recent case where a pedophile fled South Korea and was arrested while trying to hide out in Thailand.

      By the way, saying Thailand's major import is pedophiles is really obnoxious. I'm sure there's no child molestation going on in your country, eh? No sex slavery, either. Don't be a racist.
  • Does this mean that I can't put pictures of my kids on a website hosted by an ISP? I understand the privacy implications of last names and addresses, but kids pictures by themselves seems like it is going too far.

    - Malcolm
  • they just outlawed facebook - or the thai equivalent to facebook?

    I remember reading that something like 2/3 of Koreans have the equivalent to a facebook page, and I bet social networking sites are popular in thailand too.
    • by mjwx (966435)
      Thailand is not as rich a Korea, the majority of Thai's (especially the youth) would not have regular access to the Internet.
      • Thailand is richer (by a good ways) than Vietnam, and at least in the cities, pretty much any one who wants regular Internet access has it. Internet cafes are dirt cheap, and computer ownership is not unusual among the growing middle class, either. Computer shops are all over the place in Saigon. I expect that most urban teens in Thailand have regular Internet access if they want it.
  • Why laws like this need to cover an email address or a chat handle.
    I can understand not wanting age, phone number, address or photo to be disclosed (because those can be used to identify someone) but how does collecting, using, storing or disclosing an email address or a chat handle violate someones privacy? (most forums I know of collect but do not display email addresses)
  • no surprises here (Score:5, Insightful)

    by weighn (578357) <weighn@QUOTEgmail.com minus punct> on Sunday November 25, 2007 @12:12AM (#21468423) Homepage
    So, once again legislators completely fail to grasp the simplest of concepts relating to this communications medium. It's easy to single out Thailand due to the bizarre [slashdot.org] laws [slashdot.org] that apply to the King/YouTube/Open Source [slashdot.org]. However, this seems to happen under all governments - regressive/conservative/progressive. My own country does it [slashdot.org]. Or, hopefully the correct phrase is did it [wsj.com] now that the election was won by a party that promises tax rebates for parents buying tech for their schoolkids.

    Is it really a surprise, when you look at who the people are that draft these laws? Is it fair of us to expect them to be in touch? Perhaps what democratic governments need is a non-political, not-for-profit group that can propose some framework for national government tech policy? They could even propose different flavours for governments with either progressive or conservative agendas. At least then we may have some body of tech legislature that is based on informed analysis of what is being regulated. Easy to say, I guess...

    • by kamapuaa (555446)
      What are you talking about? Of course this technology is possible, have you ever used Facebook or Myspace? I can't say whether the practice empirically lead to a decrease in crime/abuse, but the law is definitely technologically possible, and at first glance would seem to make it more difficult for strangers to get in contact with minors.

      Your attitude shows why technological people have so little influence in politics - you're unconcerned with the realities of the situation, or the actual technology, and

      • by weighn (578357)

        I can't say whether the practice empirically lead to a decrease in crime/abuse, but the law is definitely technologically possible, and at first glance would seem to make it more difficult for strangers to get in contact with minors.

        To make a simple analogy, anyone can pick up a phone and dial numbers at random until a kid answers. Don't confuse "technologically possible" laws with necessary ones.

        Your attitude shows why technological people have so little influence in politics - you're unconcerned with the realities of the situation, or the actual technology, and more concerned with getting on a high horse and making your unqualified opinions out to be fact.

        I take it you mean "unqualified as politicians"? Otherwise there is a contradiction there.

        Contrary to your point, tech people only urge a little less knee-jerk, fud-ite legislature and some informed debate.

        Please make some examples out of the many, IMHO, dumb laws that are discussed here from time to time. Explain how they are actually bas

    • by LingNoi (1066278)
      Your information on "ICT minister slamming open source" is REALLY old.

      Here is the update [localfoss.org] which is also REALLY old.

      [I want to] explain a bit that I did not intend and it was misunderstanding. I am proud and glad that such activities exist. And I will seriously, tangibly, and financially support through SIPA [Software Industry Promotion Agency (Public Organization)] as soon as possible to encourage the activities.

  • Considering this protects underaged people in many ways, why not tag this "finallyprivacy" or something?
  • legislation like this is coming from a country known for it's underage sex industry.

    Why don't you guys work on breaking up the "tourism" that goes on in your country (which exists due to local police corruption in many cases) before you start passing unenforceable edicts on cyberspace? Kthnxbai.
    • The poor are the ones in the sex industry, not the wealthy and middle class who are the relative few with net access. This is an effort to protect those middle and upper class kids. As the Roman Senate said in History of the World, Part I, "**** the poor!" Actually, that was how it was said in the censored for TV version. It really confused my friend until he saw the original, several years later.
  • You can have sex with their children, you just can't post their name?

    Or Maybe times have changed, I don't keep up to date on the pedophile scene.

  • As this is in the news, I'm pretty sure it's been filtered and cleaned up to make it look good. My hope is that it does just this and makes every effort to protect children and doesn't have some attached agenda in it. Otherwise this sounds like a solid law to help protect the children.

    On another note, does anyone have access to the wording of the complete law, I am very interested in reading all it has to say.
  • How would a modern-day George Washington advertise his new surveying business [kenmore.org] following his father's early demise?

    George Washington began surveying at about age 15. His father's probate inventory included a set of surveyor's instruments.
    • by tepples (727027)

      How would a modern-day George Washington advertise his new surveying business [kenmore.org] following his father's early demise?
      He would wait until age 18. Life expectancies are much longer now than then.
      • He would wait until age 18. Life expectancies are much longer now than then.
        The urge to procreate has not changed. The endless schooling that people are now subjected to in the U.S. leads to pre-marital sex, which leads to weaker marriages, abuse of women, neglect of children, and decay of society.
        • by Catbeller (118204)
          People, esp. teenagers, have sex because they are horny. No evil schools necessary.

          And it's really no one else's business.
  • My little sister listed her age on Myspace as 17 when she was 14. Need I say more? After seeing that, I'm all for this legislation. I'd even like to see the children themselves held responsible: they don't seem to be held accountable for their own actions at all these days.

    God I feel old saying that. I'm only 30, I swear!
    • My little sister listed her age on Myspace as 17 when she was 14. Need I say more? After seeing that, I'm all for this legislation. I'd even like to see the children themselves held responsible: they don't seem to be held accountable for their own actions at all these days. God I feel old saying that. I'm only 30, I swear!

      so let me recount: because an underage person may give false information to look somehow more "adult", "underage information" should be banned ? and people should be held accountable whe

      • The reason is because I don't want anyone coming around trying to fuck my 14 year old sister. 17 is kinda-sorta soon-to-be legal. 14 is not.
        • first, here in germany, 14 would be legal - it's the age of consent.
          second, you sister's sex life is none of your bizness, srsly.
          third, you, kind sir, are probably a control freak.
          • First, Stop calling me sir. What is this, a Nigerian 409 scam?

            Second, my sister's sex life is my responsibility as she is my SISTER. I care for her well being. Even (and especially) when she is unable to do it herself. You come down here and try to fuck her. I'll have your own dick wandering about in your own intestines, traveling through them the wrong way. I might shove it so far up there it'll bulge in your throat.

            Third, if 14 is the age of consent in Germany, then, well, what part of the country in nice
  • For gods sake, he is a ham radio operator, HS1A. But I think other people actually control the country and make the laws. But he is revered by most all in Thailand as he put much effort into helping his people.
  • Internet censorship (Score:3, Interesting)

    by FRiC (416091) on Sunday November 25, 2007 @01:31AM (#21468857) Homepage
    The Internet censorship in Thailand is back in full force too, and all this happened right after Jimmy Wales of Wikipedia criticized the Thai government for Internet censorship during his keynote speech at the ICT Expo in Thailand earlier this month.
    • by LingNoi (1066278)
      Rubbish it has been happening MUCH longer then that.

      It all started when the new emergency military government came in and overthrew the corrupt prime minster Taksin. The new ICT minister that replaced the old one started blocking websites [slashdot.org]. Before that happened there were only 3000 websites blocked, now there are over 15,000.

      That all happened in 2006 [wikipedia.org].
      • by FRiC (416091)
        Actually, when the YouTube ban was lifted, they unblocked ALL the sites. The banning just restarted again after the ICT Expo.
  • My company is in the top 50 sites in Thailand, and we're popular with teens....

    I guess that means extra work for us, sorry kids, but I can't get home for christmas
  • Any UK government officials in Thailand had better make sure that their diplomatic immunity is watertight: they just potentially published 7.5 million children's names, birthdays and addresses [bbc.co.uk] along with those of the parents.
  • A lot of people in Thailand get raped and even people in their 25s can be really naive about the realities of life. The first thing you have to understand about a country like Thailand is that they are a lot more stricter then a western country when it comes to their children.

    They're very protective over their children compared to the west where they can do what they want. Most children in their 25+ still live with their parents and are home before 9 pm. You live with your parents until you're married. If y
  • The article is so short that I can't help but be confused by the OP subject line. Does this law restrict ISPs from selling teens' demographic information to advertisers, or does it restrict all websites from hosting (and displaying) any personal information about teens? If it's a restriction on ISPs, then don't we have some similar child protection laws in the US with the age being 13? I don't see the problem with a law that limits marketing to children, or marketing of children. If it's a restriction on

  • Thailand has a thriving child sex industry. But posting teenager's info online is illegal? So it's legal to pay to have sex with teens, but it is not legal to post the information about the other teens in you class online? They need to get their priorities straight. And no, I am not trolling. If you don't think Thailand has a thriving teen whore industry, google it for yourself.

Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing. -- Roy L. Ash, ex-president, Litton Industries

Working...