Slashdot Log In
FCC to Develop 'Super V Chip' To Screen All Content
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Aug 03, 2007 07:49 AM
from the any-chance-we-could-stop-thinking-about-the-children-now dept.
from the any-chance-we-could-stop-thinking-about-the-children-now dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Senate Commerce Committee has stepped in and approved a legislation asking the Federal Communications Commission to 'oversee the development of a super V-chip that could screen content on everything from cell phones to the Internet.' Since the content viewed by children is no longer restricted to TV or radio Sen. Mark Pryor, D-Ark., the sponsor of the Child Safe Viewing Act, feels that the new law is necessary. 'The bill requires the FCC to review, within one year of enactment, technology that can help parents manage the vast volume of video and other content on television or the Internet. Under the 1996 Telecommunications Act, TV makers are required to embed the V-chip within televisions to allow parents to block content according to a rating system.'"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
FCC to Develop 'Super V Chip' To Screen All Content
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 408 comments
(Spill at 50!) | Index Only
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1)
|
2
Why not... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parents today obviously have ZERO interest in spending time with their children and monitoring their activities and habits.
This is ridiculous.
Re:Why not... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://sitetheory.com/ | Last Journal: Friday October 24 2003, @10:59AM)
Re:Why not... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Why not... (Score:4, Insightful)
I dunno if this is Eugenics but... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday December 20 2006, @03:29PM)
Re:I dunno if this is Eugenics but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Don't be so quick to write off the children of those "under-performers". Most of them is what keeps this country functioning.
Re:I dunno if this is Eugenics but... (Score:4, Insightful)
So what you'll have is a class of people that know the value of a dollar and know how to save. Then you'll have everyone else that's in debt up to their ears, teetering on bankruptcy. The first class of people will be making money off the second since the second class is to stupid to learn anything.
Re:Why not... (Score:4, Funny)
(http://jackmaninov.ca/)
Re:Why not... (Score:4, Informative)
(http://nzruss.blogspot.com/)
The latest Wired magazine has a breakdown of average US household expenses, (I tried to find it online but couldn't). Anyway, from the picture table it was pretty clear that more than two-thirds (~66%) of household expenses go to Telco's/Cable/Tv companies. It was a good prompt for me to revise what services I have vs what I actually need. We now have a pre-pay phone, dropped our DirecTv in favor of free-to-air (timeshifted fav shows with Mythtv) and 2-at-a-time-netflix, and reviewed our internet useage and plan (which didn't change). I'm aiming to drop the standard land-line and go for a VOIP service (Skype calling in) with Cellphone for 911 calls. Overall I think we're saving about $70/month and once the land-line is gone it will be $120/month for very little sacrifice. Ultimately freeing up money to do other things.
Ultimately there are less things for me to 'censor' cos we simply have less services. I agree that it should be the responsibility for the parents to manage what their children watch / are exposed to, and most providers (e.g directv) offer some form of parental control. If a service does not offer parental control (i.e a standard internet connection), then the parent needs to have a good long look at the service and whether it is appropriate for the child to have access to. if your kid 'has to have' a cellphone, there are plenty without data plans and no access to the internet, and for home based things there are third party solutions like net-nanny, or an Astaro gateway for the household.
Re:Why not... (Score:5, Insightful)
(http://www.lazylightning.org/)
Being that I am finally of the age where my friends and co-workers have young children and I myself may soon have a child, I am noticing more and more the teaching and parenting skills that people have.
Now, I am continuously out and about and watch the result of poor parenting when the little bastard bites your leg [bash.org] but recently I have been noticing a backlash against this. Parents are starting to spank their kids again (in public no less, the horror!), sternly talking to them instead of baby talk and asking what their true feelings are, and generally raising children that aren't going to run out in the middle of the street and then stare at you like it was your fault that you almost hit them.
What this is, aside from the vocal minority of those parents that are still parentally retarded, is the politicians doing everything they can to create more censorship and centralized control under the guise of saving the children. If anything, these people aren't bad parents because they can't control their brats, it's that they can't control their government.
Not controlling the government is far more scary than some little shithead not getting to watch Denis Leary call someone a fucking cocksucker and talk about his erection likelihood on Rescue Me.
Re:Why not... (Score:5, Insightful)
Technology alone cannot solve problems. Realize 2 things: First of all, your kids have way more time to figure out ways around your access control than you have to review whether your access controls work. And second, you have no control over the TVs of their friends. Even if your kids can't figure out how to circumvent the V-Chip, they simply go to their friends and watch that video there.
I want to opt out. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.slashdot.org/ | Last Journal: Wednesday December 20 2006, @03:29PM)
I can't? Oh joy. Perhaps the parents should pay MORE for a TV with MORE FEATURES instead of the government forcing everyone to pay for it.
Re:So does this mean... (Score:5, Funny)
You can already block all content. (Score:5, Insightful)
Censoring for Children is like... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is our obligation, as adults, not to prevent the reality from reaching the senses of minors, but to provide adequate explanations and guidance. Those technical censoring measures are the result of the intention to avoid adult responsibilities, to "sweep the problem under the rug", so to say.
Re:Censoring for Children is like... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Censoring for Children is like... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Censoring for Children is like... (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry, but I disagree. It is our responsibility as adults to introduce children to reality as they are able to understand the explanations and guidance. A five-year-old is not likely to understand any possible explanation for a violent rape scene that he/she saw on TV. I'm really astounded that people think of the V-chip as censorship. Could somebody explain exactly how a screening tool that can be turned on or off by the owner is censorship? The V-chip is nothing more than a tool. It can be used for good and for bad. Good parents will carefully monitor what their children are watching (either to keep them away from inappropriate content or to explain questionable content). Bad parents will rely solely on the V-chip (a huge mistake) to allow them to shirk their responsibility. I have two children. I use the parental lock-down features on my cable box, but I also monitor what they are watching. The parental lock-down is nice because it cuts down on inappropriate content that may show up while I'm running through channels in the presence of my children. It also makes sure my eight-year-old isn't going to change channels to something that's not suitable for him (or his little sister) while I'm in the bathroom. But I'm also fully aware that it is not a substitute for responsible parenting. Some channels don't include rating informations for all shows (The Science Fiction channel and HDNet are two notable offenders), and the most questionable content comes from the commercials rather than the programming itself. Therefore, I make sure I'm there to explain behavior that is and is not appropriate. I like the V-chip as a tool, and nothing more. These laws aren't about mandating that people _use_ the V-chip. They are about making sure that it's available for those who _want_ to use it.
Re:Censoring for Children is like... (Score:4, Insightful)
True, but it is mandating (I think) that every adult has to pay for it, presumably in everything from computers to phones, which is still an issue. What's wrong with overseeing the development to make it available as an option to those who want it?
There's also the question of how they intend to implement a rating system for the Internet.
All content? (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Saturday September 14 2002, @08:48PM)
How many parents actually use the V-chip? (Score:5, Interesting)
(Last Journal: Wednesday October 31, @08:33AM)
V-chip doesn't *SCREEN* content (Score:3, Informative)
-b.
Parental Responsibility? (Score:4, Informative)
Protect us from ourselves! (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, good luck with that, folks.
They're still missing one form... (Score:5, Interesting)
(http://soma.skeeze.net/)
Obligatory User Friendly Strip [userfriendly.org]
Parents, Supervise Your Own Children (Score:5, Insightful)
It's bad enough that some parents think that television is a babysitter. It's even worse that some feel the Internet is a more interactive babysitter. Now, it seems, your cell phone and ipod are capable of acting as babysitters.
Sadly, judging from my experience in the restaurant, technology might actually be a better babysitter than some parents...
Re:Parents, Supervise Your Own Children (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://www.outerspacecrew.net/)
It's best to ignore such a child. You see, when you grow up, whining and screaming does not get you balloons. You want to learn that lesson early.
Either that or give the child some strong negative reinforcement. But I can see a mother being uncomfortable with that in a crowded restaurant.
Overkill (Score:5, Insightful)
(Last Journal: Friday September 21, @07:18AM)
This technology is all overkill anyway, and here's why:
To view content, you have to physically have access to a device that can display the content. As a parent, you should be able to remove that physical access for all 'locally controlled' devices; you can't prevent them from watching a friend's phone or whatever regardless of V-chips or whatever.
There is this thing called an 'off switch' and, failing that, circuit breakers.
You don't want them to have a phone, don't give them money to buy one. If they're old enough to get a job to afford their own, then they should already have the capacity to handle whatever content they can obtain anyway.
To me, these laws just take away responsibility and, with it, freedom from the general populace.
The same Mark Pryor... (Score:5, Informative)
(http://filer.case.edu/~bct4)
At some point, it becomes really, really obvious.. (Score:4, Insightful)
(http://darkcyclone0.tripod.com/snyktn.html | Last Journal: Thursday August 03 2006, @02:55PM)
More concerning is the new anti-TV violence rules. I really don't want to go back to the days of the A-Team where you could have machine guns as long as they never hit anyone.
Society of bad parenting (Score:4, Insightful)
Lost Cause (Score:3, Informative)
(http://slashdot.org/)
Even if this becomes law, I can't imagine that it would survive its first challenge in a federal court.
I Want One (Score:3, Interesting)
(http://slashdot.org/~Doc%20Ruby/journal | Last Journal: Thursday March 31 2005, @01:48PM)
The alternative is that the government and providers screen content at the server, without consumer choice.
The only problem is that today's FCC, coming at the tail end of the Republican covert government [dailykos.com], will probably install spyware on their "Super" V-Chip. So instead of all your TV signals of all they offer coming down your wire or over the air, for you to privately select from, their "Super" V-Chip will send a log to the NSA. Crossreferenced to all your personal data [wikipedia.org], including email, phone, surveillance video, and all the electronic/digital transactions that profile your life.
Eventually the NSA will convince us to implant an RFID V-Chip "so we can easily tune our TVs wherever we go".
But if we get a private V-Chip now, before they do it, then we can satisfy the demand for convenience before that convenience is exploited to mask total privacy invasion. If the V-Chip specs and HW/firmware/SW are open, then we can get both safety and convenience. That's known as "freedom": the (traditional) American Way.
Oblig.: (Score:5, Insightful)
- Bender