General Question

elbanditoroso's avatar

South Carolina may require porn filters on all new computers sold there. Is this the nuttiest idea ever?

Asked by elbanditoroso (20844points) 4 weeks ago

This proposed law here is stunningly stupid and inconsistent. Why would anyone think, for a moment, it made sense?

First, suppose a porn filter is required on a new computer. What’s to stop the owner from clicking “uninstall”? Or reloading Windows or Linux? Or doing any of a hundred other things to defeat the silly filter?

Second, if the goal is to reduce people viewing porn, then why is there a $20 fee to get rid of the filter? If it’s bad, it’s bad. Hypocrisy right there.

Third, does the First Amendment play a role here? “Government shall make no law…..”?

Is South Carolina serious about this? Or just incredibly naive?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

33 Answers

janbb's avatar

We’re going to see infringements on personal freedom run rampant for several years. Strap on your seat belt; it’s gonna be a bumpy ride.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

I don’t think the lawmaker understands how computers work, probably still has a dial phone at home or hand crank.

OH wait he wants to collect $20 to remove it, maybe have that deposited into his off-shore bank account.

josie's avatar

Government uses all sorts of little tricks to get revenue without calling it a tax.
This is another one. It has nothing to do whatsoever with the issue of pornography or naivete. It’s just another attempt to get your money.

BellaB's avatar

Sounds pretty standard for how government is getting into everyone’s business in the US. Get used to it.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

It’s a nutty idea. WTF S.C.?

ragingloli's avatar

That has to be a lie. After all, SC is ruled by the Party of Limited Government™!

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

@loli never underestimate the religious right. Really most of the nutty right wing stuff comes from the hard line bible thumpers.

Strauss's avatar

It’s gonna drive a lot of new computer sales out of state.

LostInParadise's avatar

I have a perfect test case. Have a site that just displays pictures of nude paintings and statues by famous artists. Do you think the site would be filtered. It would make a great headline. South Carolina blocks Renoir paintings.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

The tech does not effectively exist. It’s like when California wanted ammunition ID stamped as it was fired. This is what happens when our “leaders” are not very well educated about things they are proposing laws for.

Zaku's avatar

@LostInParadise Though the people who want to ban pornography seem to overlap a bit with people who don’t value art.

stanleybmanly's avatar

How would the state propose enforcement of such an ordinance. If half of the nation’s retail consumer sales are already through Amazon, what idiot is going to buy a compromised jerry-rigged gadget off the local shelves?

MrGrimm888's avatar

It’s sadly not a surprise to me.

There are lots of cool people here in Charleston, but the state as a whole, leans heavily to the right, and there are lots of conservatives and backward thinking morons….

I’m embarrassed…. Thanks SC…

Dante_Lincoln's avatar

That is quite interesting. it’s a good idea that they are filtering these things. As there are children who use computers and may find these things accidentally.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

^^ This is the job of the parents not the state.

Seek's avatar

My kid found porn on Youtube when he was, like, five.

It didn’t kill him, I simply had to talk for him for a couple of minutes about how some things are grownup stuff, and he shouldn’t worry about it, but focus on being a kid because there’s enough time for being a grownup later. Then he went back to finding Pokemon episodes.

So far he’s remained unscarred.

ARE_you_kidding_me's avatar

^^Good mom right there

MrGrimm888's avatar

Being a good Mom is SO important… I have so much respect for good Moms…

And yes. It’s up to a parent to know what their child has access to….

rojo's avatar

No. Putting Trump in charge of the country is the nuttiest idea yet.

MollyMcGuire's avatar

Why not have them for all computers? Actually I think the Windows security settings address this. South Carolina’s effort is for the protection of kids. I’m glad there are places that get it.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@MollyMcGuire Big brother knows what websites you frequent.

The state has no right to take over the function of parenting and first amendment rights for adults in one sweeping law.

janbb's avatar

yeah – we live(d) in a free country.

ragingloli's avatar

This is why every time a conservative talks about how he “loves freedom”, you know he is lying.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Well. It is illegal for minors to view adult content. It’s not a parent’s right to expose their child to pornography.

The more I think about it. I would like this filter for my children (if I have children. )

A parent can’t be everywhere at once. A “naked girl” Google search gives photos quick.

Kids these days have it too easy. I had to steal porn. Or watch scrambled Playboy, or hairy European Cinemax soft core…

ragingloli's avatar

My parents actually bought a Hentai DVD for my sister.
Unfortunately, they have no eye for quality in that genre.

janbb's avatar

@ragingloli has a sister? That’s the first personal news I’ve read about you in 20 years.

elbanditoroso's avatar

The problem with filters is that they are so blunt.

There are at least two problems with filters.

1) They are inaccurate more than they are accurate. If I type in ‘boobies’ does the filter know if I am talking about breasts or birds? If I search for the word ‘dick’ does the filter know that I want to look up things about President Nixon (Tricky Dick) or a male appendage? If I type in the word ‘porn’ how does the filter know that I am not writing a term paper of the evils of porn? Short answer, the filters don’t know so they err on the censorship side.

2) Who manages the filters? Supposed that the filter manager decides that you can’t search for ‘abortion’? Or maybe ‘dissent’? Or perhaps “climate change”. the problem with any filter is that it can be changed at the whim of its manager. Talk about thought-control!!!

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Excellent points. All censorship is a slippery slope though.

Zaku's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Isn’t it just illegal for a business or someone other than parents to knowingly provide adult content to minors?

Strauss's avatar

@Zaku ^^ In some places it’s even illegal for the parent(s) to provide pornography to minors.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Correct.

It’s kind of weird though. A parent can take a child to an R rated movie that may have strong sexual content…

Zaku's avatar

Wow I had no idea. Does that include their own children?

BellaB's avatar

Better r-rated than full of violence.

If they’re going to put a filter on, make it a violence filter.

Not that I want either, but if there is to be one – violence is the thing to filter, not sex.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther