 
SilenceGold
Premium
join:2003-07-31
Benton, AR | Independence? Believer in Freedom. | |
|
B
Premium,MVM
join:2000-10-28
| Irrelevant
It's irrelevant. To just about everything.
Nothing of any significance will change due to this.
If the new Puritans in the US get control of the Internet, it will happen regardless of the availability of a particular TLD.
-- B
--
In a realm outside causality and function | |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | So? quote:
...and ushers in a new age where anything deemed unsightly is cordoned off and filtered by domain name (like controversial political speech).
They can say whatever they want, doesn't mean people have to be exposed to it. This is the same dumbass argument made by spammers and junkfaxers...free speech. Free speech is standing on a street corner spouting whatever stupid sh!t you want to spout, not hijacking my services that I pay for to advertise to me. I have just as much right to filter and cordon, or subscribing to a provider who filters and cordons as they do to say what they're saying.
No one is banning anything...just making it easier for people who don't want to see/hear/read to exercise their right not to see/hear/read it.
And it's not the ones looking to avoid it that are Ghettoitizing things...it's the smut peddlers who use every trick in the book from traps and domain hijacking to using misspellings of popular sites to get hits on their pages who are doing that quite well on their own.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI | |
|
 | 
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | Re: So? quote:
No one is banning anything...
YET | |
|
| |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: So? The world hasn't ended YET...either.
I think the world ending would be a YET or higher concern.
When there is talk of this YET becoming an IS...then it can be addressed. Until then it is simple paranoia.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI | |
|
| | |
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting
| Re: So? And words are but wind.
I'm very glad you're so optimistic. I wouldn't write it off as paranoia, though. Given the current cultural and political climate, it's something worth discussing, since it impacts the structure of the Internet for many years to come.... | |
|
| | | |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA | Re: So? That may be true for the domestic political climate, but not global political climate.
--
Life is good without the headache of Comcrap HSI | |
|
| | | | 
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Keep in mind this is just a url designation. It's not trampling on constitutional rights or restricting access to anything. It's an optional format adult sites can use. Conspiracy theories are all well and good, but this is hardly a reason to be worried. | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | Re: So? I am? All I said is it was worthy of discussion. Don't point that thing at me... | |
|
| |
jmuskratt
join:2000-11-21
New Orleans, LA | Blah blah... Commercial porn is far from being protected speech. | |
|
| 
Roundboy
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Drexel Hill, PA
| Re: Blah blah... said by jmuskratt  :Commercial porn is far from being protected speech. What? This is EXACTLY the type of thing free speech covers.
Just because a minority of people hate something, doesn't mean it needs to go away.
Yes.. minority. if the MAJORITY hated porn.. it wouldn't exist in the quanity it does now.
--
if($power)
{$corrupt;}
elseif( abs($power) )
{ abs($corrupt); } | |
|
| |
SRFireside
join:2001-01-19
Houston, TX
| Re: Blah blah... said by Roundboy :This is EXACTLY the type of thing free speech covers. How? How is having a .xxx designation trampling over free speech? Some adult sites would welcome the option. Oh yeah... you do know it's an option, right? Nobody is being forced into using it. | |
|
| | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| The freedom of speech granted to us was never intended to be a "say or show whatever you want, whenever you want to" right. Go review some history.
The only 2 things I don't agree with about the .XXX domain:
1.) I think it is discriminating to make them pay more and that should not be stood for by anyone. If it cost you $9 for a .NET name then it should cost you $9 for a .XXX domain.
2.) It should be REQUIRED for ALL porn sites, with the companies that currently have the domain getting first dibbs on the .XXX domain. As far as the .NET .COM and .whatever companies having the same name but different .names, give it to the first to register if there is proof or auction them off between those companies if there is a dispute.
Requiring and enforcing the .XXX domain can be easily done at the top level domains. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this. The material is still freely available to all that wants it and it is easily blocked by all that don't want it viewed, which is more important then anyone's right to view it.
And before we get the argument about the medical or artistic separation. As mature adults we all can EASILY see the difference. If you honestly can't tell the difference, then you probably shouldnt be looking at any of it any way.  | |
|
| | |
Roundboy
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Drexel Hill, PA
| Re: Blah blah... said by Skippy25 :The freedom of speech granted to us was never intended to be a "say or show whatever you want, whenever you want to" right. Go review some history. Literally.. no.. this does not meet the definition of free speech.
but...
taken in the context of the original poster i quoted.. it is. He seemed to take the stance against it, and would probably like to see it banned. This makes my post relevant... just because someone doesn't like it.. doesn't mean it can be censored.
THAT is the essence of free speech. Replace internet porn with 'political opinion'. Same stuff.
--
if($power)
{$corrupt;}
elseif( abs($power) )
{ abs($corrupt); } | |
|
| | | | jmuskratt
join:2000-11-21
New Orleans, LA
1 edit | Re: Blah blah... What I meant, specifically, is that commercial porn is *minimally* protected speech. It isn't a total ban, just a time, place, and manner restriction. If you can have laws outlawing strip clubs and adult bookstores within 1000 feet of a school, it stands to reason you can segregate commercial porn to the .xxx domain. The Supremes have agreed with most such restrictions in the past, and I doubt they'd change their stance here.
Charging more, while still constitutional, isn't that nice. It isn't content related discrimination because I could buy hotsex.xxx and put up a webpage devoted to women's history. In fact, I bet that's what happens to a few..reverse domainjacking. Fun to see.
Funny, I didn't see me advocating a ban on porn in my original post. I guess you know better... | |
|
| | KUppiano
Karl Uppiano
join:2003-02-02
Ferndale, WA
| said by Roundboy :said by jmuskratt :Commercial porn is far from being protected speech. What? This is EXACTLY the type of thing free speech covers. Just because a minority of people hate something, doesn't mean it needs to go away. Yes.. minority. if the MAJORITY hated porn.. it wouldn't exist in the quanity it does now. Free speech is only about being able to criticize your government without being thrown in jail. It doesn't protect you from having your keester handed to you in the public arena, or by private organizations (e.g., your workplace) when you cross cultural standards of decency or popular opinion... as the Dixie Chicks discovered the hard way. | |
|
| | |
Roundboy
Premium
join:2000-10-04
Drexel Hill, PA
1 edit | Re: Blah blah... said by KUppiano :Free speech is only about being able to criticize your government without being thrown in jail. It doesn't protect you from having your keester handed to you in the public arena, or by private organizations (e.g., your workplace) when you cross cultural standards of decency or popular opinion... as the Dixie Chicks discovered the hard way. your kidding.. right? Free speech is almost everything... exceptions being yelling 'FIRE' in a movie theater when there is no fire.
Free speech protects the Dixie Chicks from stating opinion.. and the opinions of those for or against them.
Thanks for playing..
(yes.. thats free speech too)
Another exception would be this website.. Since its privately run, the owner can remove postings as he sees fit.. nothing protects that post. But something that is LEGAL to do, but maybe not everyones choice of nudity, has EVERY RIGHT to be there.
--
if($power)
{$corrupt;}
elseif( abs($power) )
{ abs($corrupt); } | |
|
| | | | KUppiano
Karl Uppiano
join:2003-02-02
Ferndale, WA
| Re: Blah blah... said by Roundboy :said by KUppiano :Free speech is only about being able to criticize your government without being thrown in jail. It doesn't protect you from having your keester handed to you in the public arena, or by private organizations (e.g., your workplace) when you cross cultural standards of decency or popular opinion... as the Dixie Chicks discovered the hard way. your kidding.. right? Free speech is almost everything... exceptions being yelling 'FIRE' in a movie theater when there is no fire. Free speech protects the Dixie Chicks from stating opinion.. and the opinions of those for or against them. Thanks for playing.. (yes.. thats free speech too) Another exception would be this website.. Since its privately run, the owner can remove postings as he sees fit.. nothing protects that post. But something that is LEGAL to do, but maybe not everyones choice of nudity, has EVERY RIGHT to be there. Kidding? Absolutely not. You didn't read my post very carefully, did you? I said free speech means the govenment can't throw you in jail for stating your opinion, but it doesn't protect anyone from negative responses from the general public. You can't drop trou or scream obscenities in town square (yet) - local ordinances rightly set the standards for the community. And no one is protected from being kicked out of private groups or from being fired for stupidly shooting their mouth off (see also: hate speech). | |
|
slick2684
We Can't Stop Here. This Is Bat Country.
Premium
join:2003-11-15
Santa Barbara, CA
clubs:
| So? What, exactly, is this going to do for us? Nothing...do you think Hustler will give up www.hustler.com and move to www.hustler.xxx? Hell no, they'll add the domain. Its not a mandatory switch, its just opening a gateway for millions of new porn sites (and knockoff sites).
Useless.
--
1d17h : 2005-05-18 16:04:46 : From System: ... delete-this ... keep-thisFor post »Signing the USA himno you are warned by a moderator for '' .. Continued, repeated threadcrapping and flaming in »Signing the USA himno | |
|
| 
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| Re: So? Yup. It's a day late and a dollar short. If originally all porn sites were filed under the .xxx it might work, or if there was some type of a world-mandate (never gonna happen), but not any more. Companies will just register the .xxx. domain and redirect that site to their .com (or vice versa). Many have spent money to "brand" their .com site and aren't going to just give it up without a huge fight.
--
"What gives them the right to come in and do this?" she said. - Lady complaining that she was getting FIOS in her backyard. | |
|
| | 
TimSpencer
join:2001-05-18
Arvada, CO
 ·Comcast
| Re: So? If I'm blocking all .xxx domains, I don't care if there's a redirect from .com to .xxx. My kids won't be able to hit the .xxx because it's blocked at my gateway (in theory)...the redirect would fail.
I like the idea of .xxx, if for no other reason then the fact it could make content filtering that much easier. I'm all for free speech, and I don't think forcing .com porn sites to redirect their traffic to a .xxx address infringes upon their rights in any way. It just simplifies the filtering process for parents and network admins.
--
"Don't think Meat, it can only hurt the ballclub." - Crash Davis | |
|
|
cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
| If it was an actual redirect, then maybe. But if they just point the .com and the .xxx domains to the same address, which is actually what I meant origianlly, then your idea falls apart. You've just added another thing to check in the filtering game.
--
"What gives them the right to come in and do this?" she said. - Lady complaining that she was getting FIOS in her backyard. | |
|
anonpronman
@dsl.net | About time. Well it's about time that we get our own domain name.. Sex is the Oldest industry yet that last to get recognition that it deserves.. as for Ghettoization I'd say what is dot com.
--Who do you want to pay off today? | |
|
markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| $60 they complain? lol I doubt they won't complain about moving for a measly $60. Porn sights bring that in like water a hour.
The real hurdle is porn sites complaining about reserved names under .xxx. www.porn.xxx for example would be wanted by every porn site out there, even the small porn websites. | |
|
| 
inteller
Sociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | Re: $60 they complain? lol an hour? Try 5 minutes. | |
|
| | 
entropy1
Premium
join:2002-09-25 | Re: $60 they complain? lol You two obviously don't know what you're talking about. Read up on facts before you comment. | |
|
crippy
Premium
join:2005-05-17
some place | stupidity its stupid, why would a person waste $60 on a .xxx domain if they can get a .com or .net for just $6 or around that price.. | |
|
| markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| Re: stupidity said by crippy :its stupid, why would a person waste $60 on a .xxx domain if they can get a .com or .net for just $6 or around that price.. Because they know customers will start to associate .xxx with porn sites if mass movement of sites go there. Also, like i said above if that said porn site can get the name the originally wanted. www.porn.xxx for example, they would pay it gladly. | |
|
garagerock
Premium
join:2002-06-14
Louisville, KY | Confusing How are they going to force anyone to move their site to another domain name? If I own cheesekornkliff.com (for example), and it is deemed too "pornographic" by the morally upright, how are they going to force me to change to cheesekornkliff.xxx? | |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | Cool! Just makes it easier to find my main vice!  | |
|
dibbb
join:2003-09-19
 ·Time Warner VOIP
| better than forcing a TLD I think the .xxx TLD isn't a bad idea, but I think a better idea would be to somehow have a thing when you register your domain you have to pick (correctly) what "category" your domain is for.
i.e. If you personal site also had computer information, you could pick "personal" and "IT" or whatever.
Then, when you google or search, you could check off the categories you wanted to include.
Sure, this would mean someone, ICANN or whoever, may have their hands in the 'net a little more, but I think it would be better overall. | |
|
ross
join:2000-08-16 | Not just a free speech issue! Discriminatory pricing is a major concern as well as free speech. Some TLDs get charged peanuts, others get saddled with an outrageous fee by comparison. Who decides what's fair? Who decides on which categories get preferential pricing? | |
|
DrewCapu
Giant Diehard
join:2001-12-19
California
clubs: | xxx.xxx.xxx so if you had the domain xxx.xxx, could you just use xxx.xxx.xxx as your website instead of www.xxx.xxx? I don't see why not. That would be a pretty cool url to have. | |
|
|
slick2684
We Can't Stop Here. This Is Bat Country.
Premium
join:2003-11-15
Santa Barbara, CA
clubs: | Re: xxx.xxx.xxx that would be a subdomain, and yes you could have it assuming you owned www.xxx.xxx.... | |
|
transient_lucidity
@verizon.net
| Classification or Ghettoization? Is it really "ghettoization"?
If you were to register a domain in the UK, you would end up with www.sitename.co.uk If you were to register it in China, it would have .cn If it's a US government site, it would be .gov And if you wanted people to know that yours is a site regarding education, you would get .edu All of those are just classifications. So when does classification cross over to being ghettoization? | |
|
kpruett
join:2003-01-03
Dacula, GA | Already Covered Been there, done that:
»XXX Domains
Ken
--
----------Ken Pruett | |
|
|
entropy1
Premium
join:2002-09-25 | Re: Already Covered Ken thinks he's a porn expert. LoL! | |
|
| | kpruett
join:2003-01-03
Dacula, GA | Re: Already Covered Thanks for the complement.
I am an expert on keeping it out of my company.
.xxx will make my life easier.
Ken
--
----------Ken Pruett | |
|
| | | |
| | | | kpruett
join:2003-01-03
Dacula, GA
| Re: Already Covered As I said, already covered in the other thread.
The main argument is whether to make them use .xxx.
Either way, I said it would make it easier....I didn't say it would make it easy.
Some people never listen.
Keep telling me to educate myself by pointing me to sites I'm familar with.
If you think I'm the expert, then don't try to educate me...maybe listen to me.
Ken
--
----------Ken Pruett | |
|
nowise7
join:2005-01-15 | I would like it I for one would like it if all the porno sites had to be a .xxx site. I'm all for free speech but I'm also for easier content filtering like the other guy said. | |
|
|
qwertypoiu
@verizon.net | Re: I would like it Then you really aren't for free anything. You are for "only when it suits me". Why not just say it? | |
|
|
| 
RMAntala01
join:2002-02-14
Merrillville, IN
clubs:
| Re: Organized said by ctceo :...specifically for lets say teledildonics workbooks. :) WooHoo!...
Time to go register TELEDILDONICS.XXX and TELEDILDONICS-WORKBOOKS.XXX.
j/k... couldn't resist. 
--
Zen Buddhism for techies: "Jesus saves, but only Buddah makes incremental backups". | |
|
| | |
|
|
|
·
·
·
·