High Court Weighs Library Internet Porn Filters

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,80305,00.html ^

[forktail]

WASHINGTON

[MarkL]

The problem is the legal liability this opens the libraries to. I have no doubt that employees who find this sort of thing offensive would sue, based on a "hostile work environment." Secondly, public displays of porn could be prosecuted as indecent behavior.

It's been my experience that you're right, most filtering software has problems, but some of the new software, like the new surf control, running on a seperate firewall, like Bordermanager, works quite well, even disallowing the use of remote proxy or redirection pages.

Mark

[Redcloak]

I wonder how many stories about the capture of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would have been nixed by the filters because they contained jokes about his resemblance to Ron Jeremy.

But I digress...

So what's the solution? Close the government-funded libraries. If one is particularly upset about such a move, they can open their own private library and charge a membership fee to users. They can even allow porn, or refuse it, as they see fit. We wouldn't even be having this discussion had we kept government in a sufficiently small box. But, we let it get loose and now we're having the Supreme Court consider whether or not we want guys in raincoats using publicly funded facilities to download pictures of 40 year old women pretending to be lesbian schoolgirls.

[forktail]

So what's the solution? Close the government-funded libraries

No the solution is NOT to close the publicly funded libraries. The solution is simply NOT technilogocal. Have humans montior the machines and let there be reprecussions for any offense of the posted rules.

The problem here is AS USUAL people are shirking their responsibilty and hoping that some "magic box" is going to save them. Kinda like the parents who think the TV is good place to park their kids for 12 hours a day.

However I find your comments on the gov't in line wth my own thoughts on the topic. (I'm sorry if that fightens/offends you) ;)

[Question_Assumptions]

Porn is the biggest profit making business on the internet, bar none.

Note the qualifier "that sort". I wasn't talking about pornography, in general, but the very extreme sort. I think that people who like seeing other people get deficated on, beaten to a pulp, or having sex with animals is a small minority. Do you disagree?

[jimt]

I think that people who like seeing other people get deficated on, beaten to a pulp, or having sex with animals is a small minority. Do you disagree?

I'd agree with the first two, but judging by the porn spam I've received since being foolish enough to buy a book from Amazon, the latter is either pretty popular or it's advertisers are pushing real hard. This week out of 68 spams, 3 were general porn, 1 incest, 1 rape. Not counting numerous penis enlargers, business opportunities, software deals, etc. But last week there were at least two animal offers. I permanently delete the junk mail after each week, so I can't be sure, but in order of ad frequency I'd say in the categories you cite it's animal, rape, then scatological, with animal averaging at least once a week.

Where they get the idea that spam mail (of any kind, let alone porn) is welcome is beyond my imagination. Every spam sender goes on my "delete immediately" list.

How about my idea of having librarians have sight of the computers children are allowed to access?

[Question_Assumptions]

Just because people are pushing it doesn't mean that most people want it. Judging by the movies now appearing on cable, most of America must be gay or intensely fascinated by homosexuality. I doubt it.

How about my idea of having librarians have sight of the computers children are allowed to access? It could be part of the solution. Having the librarian complain after the porn is accessed is a little like calling the police after you've been robbed, though. And the bigger problem isn't children accessing porn but adults accessing porn where children can see it, either on purpose or because they don't care.

[FreePaul]

You have to refrain from searching for "hot naked teens"

You're really making it tough. You also don't want me to view porn at the local library. If I can't do these how am I going to find anything to complain about? If you had your way the major internet industry would be killed, thousands of spammers would be put out of business and threads like this would die. Maybe two out of three would be worth the effort.

[FreePaul]

How about my idea of having librarians have sight of the computers children are allowed to access?

I visit libraries pretty often looking (mostly unsuccessfully) for something to read. Most people I see working there have enough trouble checking books in and out even with the automated equipment. I don't think that they could be trusted to keep the children's viewing under control. There would also be the ususal complaint by some parents that no one should tell their children what they can do (sometimes includes the parents).

[Quick1]

You missed the point completely.

This isn't about letting people go into libraries to watch porn, this is about whether or not they should install filters that may filter out sites about breast feeding, as an example. Filters should not be needed, IMHO, because a librarian monitor is going to be a much better judge about what is porn and what is not. Stick the computers in an area near the librarian, and there is no problem.