With the release of the latest expansion for Blizzard’s Hearthstone we sit down with the development team to learn about its development.
Hearthstone Interview - Inside the Halls of Scholomance Academy
With Sony and Guerrilla Games’ Horizon Zero Dawn hitting CPUs and GPUs, Kosta finally steps into the post-apocalyptic shoes of heroine Aloy to slay some robo-dinos.
Horizon Zero Dawn is the Best Game I Haven’t Played
The ASUS ROG Zephyrus G14 is one of the most talked about gaming laptops of the year for good reason - it packs the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS mobile CPU in a tiny package.
ASUS ROG Zephyrus G14 Review
The World Game is back, natch, so we go through all the big changes coming in EA’s FIFA 21.
FIFA 21 Preview - Inside the Big Gameplay Changes Coming
Post by natslovR @ 10:56am 16/08/04 | 87 Comments
The Federal Labour party may be planning to attack the Howard Government as being soft on internet porn by proposing a system to block hardcore porn at the ISP level

My view: Protect children by keeping them off the net unaccompanied. promoted forum item



censorship





Latest Comments
StreX
Posted 11:02am 16/8/04
It's ok guys, I will download the internet and then send it to y'all on DVD's :D
trog
Posted 11:03am 16/8/04
Parent licensing ahoy!

What do the Democrats have to say about this?
StreX
Posted 11:08am 16/8/04
What do the Democrats have to say about this?
They were unable to comment due to the current filming of 'Natasha Spotdestroya Does Canberra'.
Opec
Posted 11:10am 16/8/04
Man, old 'tash really let herself go these days.... Saw a footage of her in the Paliment and yikes...

Also good luck to the ALP, how's everyone's ISP pr0n blocking proxy thunk up my Richard "luddie" Alston going ?
HERMITech
Posted 11:18am 16/8/04
There has been consideration at some point of creating a .sex (or similar) domain just as we have .com, .net, .org (.orgy?) etc

However I'm afraid that if they did this, it would be FAR to easy for Govts to pass a law that would force ISP's to block access to those domains and prevent the entire populace from accessing this.
In an ideal world where you could trust your govt (heh, sif that will ever happen), this wouldn't be that bad an idea as when you create the account with your ISP, you could option in/out on access to these domains if you were worried about children accessing adult material.

Seeing as I don't have any kids (/me shudders at the thought) living in my house, I should be able to view whatever I want. Personally I prefer to censor my own viewing, and not have it censored on what someone else thinks that I can deal with.

I know what I can tolerate and what I have no interest in seeing/viewing.
HERMITech
Posted 11:19am 16/8/04
But if they do invoke this, you can trust me when I say they had better have those terrabyte disks available....
Cause I'll be sending you a few to fill up for us Strex =)
CaPt0
Posted 11:34am 16/8/04
i agree that the government should not try to sensor the internet but rather it is up to the parent/gardian to educate their children in appropriate use of the internet.
spidz
Posted 11:42am 16/8/04
everyone with a ckue would agree, but Latham knows most people with a clue won't vote for him. He's trying some populist politics to win his fair share of the vote from those people without a clue as they usually decide the election.

queue post from einy just to prove my point ;)
mongie
Posted 12:24pm 16/8/04
pretty sure there is actually a .xxx domain extension, but nobody uses it.

NatsLovr is right, its a parent's responsibility to monitor young children's use of the net, and if they decide to censor it, then we'll be no better than bloody china.
shad
Posted 12:48pm 16/8/04
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Deadly-Fly
Posted 12:49pm 16/8/04
I think it would be good to see them attempt to sensor it just so they can find out how futile it would be.

I mean really, if they had any chance of sensoring the internet you'd think RIAA would be the first in line.
clipto
Posted 12:50pm 16/8/04
The internet wasn't made for children, I can see no reason to turn it over to them now.
thetron
Posted 02:08pm 16/8/04
Just use unfiltered proxy server. Problem solved

Not unless it was @ the router level. Thats a different story
CHOPPER
Posted 02:10pm 16/8/04
HAHAHAHAHA!!!.... you guys are such liars... you're all saying really suttily "No" because ur afraid to admit that you look at porn all f-ing day long, and that without it, half of our day's would be actually used constructivly... Even with sex, porn still is there, like a backup system.. to protect us from the dreaded "No sex" strike that woman can sometimes pull on us, the dominant male species haha...

(Just a joke, don't get offended ladies)

They better bloody not get rid of it, or i'm screwed... and it means i've gotta stop deleting my stash on my computer...

Also, it will probably end up like prohibition... when you ban all hardcore porn, it will create a underground crime syndicate overnight... haha

Good luck to them, I might make some money out of it if they DO ban it haha...

TufNuT
Posted 02:13pm 16/8/04
hahahahaa ban porn hahahhaah Labour is obviouslly new to the interweb
typo
Posted 02:28pm 16/8/04
roposes that ISPs install compulsory filtering programs so only adults who can verify their age could view X-rated material.



I don't really see the problem. Can we stop kids from playing online games too?
Superform
Posted 04:31pm 16/8/04
block hardcore porn at the ISP level


how? the? f***? can? u? do? that?
JohnnieD
Posted 04:50pm 16/8/04
wouldn't stop p2p programs.
Melissa
Posted 05:12pm 16/8/04
tash isn't hot anymore?

=(
WetWired
Posted 05:27pm 16/8/04
according to this article

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10453582%255E421,00.html

(cbf linking it properly)

"Mark Latham's office is understood to have shown "strong interest" in controls that would automatically filter out violent pornography such as images of rape, torture, bestiality and coprophilia. "

if that's the only censorship they're talking about? I don't have any issues with this
trog
Posted 05:39pm 16/8/04
if that's the only censorship they're talking about? I don't have any issues with this
The issue is, it shouldn't be up to the government to tell us what we can and can't have access to on the Internet, if only because they're woefully underqualified and not aware of the issues. What are they going try to filter next?

I say 'try to' because anyone that knows anything about the Internet knows immediately how useless such controls are. How do you 'automatically filter' certain types of pornography, anyway? There is, to the best of my knowledge, no intelligent, automated system capable of looking at an image and determining what sort of pornography it is. That leaves only one option - blacklisting certain domains.

It might stop kids randomly typing 'girlsandtheirdonkeys.com', but seriously, how can they hope to blacklist all 'inappropriate' sites on the web?
Haklin
Posted 05:47pm 16/8/04
this is just another reason why im voting for the Liberals again...

So annoying how s***** our choices for who runs our country are but Labour just arnt impressing atm.
neWordeR
Posted 05:59pm 16/8/04
Never voted for Labor.. never will.

tung
Posted 06:00pm 16/8/04
you have to realise that labour is trying to appeal to the masses, we are but a minority, and one that has very little say at that, considering most of this community i would dare say is under 18. in politics, appealing to the majority is generally the way to go, given that the case at hand isnt something that is going to f*** up in anyway.
tiwaz
Posted 06:05pm 16/8/04
actually the liberals were aiming to do the same thing a few years back so i guess u voted for it indirectly but enough of that business.
i agree with trog wen he says that domains should be black listed. but that seems to b as far as isps will be able to take it.
the biggest problem i see is that you block porn sites no worries but wot if the person is over 18, a person allowed to do such things so how will isps be able to determind wheter its a kid or not,
Sorry Parents i belive its to you
SO GET EDUCATED ABOUT THE NET
spidz
Posted 06:19pm 16/8/04
government should implement breeding licenses, and while they're at it voting licenses would be good too :P
nF
Posted 06:20pm 16/8/04
I thought the liberals conceded a few censorship things a while back to appease whatshisname the Tamsanian independant.
GumbyNoTalent
Posted 06:22pm 16/8/04
Considering the Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts spent over 4 million dollars on their website, I doubt they have the necesary know how to do anything remotely smart.
fpot
Posted 06:26pm 16/8/04
Censorship is wrong.
Deadly-Fly
Posted 06:29pm 16/8/04
government should implement breeding licenses, and while they're at it voting licenses would be good too :P
Yes, and we should shoot people with opinions that differ from our own.

Those opposed say die.


Edit: aye, I ment aye >:]

last edited by Deadly-Fly at 18:29:29 16/Aug/04
hast
Posted 06:40pm 16/8/04
I have no idea how they spend 4million on it, especially since they used a pre-packaged solution. That being said, the vignette CMS system looks pretty cool. Much nicer than any of the opensource CMSs.
nF
Posted 07:02pm 16/8/04
You give me $4 million and i'll make you the best CMS system system system ever.

(The whores and cocaine will come out of the $4 million.)
Smoke Jag
Posted 07:13pm 16/8/04
nothing pisses me off more than other people censoring what I can/can't see..

Seriously.. they should give you a warning (most sites already do) so you can choose to or not see something.. then the rest is up to the individual.
Young kids should be supervised on the net anyway.. and what kind of childhood would it be if you never got to discover new and strange things like porn..
Latho will probably lose my vote if he pulls anymore stupid idea's out of the air.
Carbito
Posted 08:16pm 16/8/04
I am sooo against censorship no matter what the reason. The internet should be a free place, thats why people use it. If we wanted stupid laws and lame rules then we would go into the real world!
Ada3K
Posted 08:18pm 16/8/04
lathom is just randomly pulling things out of his ass to see what people react to. Seriously he has no idea how to run a country. no way in hell is he getting my vote.
Hunter
Posted 08:19pm 16/8/04
Can we stop kids from playing online games too?
F***, yes please!
whoop
Posted 08:25pm 16/8/04
someone's mum run for parliament so I can vote for her because the current selection are all pretty much dongs
maxe
Posted 08:25pm 16/8/04
i dont care if they block porn, but every single experience ive had with domain blocking or whatever has lead to a million and one other non-porn sites being blocked too.
typo
Posted 08:32pm 16/8/04
The issue is, it shouldn't be up to the government to tell us what we can and can't have access to on the Internet, if only because they're woefully underqualified and not aware of the issues. What are they going try to filter next?


The point is that the government does tell us what we can and can not see, the state and federal laws very explicitly state that. What they have problems doing is policing the content that people actually do go and look at on the internet.

I say 'try to' because anyone that knows anything about the Internet knows immediately how useless such controls are. How do you 'automatically filter' certain types of pornography, anyway? There is, to the best of my knowledge, no intelligent, automated system capable of looking at an image and determining what sort of pornography it is. That leaves only one option - blacklisting certain domains.

It might stop kids randomly typing 'girlsandtheirdonkeys.com', but seriously, how can they hope to blacklist all 'inappropriate' sites on the web?


There are things that can do some things like what they want here, but they are all intensive software and not really suitable (at the moment) for mainstream usage by ISPs.

The internet wasn't made for children, I can see no reason to turn it over to them now.


The internet wasnt made for almost all of the every day usage it gets today.

I am sooo against censorship no matter what the reason. The internet should be a free place, thats why people use it. If we wanted stupid laws and lame rules then we would go into the real world!


You should be censored from life.

Can we stop kids from playing online games too?


F***, yes please!


I don't think you would have passed your "right to live" exam when you turned 18, so you should just f*** up.
Hunter
Posted 08:35pm 16/8/04
Nice work troll. Next time I won't agree with you. Way to alienate yourself clownman.
Rukh
Posted 09:18pm 16/8/04
Well unless Kate Lundy or anyone else in the Labor frontbench manages to talk some sense into the wowsers and idiots coming up with this policy idea, they've made up my mind for me on whom I'll be voting for in the next election.
I'll be voting Greens for my first preference.
I still have to decide how I'll allocate preferences.
(Sure our voting system sucks but I'm going to vote for my first preference based upon actual preference rather than the probability of a win).

The problem politicians have is that they're expected to create and pass laws on things they have no idea about.
I mean, I wouldn't go to a doctor for I.T. advice. I wouldn't go to a software engineer for advice on building a bridge (injoke ;) and I'm not going to trust a janitor to perform surgery on me.
And yet politicians have no problem drafting and passing laws on things they and their staff have no idea on.
Hell I imagine that a number of them know this and simply don't care. They just want to be seen to be passing something so they still have jobs come the next election.

Dumb Laws would be a much smaller site if politicians actually learnt before legislating.

p.s. Bring on proportional representation or failing that, using Condorcet Voting rather than Instant Run-Off Voting.
kussie
Posted 09:33pm 16/8/04
Well said Rukh this idea is just plain stupid imo. Censorship is a bad bad thing.

Did anyone else see the news report about Manhunt on the Channel 10 news? About parents wanting it banned we should just implement 18+ for games like we have for movies and other forms of media, i mean doesn't that make sense? Although we are talking about the government and people who really have no idea here. hhmm

last edited by kussie at 21:33:20 16/Aug/04
WetWired
Posted 09:38pm 16/8/04
I'm pretty sure they just recently announced plans to introduce R and X ratings to classifications
kussie
Posted 09:41pm 16/8/04
didn't mention it on the report, but that could just be Ch 10. So who knows?
WetWired
Posted 10:07pm 16/8/04
kussie
Posted 10:10pm 16/8/04
cool wonder when they will implement them
Deadly-Fly
Posted 10:19pm 16/8/04
cool wonder when they will implement them
They aren't, just because the EFA support an R rating does not mean the OFLC or the government will. That article is about game classifications coming into line with movie classifications in regards to G, PG, M, MA15+ and RC(Refused Classification). There is still no R or X rating for games, which is just another sign of how out of touch the government is in this area.
kussie
Posted 10:21pm 16/8/04
Aahh that would explain why i never heard about them hehe.
Superform
Posted 10:34pm 16/8/04
i just cant understand how they can stop the internet

its like stoping a dam with your fingers...
clipto
Posted 11:29pm 16/8/04
i just cant understand how they can stop the internet

its like stoping a dam with your fingers...


When you look at China, or Afghanistan under the Taliban, your analogy doesn't hold.
Haklin
Posted 12:28am 17/8/04
"f*** you i wont do what you tell me"...RAGE

oh..found this...

A little porn is 'good for you'
By Emma-Kate Symons and Kate Mackenzie
August 17


last edited by Haklin at 00:28:11 17/Aug/04
typo
Posted 07:37am 17/8/04
Nice work troll. Next time I won't agree with you. Way to alienate yourself clownman.


Cry more?
Spook
Posted 07:45am 17/8/04
Censorship is wrong.
natslovR
Posted 08:55am 17/8/04
One thing to remember is that while Latham may be targetting "... images of rape, torture, bestiality and coprophilia" now, what will get censored will be far less extreme. Over the last 10-20 years the range of material that is considered acceptable and legal in Australia has shrunk dramatically. The pornography legally available from our two great Territories via mail order or over the counter is becoming increasingly vanilla and boring as the government of the day legislates the kink out of the X category to satisfy special interest groups. We then end up with the downward spiral of the under-the-counter market expanding dramatically and these people being exposed to the stuff that should really be kept out of their hands.
Frag
Posted 09:24am 17/8/04
somehow i think labor just lost the election.

Sounds like something the Nazi's would have done if they had been in power during the "Internet age". Funny how Labor is a socialist party....
Frag
Posted 09:29am 17/8/04
We then end up with the downward spiral of the under-the-counter market expanding dramatically and these people being exposed to the stuff that should really be kept out of their hands.
Governments just don't seem to learn do they? Prohibition didn't work in the 20's and early 30's (giving rise to the Mob). If i didn't know better i'd say the Govt is ASKING for profiteers to put their hands up.
Deadly-Fly
Posted 10:53am 17/8/04
somehow i think labor just lost the election.
Somehow I doubt that.

The vast majority of Australians are going to think this is a good idea, in fact, I can gaurantee that Howard will not attack this policy at all. Why? Because if he does, he will be seen as advocating access to "... images of rape, torture, bestiality and coprophilia" by the voting public. I wouldn't even be surprised if he makes a similar policy. We might think it's idiotic because there is no real way of inforcing it and some people might be under the mistaken impression that they have some kind of right to see what they want (if this was true we wouldn't have an RC classification for films and games). But lets face it, the majority of Australians aren't computer geeks that know that any attempt at censorship of the internet will fail and the majority of Australians think that having access to that kind of material is wrong.

If anything this is a policy that will get labor more votes. If they lose a few votes to geeks but gain support from worried parents then I don't think they'll much care about the practicalities.
Frag
Posted 10:58am 17/8/04
^ i guess men aren't parents too..
Deadly-Fly
Posted 11:53am 17/8/04
At this stage I'm assuming you didn't even bother to read the article.
Mark Latham's office is understood to have shown "strong interests" in controls that would automatically filter out violent pornography such as images of rape, torture, bestiality and coprophilia.

A confidential paper from the left-wing think tank the Australia Institute, which is now being considered by the Opposition Leader's office, proposes that ISPs install compulsory filtering programs so only adults who can verify their age could view X-rated material.
Understand?
Rukh
Posted 12:55pm 17/8/04
Deadly-Fly: I read the article. I didn't understand what coprophilia meant so I looked it up. Doesn't seem to have anything to do with violence to me.

I also know that installing these magical filters that will automatically block these VIOLENT images (but not for those 18+!!!) requires either a Magician of the 9th Circle of Power(!!!) or a Bulls***-Consultant-of-Big-$$$ coupled with a Stupid-Politician-of-No-Brains
natslovR
Posted 01:28pm 17/8/04
Yes, add yourself to the list to view violent pornography, sounds like a grand idea.

And when you have to add yourself to a government list to view your friday spoot on QGL, will you?

I'm <30 years old and I can remember times when lists have been abused. From Telstra through to the Australian Adult Entertainment Industry. You won't catch me adding my name to the uncensored-net-access list not with the continued and harsh pro-censorship swing in the world today.

last edited by natslovR at 13:28:59 17/Aug/04
Deadly-Fly
Posted 02:15pm 17/8/04
Deadly-Fly: I read the article. I didn't understand what coprophilia meant so I looked it up. Doesn't seem to have anything to do with violence to me.
That's not exactly my point, all I'm saying is that the majority of the voting public are going to see this as an attempt by labor to protect children from pornography and stop sicko's from getting access to child porn or tub girl. They will support this, they won't understand that it won't be effective and they won't be paranoid about being on some list. The only way Howard is going to be able to explain that it won't be effective is by claiming that it might block all kinds of porn and not just the really bad stuff. This will clash strongly with his family values stance and labor will pwn him for it.

What Howard will do is come up with a slightly different policy and claim that it is completely different to labors and far superior, yet it will, in the end be just as ineffective.

I don't care either way if any sort of policy like this does get implemented but any placebo that shuts up all the whinging f*****g parents groups for atleast a little while is well worth whatever waste of money this will be.

Also, natslovR, most adult sites require a credit card if only for proof of age. If you visit these sites, chances are you're already on some sort of list. Do you think the banks or the porn sites you visit will be anymore responsible with your information than the government?

And Friday Spoot isn't pornography, it's art. ;)

last edited by Deadly-Fly at 14:15:38 17/Aug/04
Rukh
Posted 02:20pm 17/8/04
Friday Spoot isn't art and it's not porn. It's an Institution! :)
Kimbo
Posted 04:33pm 17/8/04
If they had a license for computers like they do for cars we wouldn't need politicians telling us what we can and can't do.

It would solve a s***load of problems.

So all the people that can't drive a computer could go away and read books :)

Thats what me and my friend can definately agree on. That we need to license people to drive computers.
Kimbo
Posted 04:35pm 17/8/04
Im also with the guy who said that we should stop kids from playing online games.

It might get the more mature people who don't use abbreviations and swear against other people online just because they lost the game and didn't get the highest frag count.

Hell it could even get rid of the people who think that their ego online will increase their e-penor size
GumbyNoTalent
Posted 04:38pm 17/8/04
increase their e-penor size
Oh my f***** gawd... you mean it dozzen't!
Kimbo
Posted 04:40pm 17/8/04
No sorry Gumby is doesn't :)
natslovR
Posted 05:22pm 17/8/04
Also, natslovR, most adult sites require a credit card if only for proof of age. If you visit these sites, chances are you're already on some sort of list. Do you think the banks or the porn sites you visit will be anymore responsible with your information than the government?
Nope, no different. But I don't pay for net porn. And that is what I meant about pretending the net is anonymous. I know that my isp knows what newsgroups i drain and which websites i visit, but that information isn't generally made available publicly. And with most adult website billing systems you are being billed by a large over-all porn retailer not directly by black-dwarf-nymphos-with-strappons.com so VISA/Mastercard/YourBank doesn't really know what your kink is.
Haklin
Posted 10:23pm 17/8/04
And with most adult website billing systems you are being billed by a large over-all porn retailer not directly by black-dwarf-nymphos-with-strappons.com
...man :( that site doesnt work nat...fix the link...:P
jellygoose
Posted 01:11am 18/8/04
just thought it was appropriate to mention that this thread had 69 comments.. till now :) will they also ban that goat.cx thing ?
spag
Posted 09:49am 18/8/04
the very fact that politicians think they can control porn on the internet when they cant even stop spam reaching their own internal email accounts just shows you how clueless our supposed "leading I.T minds" running this country are.
sprayNwipe
Posted 10:22am 18/8/04
I think the point here is that the ALP hasn't even talked about this, and even the article says that Kate Lundy would oppose it, and she's the shadow minister for IT.

Yay FUD!
trog
Posted 10:29am 18/8/04
What, so the opinion of " Labor's communications spokesman Lindsay Tanner, leading ALP women including Carmen Lawrence, and pro-family values backbench MPs" doesn't count compared to what the Shadow Minister wants?
trog
Posted 10:34am 18/8/04
I don't care either way if any sort of policy like this does get implemented but any placebo that shuts up all the whinging f*****g parents groups for atleast a little while is well worth whatever waste of money this will be.
I totally disagree - rather than shut them up by rushing through controls that restrict our freedom, they should be EDUCATED so they understand that the Internet is NOT a babysitter and NOT a toy. Just like any time when you let your kid go out and do ANYTHING by themselves, you need to be aware of the risks.

Trying to mitigate these risks by putting in stupid laws won't help. How much less spam are you getting now as a result of all the various spam laws that have been passed all over the world?
Frag
Posted 10:56am 18/8/04
Trog owns my english :/

thx :)
Deadly-Fly
Posted 11:17am 18/8/04
I totally disagree
That's ok, my comment wasn't entirely serious :P
rather than shut them up by rushing through controls that restrict our freedom, they should be EDUCATED so they understand that the Internet is NOT a babysitter and NOT a toy.
That's all well and good but telling people that they will have to take responsibilty for themselves won't win an election. It might be the best way to handel the situation but that's not what this is about. Like I said it's a placebo designed to make people feel like they are getting a real solution without all the harmful side effects of having to be educated. I'm not saying that I agree with it, just that I don't really expect any better.

My whole trail of posting has just been an atempt to show how politically, it would be a good policy for labor to adopt because to the average Australian it will sound good, not that it is the best option or that it will work on a practical level.

Also, I don't really get spam so I wouldn't no whether or not the spam laws do anything. I assume they don't.
GumbyNoTalent
Posted 12:20pm 18/8/04
Porn is good for you
PORNOGRAPHY is good for people, the academic leading a taxpayer-funded study of the subject said yesterday, as the Coalition and Labor traded jibes about an Opposition push to stop online porn reaching home computers.
DrFrag
Posted 01:44pm 18/8/04
coprophilia

What is that? Some kind of policeman sex?

If they find a technologically feasible way to pull this thing off, why not add peodophillia to the list?
DrFrag
Posted 01:47pm 18/8/04
coprophilia

What is that? Some kind of policeman sex?


Never mind. I just looked it up. Ewwwwwww.
Rukh
Posted 03:48pm 18/8/04
DrFrag: peodophillia isn't on the list because it is already illegal in its own right and possessing any pictures/videos etc. of such activities is also illegal (I believe an exception is made of course for the OFLC as part of their duties, and most likely the Police as part of their duties).

here comes the two to the three to the f
Posted 12:53am 19/8/04
arghh deadly fly stop using the word 'placebo' in the wrong context..! :)
DrFrag
Posted 12:40pm 21/8/04
DrFrag: peodophillia isn't on the list because it is already illegal in its own right and possessing any pictures/videos etc. of such activities is also illegal (I believe an exception is made of course for the OFLC as part of their duties, and most likely the Police as part of their duties).

Yeah I know it's illegal, but if they have a way of blocking the other stuff, surely they can put the technology to good use and block more peodophillia? And if they're already blocking peodophillia (from a technological viewpoint that is) then surely they can use the same technology to block these other things?

I think everyone here knows it's not particularly feasable. I mean, ISP blocklists aren't going to have much of an effect on P2P, IRC file downloads, e-mail attachment subscriptions, etc. Heck, you could get a satellite video phone and receive stuff.
The only benefit I can see is blocking the accidental access of this material, or stopping the computer illiterate. But really, how often do people accidentally run into this kind of thing? Pop-ups and deceptive links are the only real ways I can think of, and the solution to those are XP SR2 and don't use Slashdot. ;-)

Oh yeah, and spam. I recall my distraught grandmother talking to my sister about some unsavoury e-mails. o_O
SnotOne
Posted 01:08pm 24/8/04
Misleading journalism leads me to the Q. do you know that the internet is already censored. Q. Wnat affiliations does this right wing site have .....and who owns it ....... obvious questions after looking at your post natslovR..... on a game site !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Children need protection from people like you.
SnotOne
Posted 01:10pm 24/8/04
trog
Posted 03:11pm 24/8/04
Q. do you know that the internet is already censored
Yeh, in CHINA
hast
Posted 07:02pm 24/8/04
I wouldn't be surprised if there was software capable of recognising pornography. There is software that can recognise faces so it wouldn't be a giant leap to recognise boobies. Probably *very* computationally expensive and totally impractical on a large scale.
SnotOne
Posted 12:57pm 30/8/04
Yeah hast, the hardware and software can already already do this with great accuracy, like understanding series of words, images, etc, and now that its filtering down from the military, and faster now due to 9/11 we'll see it rapidly mature at a cheaper price.
Freedom democracy honesty, the filthy rich and powerful want this for you....lol
Commenting has been locked for this item.
87 Comments
Show