Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Government Cellphones

Utah Campaign Against Porn Marches On With Phone Filter Ban (apnews.com) 212

Conservative lawmakers in Utah have a passed a proposal this month requiring all cellphones and tablets sold in the state to automatically block pornography. It's unknown whether Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican, will sign or veto the proposal. He has until March 25 to decide. The Associated Press reports: Supporters argue the restriction is a critical step to help parents keep explicit content away from kids -- especially as more children have their own electronic devices and have been forced to spend more time online during the pandemic. Combating porn is a perennial issue for Utah lawmakers who have previously mandated warning labels on print and online pornography and declared porn a "public health crisis."

Utah's generally conservative culture means racy mainstream magazines and lingerie catalogs can be considered risque. Leaders of the predominant Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints faith have also drawn attention to what they consider the harms of pornography. Even if Cox signs the measure, it wouldn't go into effect unless five other states also enacted similar laws, a provision added after manufacturers and retailers voiced concerns that it would be difficult to implement the filters for a single state. If Cox signs the bill, Utah appears poised to become the first state to mandate filters on devices, according to two prominent technology experts and the bill's sponsor, though federal internet restrictions aimed at preventing kids from accessing porn were passed in the late 1990s and later stuck down in the courts.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Utah Campaign Against Porn Marches On With Phone Filter Ban

Comments Filter:
  • How does a phone (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Arthur, KBE ( 6444066 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:09PM (#61166164)
    determine what's pornographic? That's a social standard.
    • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

      Depends who's phone. If it's a Utah priest, then the phone can probably infer 100% of it is porn with very high probability.

      • If it's a priest, wouldn't that mean they are more likely to use porn? Maybe we just need a god filter for phones.
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by youngone ( 975102 )
          Most of the priests in Utah would be Mormons I would imagine, and in my limited experience with Mormons, they're dirty, dirty perverts.
          I mean that in a good way though.
          • Re: How does a phone (Score:4, Informative)

            by Orange Man Bad ( 5608829 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @09:31PM (#61166716)

            At my college the Mormon girls were exceeded in sluttiness only by the Catholic girls.

            Mormon girls were good for general partying. Catholic girls were "anything but intercourse" which meant some amazing bjs and most of them considered anal sex as not intercourse, too.

            Gotta love those religiously raised girls finally set free!

            • Re: How does a phone (Score:4, Interesting)

              by youngone ( 975102 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @10:07PM (#61166820)
              Yes, that's what I was thinking of.
              I met a girl in a bar once, and she took me home. This started a short, but extremely fun little affair.
              She had to keep the whole thing secret from her parents of course, as they would have hit the roof if they found out.
              I sometimes wonder what her future husband thought on their wedding night, because she wasn't a virgin when I met her, and I understand that sort of thing is important to Mormons.
              Maybe she got out of the cult. I hope so, she was a nice girl.
          • Behind closed doors, perhaps. But as with all these strict religious communities, it's important to maintain the facade of respectability at all times.

      • Does the LDS have priests?
        I think thr have bishops, but those are not as high up in the church as those in the Catholic heirachy.

    • Quite easy (Score:5, Funny)

      by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:38PM (#61166240)

      How does a phone determine what's pornographic? That's a social standard.

      Very simple, every web request sent via a phone gets sent to what is called a "jack center".

      If someone at the jack center is able to pleasure themselves viewing the URL you attempted to access, then it is blocked, otherwise it goes through.

      If you are worried about latency, rest easy - they hire only 18 yo males so the latency is nearly negative.

      • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward

        True but they return a success string on every query.

        Yes, every.

      • Penile plethysmography,
        Would you need to calibrate for SGBi maybe? LDS? Catholic girl fetish?
        The angle of the dangle is proportional to the heat of the meat.

    • There are working filters available now. Some of them allow you to select ban-lists from different organizations.

      There is no question that the technology exists to implement this.

      The real question is whether a filter mandate is an appropriate role for the government.

      To be clear, without the government mandate, phone owners can still install filters if they choose. And with the government mandate, phone owners can still remove the filter. So what the mandate does is change the default.

      • There is no question that the technology exists to implement this.

        Not without false positives that are going to occasionally be, at best, extremely inconvenient, and a bunch of false negatives too. Not to mention that it's very likely to be forwarding your https content to a central server at least some of the time. Who's going to be liable when this software stops you doing something essential, or gets hacked and leaks your personal data?

        • Not to mention that it's very likely to be forwarding your https content to a central server

          That is not how the filters work.

          There is a list of banned URLs. Every day, your phone will fetch the updates to keep the list up-to-date.

          When you (or your kid) try to access a site, the URL is compared to the list. Nothing that you type is sent to a server.

          Who's going to be liable when this software stops you doing something essential

          Nobody. You can turn the filter off anytime you want.

          or gets hacked and leaks your personal data?

          There is no reason for any of your personal data to be stored.

      • There are working filters available now. Some of them allow you to select ban-lists from different organizations.

        Opt-in filtering doesn't affect 1st amendment protections, unlike mandatory filters.

        False positives in opt-in filters are not so problematic (unless they start blocking things like the Governor's name).

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by jbengt ( 874751 )

      . . . what's pornographic? That's a social standard.

      This is Utah. Who needs porn when you've got 4 wives.

      Wait, never mind, it's the 3 other guys who can't get wives because the elders have married them all.

    • by Z80a ( 971949 )

      I imagine they will probably end up with a furry outbreak

    • This legislation does not specify who controls the passcode, how this is initially set, who holds the default passcode and how such info is distributed.

      Parents do not unbox their kids presents for them because unboxing is part of the “experience” of receiving something new. Phone manufacturers to “comply with the law” will simply set a default of 0000 upon activation regardless of the state and leave it up to parents to change it... which means any child with half a brain will sim
      • This legislation does not specify who controls the passcode, how this is initially set, who holds the default passcode and how such info is distributed.

        There is no indication in the article that phone users will be allowed to turn off the blocking.

      • Second reply to acknowledge that, although the news article did not suggest that the filtering could be disabled, the text of the proposed law does detail how the filtering could be disabled with a passcode.

    • by rtb61 ( 674572 )

      Too easy, set up a different internet protocol, encrypted and specifically for minors. Simply a protocol that can be locked onto children's devices that only allows access to the minors internet. All content has to be checked before it is allowed it. Simply, why doesn't it happen. Psychopathic greed of the establishment because they want to target children with mind disturbing peer pressure advertising because GREED KNOWS NO LIMITS. Really sick as fuck billionaire adults. Have a controlled minors internet a

    • The same way businesses have been preventing employees from accessing pornography on their computers for decades? There are free filtered DNS services that offer this now. I'm not saying I agree, but it's a pretty simple concept.

    • determine what's pornographic?

      They are mormons in Utah, so polygamous. They consider 1:1 as porn, but MFF threesomes and moresomes will be OK.

  • by rmdingler ( 1955220 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:11PM (#61166168) Journal

    If the measure to filter cell phones sold in Utah is successful, marijuana won't be the only thing smuggled in next door from Colorado.

  • by tempest69 ( 572798 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:14PM (#61166172) Journal
    8 scammers in a 90 minute window today...
    I've complained to my phone company, and my government officials. They gave me the polite "fuck off, not happening"
    The phone companies aren't cooperating, the government has no interest in the fight. Everyone I know deals with this crap.
    Dammit, I JUST GOT A DAMN SCAM CALL WRITING THIS.
    • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:59PM (#61166302)

      A flaw in representative democracy is that diffuse non-partisan issues are ignored.

      Plenty of people care about spam calls, but far fewer of them care enough to change who they vote for, and those people are spread out across all 435 congressional districts.

      No politician benefits from fixing the phone spam problem.

      • by The Evil Atheist ( 2484676 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @08:42PM (#61166576)
        That's because voting is not the end point of democracy. You still have to constantly communicate with the elected. That's the one thing Republican voters do well - they continue to write and inundate politicians with letters and phone calls.

        Many surveys paint most Americans as more progressive than their reputation, but it is the ultra conservatives who are loudest after the election. You can't wait for the next election.
        • You still have to constantly communicate with the elected.

          If your representative gets 1200 letters about the auto parts factory closing and 3 about phone spam, can you guess which issue will receive attention?

          If each representative receives three letters about phone spam, that is 435 * 3 = 1305. It is a bigger issue but spread out. So it is ignored.

          • Then send 1200 letters about the phone scam. That's the point. You're supposed to keep sending them, and you're supposed to encourage others to send them as well. That's what the ultra-conservatives do and that's why they keep getting the attention in situations like this, even though they're always in the minority.
    • Time to drop your phone service, I guess.

    • -I've found unless you need to pick up phone numbers you don't know the ios 14 feature to block unknown callers works pretty well though I can't use that feature since I must pick up a lot of unknown calls

      -short of that, I suppose there are various tools on android I've heard about that work well

      -I myself went scorched earth a while back, I ported my number to google voice and signed up for a native number in a fly over state and set my phone to block all numbers from that area code with number shield (best

    • Most of them come from India. I wait until someone gets on the line and then ask if their mother knows they steal for a living. They hang up real quick.

      • I did this. He started talking shit, and said: "Your wife wants my penis"... I responded with "naw, she's going to need more than 2 inches..." he hung up right after.. it's as if it struck a nerve and activated some deep-seated trauma within him...
    • Once,you know it's a scammer, say this to them: "...It's done... But there's blood EVERYWHERE. You should probably leave the country for a while..."
  • in trying to outwit millions of horny teenagers.
  • by Rick Schumann ( 4662797 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:16PM (#61166176) Journal
    Oh for fucks' sake.. how many times have however many governments and politicians tried what amounts to 'net nanny' software?
    You can't define 'pornography' with any regularity.
    'Block lists' inevitably either block non-porn, fail to block actual sex porn, or become subject to someones' 'agenda' sites to block.
    Kids will find a way around the blocks and filters no matter what you do.
    It's a waste of time and money to even bother with this nonsense.
    It is not the job of governments to raise peoples' kids for them; PARENTS get to decide these issues, not politicians!
    Meanwhile: we're still in the middle of a global pandemic that's fucking up our economy. You politicians have more important things to worry about than this, get off it and get busy with the things that need doing RIGHT NOW!
  • by Berkyjay ( 1225604 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:20PM (#61166190)

    It's only around $3mil people and I bet you most of them would travel out of state in order to get a cell phone.

  • Wedge issues (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:34PM (#61166226)
    like all the culture war issues be their children's books or the genitalia of common root vegetables this is a distraction from environmental issues used to keep people from demanding the same piece of the pie their parents (grandparents?) got.

    The corporatists have gotten extremely good at getting us to vote against our own interests for the sake of things that don't really matter.
  • by ArghBlarg ( 79067 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:41PM (#61166250) Homepage

    Tax them, get them out of politics and children's education. That's the better solution.

    • If you can declare the entire Conservative movement to be a public health hazard [theweek.com]:

      This is what the conservative movement has become: a gigantic public health hazard for America and the world.

      Pornography certainly can be declared such...

      At least, we know, there is a problem: Westerners [healthline.com] — and Americans in particular [cnn.com] — aren't having as much sex as the previous generations used to. And in their horniest prime too!

      Between 2000-2002 and 2016-2018, past-year sexual inactivity rose from almost 19 perc

      • Was just coming to say that conservatism is far more of a public health hazard than porn could be even if every porn star was carrying a full arsenal of STDs and never wore a condom. Conservatism killed at least 100,000 Americans and easily as many Brazilians in this pandemic. Are there even than many people in the whole professional porn industry? And that's not even getting into what privatized health care has done to Americans.

        Also conservatism can't have it both ways on teenage sex: Are we supposed to b

        • Pretty impressive that they managed to get poor people to continually vote against their own interests. That said I'm fiscal in the conservative sense and liberal in the social.

  • by nospam007 ( 722110 ) * on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @06:41PM (#61166256)
  • 100% of pornography is blocked in the default configuration. In fact, given the phones require a SIM activation and a WiFi password that may already be the default configuration.
  • Utah seems to believe that by passing a law they can make magic happen. Magically detect porn or other things they find objectionable.

  • by bobstreo ( 1320787 ) on Tuesday March 16, 2021 @07:48PM (#61166424)

    From 2009: "Utah, Online Porn Capital"

    https://www.pcworld.com/articl... [pcworld.com]

    And that's based on the number of people paying for porn...

  • I'd love to see companies finally call the bluff on these things. Cut off the state that implements policies like this, refuse to license tech to business that decide to comply, and let the state go back to land lines and dumbphones. See how long it takes before the citizens revolt against the party leaders.

    It'll never happen, but it's fun to wish.

  • It is a filter that is enabled by default, that can be disabled. It may be poorly planned and/or executed, but it isn't a bad thing.

    Free speech, for those new to people in the USA screaming about it, is something protected by the First Amendment (so only technically in the Constitution) that allows free expression of public ideas/speech, without government interference. Except both the people and the Courts have not really decided what that means, and it doesn't cover private speech (such as Twitter). It is

  • Surely this is a free speech issue? And there's not even a question of TOS this time. I thought Republicans were all about free speech, even ones they don't like? That they'll defend to the death others' rights to free speech?

    I guess spreading violence for your own political side is the only valid free speech.
  • It's unknown whether Gov. Spencer Cox, an idiot...
    I wonder what he's trying to distract people from?
  • I cannot understand Conservative politics. It seems to be aligned with violence and control. Surely violence, the viewing of violence and death are far worse than viewing nudity and sex? After all by default we all have bodies and we all instinctively want to reproduce. Studies reveal that children are largely sexually curious also. What happens when we prevent them expressing or learning more about these instinctual desires (and tell them it is a sin / work of the devil / dirty and disgusting / ...)?
  • If social media companies can engage in coordinated bans on people and thoughts they do not like in violation of fair and equal access, then why can the democratically elected representatives not do the same? At least the people doing this were elected by the people, when social media companies do it they are unaccountable and just impose their own personal biases. And before we go down the rabbit hole of "they are private companies they can do whatever they want", tell that to a restaurant that does not w
  • ... about rape and incest. It's about time they blocked access to the Bible.

  • Scientifically valid studies that is? No? Thought so. They are just trying to legislate their own misconceptions and forcing anybody into them.

    Actual reality is that kids do not care about porn except as an "eww, gross!" thing. And when they are old enough to understand what is going on and to be interested, you cannot keep them away from it anyways. The whole thing is not only a colossal waste of effort, it is completely worthless.

  • Censorship of any content that allows people to "identify" as victims is very much in vogue. I'm sad to say that it's become fashionable, and provides status, to identify as a victim whether genuinely victimized or not.

  • If they think there is a tech capable of doing it (yea, it's an easy url filter after all) then why can't we stop robocalls with a law?

  • by Binkleyz ( 175773 ) on Wednesday March 17, 2021 @08:26AM (#61167686) Journal
    Nothing in TFA mentions a way for the filters to be disabled, so this goes from a "We must protect the poor little children with their undeveloped minds" to a "We want to legislate morality for everyone".

    Does it have a geolocation feature that disables the filter when they descend in the modern-day Sodom that is Nevada?

What is research but a blind date with knowledge? -- Will Harvey

Working...