v-chip - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Monitors, Printers and Peripherals
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 10-06-2004, 04:07 PM   #21 (permalink)
ID.10T
 
ohGrFreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Midwest in tha houzze
Posts: 1,657
Send a message via AIM to ohGrFreak Send a message via Yahoo to ohGrFreak
Default

I thought it was against forum rules to hold a person to person conversation in the forum. It's a waste of server space I believe. Of course, I belong to many forums and the rules vary between all of them slightly and I may be thinking of another forum. Just don't get into a heated argument where the thread ends up locked.

Peace
__________________

__________________
ohGrFreak is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 04:12 PM   #22 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,932
Default

I don't want to have a person-to-person chat. Anyone is welcome to jump in on this (many have).

I do agree that this should be moved to the general-chat section, but that's at the moderator's whim, and I would prefer it was moved rather than starting a new thread, because all this stuff needs to be kept to keep the integrity of the argument.

Anyway, the post is moot because we've answered the question.
__________________

__________________

-----------------------------------------------
Don\'t hate the player...Hate the game...
ShoobieRat is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 10:26 PM   #23 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 124
Default

OhGrFreak I dint know about those rules sorry about that.
I agree with Shoobie that this should be moved.

Shoobie do you belive that the FCC should make laws that force manufactures to put v-chips in their TV's. If so why and look at the ACLU quote above first.
antirem is offline  
Old 10-06-2004, 10:50 PM   #24 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,446
Send a message via AIM to Alex81388
Default

Yeah uhhhhhh

Does anyone else think this is completely uneeded? Why is it that important to remove your vchip? If you're so againt the organization that you should show it by ways of affected others thoughts and showing them.

And if your so intent on being able to watch whatever you want. You need to get better cable anyway, and that isn't censored, so go to it!
__________________
Sig removed due to foul language. Please read the rules regarding the allowable content of sigs before reposting your COMPLIANT sig.
~Trotter
4/21/06
Alex81388 is offline  
Old 10-07-2004, 11:33 AM   #25 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 124
Default

Alex it is censorship
"A media ratings system mandated by the government under threat of the formation of a federal rating agency should private industry fail is not a "voluntary" system. It is a form of censorship clearly forbidden by the First Amendment. " - http://archive.aclu.org/library/aavchip.html
if thats not censorship what is
antirem is offline  
Old 10-07-2004, 12:37 PM   #26 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,932
Default

Quote:
antirem - Shoobie do you belive that the FCC should make laws that force manufactures to put v-chips in their TV's.
In a word, yes. These laws are created not by a private organization with no contact to the general population. Demand has called for them. Second, the FCC is protecting both the Nation's interests, and the public interests, by performing these necessary rules. What keeps this from violating the Freedom-of-Speech, is that one: it was enforced by popular vote, and two: manufacturers provide a way to turn the chips off at end-user discretion.
Quote:
antirem - ACLU quote above...
I've read it several times before. The article, and the question, are not new.
In regards to TV censorship: If you find a public-access channel that you are not getting, there are two things to look at. One, are you supposed to be getting the channel on your providor plan? Two, why would such a channel be blocked from your viewing? If your plan doesn't provide that channel to you, you're not going to get it and it's not the FCC/Government's fault. If you find the channel is blocked by the government, you should find out why. No one simply walks into the FCC Source Analysis HQ in Centrevill Virginia and says "Block Channel 4" and it's blocked. The Bill-of-Rights prevents them from doing that. You have to have a legal reason, on archive, passed by the democratic system, to allow the FCC to put that kind of restriction on an end-user.
The politics gets huge, but if you spend time, you will find out what is what. You will likely find one of two outcomes. Either A, you find that the channel of communication has been "Restricted" which is a short way of saying the FBI/CIA/NRO/WH/etc has blocked the channel, and there's nothing you can really do about it. You cannot receive secret communications between SkunkWorks and the NRO. You can't do it. It's a matter of national security. If they find you trying, you'll be in a decent amount of trouble. End of story.
The other outcome leads you to a legal statement, where you will find the law (or laws) governing the restriction of the channel of communication. From there, you have hope, because you can go back and see who signed, what happened, what articles and legistlature there was, etc, etc, etc. If the reasons don't suit your tastes, THEN you get to join the lovely democractic society and conduct your protest (civily) by the freedom that democracy gives you!
Quote:
Alex81388 - Does anyone else think this is completely uneeded?
Yeah, me. One, I'm thinking he's a bit too paranoid (he ain't the only person who watches the government). Two, he can rip out his chip to his heart's content...no one will EVER know he did, so his cries fall on no ears. By just ripping out his chip, he's basically protesting in the dark.
Quote:
Alex81388 - You need to get better cable anyway, and that isn't censored,
He has a point about being "unknowingly censored" but his argument is really half-cocked and paranoid. He needs to do some researching on the true workings of the political system and be careful about buying in on the "government evil" bandwagon. I'm not saying the US-government is golden. Far from! But it's not evil or outright oppressive.
Oh, and Alex...ALL cable is regulated. ALL US cable companies are regulated by the FCC, NRO, FBI, and various other governmental organizations. All foreign signals, transmitted legally to the US, are also governed by regulations.
Quote:
antirem - if thats not censorship what is
Antirem, before you start reading from the ACLU and going straight to belief, you should spend time reading out laws first. There's a HUGE amount to consider before reading that statement you quote, and you should never take a quote from any organization at face-value.
ShoobieRat is offline  
Old 10-07-2004, 07:36 PM   #27 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 124
Default

I dont think of myself as a paronoid person Shoobie (likely story huh... lol) I've gotten letters from my ISP that i have copywrite infrigment but i dont think there watchin me, I dont buy into almost every conspiracy issue, did we land on the moon or not?... who cares, it dosnt matter. Gov't spokes i dont belive in there wouldnt be enough manpower to pull it through.
I dont want the v-chip because it is censorship and im against all forms of censorship.
You said:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do I really belive that we are being blocked from channels that will harm the goverment. Of course not
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trust me, pal, you are. And if you don't think you're being blocked from secure channels without your knowing, you're pretty niave. You can go to ANY country on this rock, and you will be safe to assume you are being censored from at least some communications band.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
and you called me paronoid?!? that sounds like you are paronoid...

Why do you belive that we should be censored? Is it to protect ourselves? I think people should have the moral integraty to make these decisions on their own. Yes America is not moral, but that is because it was taught not to be. If people could teach morals instead of banning or cesoring stuff it would be much easier and better for all. (example: In Britan and most of Europe you cn buy an alcholic drink at whatever age, in america many teenagers have alchol and they drink not for the taste, but to get wasted, of course thats not ALL cases, In Europe you drink because of the taste, again in most cases. We in america are taught that it is illegal because you can get drunk... so being teenagers they must have it not to drink but to do the very oposite.) all you need to do is teach people a better way of living instead of tempting them.

Alex im not a pervert who wants gore and sex im just against censorship besides if i really wanted those things id use the computer.
antirem is offline  
Old 10-07-2004, 09:25 PM   #28 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

wow shoobie...and people said I typed out entire books when responding to threads
Nubius is offline  
Old 10-07-2004, 11:47 PM   #29 (permalink)
Master Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,932
Default

Nubius - LOL...

Anyway...back to the hammering...

---------------------------------------------

Quote:
dont want the v-chip because it is censorship
Rewind...Take a second step back.
The v-chip is not censorship. The v-chip provides a way for applying a censorship, as a service to the public. You aren't forced to have the v-chip blocking porn channels (especially since you can turn it off).
The v-chip isn't this block of sin that you need to chastize as if it came from nowhere.
Quote:
and you called me paronoid?!? that sounds like you are paronoid...
I never liked posturing my resume, so I won't.
Let me ask you this, though: How much time do you think the government spends blocking you from the ability to recieve porn channels? How much time do you think they spend blocking you from recieving classified channels?
Who do you think is concerned with which?
Now if you're an intelligent, level-headed person, you'll know that the NRO is less-likely to be wasting their time keeping you from seeing the parties at the Playboy mansion, than they are keeping you from tunning-in on the North-Carolina "Antenna Farm."
You should also realize, that for the security of the Nation, you are not allowed to know (listen to, see, visit) certain things. This is censorship, yes, but it is censorship with a reason.
(Oh, and just for the record...my little insinuation about the magicians and "making you disappear" for getting caught trying to access secured government communications? That's not paranoia. It's law. In fact, the FBI, CIA, and NRO, all have their own legally-sanctioned sets of laws covering this, all have their own sets of protocols for this, and all have their own abilities (or access to abilities) for carrying this out.
Read your laws. That's what the National Archives is for.

Moving on...

Why do you belive that we should be censored?
Censorship is not this glob of pure evil you seem to be making it out to be.
Let me put it in another perspective: This forum.
When I come to this forum, I am under a censorship. So are you, and everyone else, right now. (Actually, you're under about a dozen, but let's not get complicated...)
Personally, I don't like listening to people cursing all the time. Cursing has its purposes, I won't deny that. You have the right to be angry (even Mr. Rogers said you should be angry once in a while). But anyway, when I come to read these pages, I don't want to read it. A lot of other people feel the same way. So, this forum was created with language filters (a kind of censorship) which keeps me from telling you what a f**king d**ba*s you are.

Moving on...

Is it to protect ourselves?
In many cases, yes. Directly, or indirectly, yes. Not in all cases. You can still be applied to a censorship that protects someone else. For example, your personal nemesis, the v-chip. Companies like to offer TV's with the ability to censor incoming channels, because it not only appeals to a popular desire, but it protects them from the liability that may fall upon them should they not.

Moving on...

I think people should have the moral integraty to make these decisions on their own.
That's a very noble thought, and in a WallGreens world, it might possibly work the way you'd think it would. You run up against a few problems, though.
1. Your mentality is not identical to your neighbor's.
2. That whole "human nature" thing...
3. People should have the "moral integrity" to not curse on these forums...but they do...
4. What people don't know, can hurt them.
5. What people do know, can do the same.

Moving on...

Yes America is not moral, but that is because it was taught not to be. If people could teach morals instead of banning or cesoring stuff it would be much easier and better for all.
Tell you what. We'll turn off all the language filters, movie ratings, nation-security protections, public-address censorships, advertising/TV/radio censorships, etc, etc,...and we'll see what happens.

Just don't come calling when you go to town and someone's plastered up posters of someone fking a horse...And don't come complaining when you see Rob-Zombie's wh0re-house stuffed in on the same channel your kids are watching Mr. Rogers and Seasame Street, right inbetween episodes...And don't get upitty when you visit this forum and it's full of posts that read more like the lyrics to rap songs than technical questions...And--

Moving on...

example: In Britan and most of Europe...
I'm not going to quote that all, but a couple things pop to mind:
1. Since when was the American mentality equal to that of the British mentality? Or the other way around? Let me tell ya, as someone who has traveled quite a bit, we ain't all the same. Thank God!
2. Actually, in most (if not all) European countries, you cannot get a drink at any age. A twelve-year-old boy cannot walk into a pub in London and get served. The difference between the US and the UK is that the twelve-year-old could get served in London if his father was with him.
3. True, the Americans have this crazy thing about drinking just to get drunk. It's very embarrassing when you go to other countries (especially Germany). You can pick out the Americans anywhere. Still, if you think Europeans drink soley for the taste, you're off your nut! The Germans, Scotts, Irish, English, French, etc, get drunk, they won't tell you it's because they like the taste, or because they wanted to get drunk!
4. If I was twelve and out in public, there'd be no way I could get a beer. However, if I was in my own home, my father could have given me a beer at any time.
5. A twelve-year-old does not have the same understanding of morality and responsibility as an 18-year-old.

If you removed all censorships, how would you "teach people a better way of living"? If you leave people to their own morals and mentalities, alone, guess what? My neighbor thinks it's okay to blast his stereo all the time and throw his trash in the yard. I think we have a problem. According to him, that's all okay! (...as he hands the keys to the car to his eight-year-old to go fetch some milk. He is eight, after-all, and knows that running people over is bad and red mean stop.)

Moving on...

Not all censorships are bad. I want there to be censorships. Censorships protect me, and others. Censorships provide one of the few ways the government has of "teaching people a better way of living." If Congress and the Senate only passed "we suggest you do this" bills, how much do you think people would follow?

Now if you'll excuse me...I'm gonna go f**k my girlfriend and then go to bed, where I will dream about our walk tomorrow at the Capital where we won't have to see anything disgusting...
ShoobieRat is offline  
Old 10-08-2004, 05:53 PM   #30 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 124
Default

Ok. I made a mistake in the last post... I said I was against censorship... I meant censorship enforced by the goverment... not censorship created by a personal organization, Im against the goverment censorizing things.

Id also like to ask wtf was that.?.
Now if you'll excuse me...I'm gonna go f**k my girlfriend and then go to bed, where I will dream about our walk tomorrow at the Capital where we won't have to see anything disgusting..." That was a little spazzed... but i meant that as a quesstion wtf was that?

"If you leave people to their own morals and mentalities, alone, guess what?" you went on from there but didnt want to throw it in the quotes. Go back to pilgrams and amish days... do you think people were moral then? I think they were... not because of rules but because they, there neighbors, and religion kept them in check.
sry about the euro thing i studied alot about spain and thats what they can do.
__________________

antirem is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.