Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

In that case it should've been an opt-in filter with possibility of white-listing any blacklisted host (using a password assigned to contract's owner).


This cilter is aimed at people who are so bad at Internet that they cannot search for, buy, and install any of the existing parental filter software.

They don't know what a website is. While you answer is sensible (not sure who downvoted you) it's no good for the people asking for these filters.

Obviously, what has been provided is also hopeless so there os that.


> it's no good for the people asking for these filters.

Are anyone asking for these filters? If there was a lot of demand for them, you'd think the ISPs would have long ago offered equivalent filters as a service.


A lot of ISPs were offering similar filters as a service.

Many people are stupid. Look how many people buy the Daily Mail.


Exactly. ISPs can already offer this with a simple question/checkbox on the act of signing up for service, no technical knowledge needed.

If you're going to legislate for the stupid, you better completely forbid driving, drinking, nightclubs, free marriage, having children, knifes and gas sales etc etc. You see where that leads.


They haven't introduced any legislation.

> Exactly. ISPs can already offer this with a simple question/checkbox on the act of signing up for service, no technical knowledge needed.

... that's what they're doing. There's a screenshot of BTs here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25400009


> This filter is aimed at people who are so bad at Internet that they cannot search for, buy, and install any of the existing parental filter software.

If they are so bad at using the Internet, his lack of knowledge and skill poses way more (severe) problems to the upbringing and education of their children than not being able to filter Internet porn. The latter is just a tiny aspect of the multitude of problems a child faces when their parents don't know how to use the Internet or a computer (finding a job, looking up a common medical problem, etc).

Spend the money for this filtering on providing (or improving) education and computer usage courses for these parents, and you'll solve this problem, as well as a myriad of other problems. Much bigger, and more pressing problems.

This is actually empowering people, in a dignified manner, that is appropriate for a free society.

It also has long-term benefits, instead of detriments. Crippling of the Internet and blocking the public's free access to knowledge is detrimental to prospering of society on all levels. Giving people the knowledge and the means to learn and educate themselves is extremely beneficial to the well-being of everyone.

If you'd really care about the children and their future, you'd approach the situation this way. The other way is just an inefficient band-aid to force a short-sighted morality on people, that will only lead to problems in the end.


If that is the case, then many people are now having their rights violated because they aren't able to figure out how to turn off the filter.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: