Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

[ Create a new account ]

bart (450)

bart
bart.lateur@pandora.be

Journal of bart (450)

Monday July 31, 2006

12:22 PM

The present is bleak.

[ #30490 ]

When I was a kid, we all thought that in 2000, people would be living on the moon. Instead, we are living in an era where conservatives with their pants in a knot pretend that porn doesn't exist.

List all Journal entries

The present is bleak. More | Login | Reply

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

Again with .xxx domain? (Score:1)

by sigzero (5768)

That is NOT going to work for 2 reasons mainly. #1 Who gets to decide what "porn" is? and #2 Can they "mandate" them moving those sites to the .xxx domain? The answer to #1 is "nobody" because "everybody" has their own idea what it is and #2 is no.

Of course, if I mis-read the point I saw in that article, feel free to ignore this post. : )
- Re:Again with .xxx domain? (Score:2)
  
  by nicholas (3034)
  
  #1 Who gets to decide what "porn" is?
  
  Mmm, porn :-) [craneporn.org]
Well duh! (Score:1)

by jjore (6662)

It's not porn, it's art! C'mon! Update your disreputable word skirting lingo once every few decades!
Huh (Score:2)

by pudge (1)

I went to your link expecting to find an example of people pretending that porn doesn't exist, and didn't find one.

I did find an interesting discussion about the ICANN, but it offered no solution: if the U.S. does not control it, who does? The UN? Oh yeah, that'd be great: they would probably revoke Israel's TLD. And if it is private, will that make it immune from influences -- mostly governmental and corporate -- or even more susceptible, in ways less obvious or detectable? I'd bet on the latter.

Also,
- Re:Huh (Score:2)
  
  by bart (450)
  
  I find it very alarming that the US abused its authority to force the ICANN to abide to its political agenda. And for what reason? Well, a very silly one: if there is no TLD for porn, then porn on the internet doesn't exist.
  
  That's a huge waste of effort, if you ask me. They should rather try do something worthwhile.
  
  Also, you assertion that the USA is the best one to control what happens to the internet, is very biased and unjustified [citypages.com]. I think the chance of the USA revoking top level domains for Iraq, Iran,
  - Re:Huh (Score:2)
    
    by pudge (1)
    
    Well, a very silly one: if there is no TLD for porn, then porn on the internet doesn't exist.
    
    That's a straw man. No one is actually saying that.
    
    Also, you assertion that the USA is the best one to control what happens to the internet
    
    I made no such assertion. Read again.
    
    is very biased and unjustified
    
    Wow. Even if I DID make such an assertion -- which, again, I did not -- how could you possibly know that it is biased or unjustified, when I didn't explain my reasons (for a position, again, that I do not have)