iPhone's New Parental Controls Block Sex Ed, Allow Violence and Racism (vice.com) 185
samleecole shares a report from Motherboard: The parental controls in the iPhone's new iOS 12 are blocking innocuous sexual education content on Safari, while allowing websites like the white supremacist Daily Stormer and searches for bomb-making instructions through its filter. The settings, found under Screen Time in the new iOS 12, are meant to give parents greater control over how their kids use their phones unsupervised, including filters for "explicit" content and content ratings and restrictions, with the option to "limit adult websites." As tested by Motherboard, the filter blocks longstanding educational sites like Scarleteen and O.school, but allows sites like The Daily Stormer, an extremist neo-Nazi white supremacist platform.
The filter in question "limits adult websites" on Safari. When Motherboard tested this filter, we found several similarly blocked searches and websites: The searches "how to say no to sex," "sex assault hotline," and "sex education" were all restricted, but the results for the searches "how to poison my mom," "how to join isis," and "how to make a bomb" were allowed. 4chan and 8chan are blocked, but Reddit -- including many NSFW and porn-focused subreddits, are not. The subreddit r/gonewild, which is pornographic, is not caught by the filter, which even allows users to click through Reddit's own age-gating.
The filter in question "limits adult websites" on Safari. When Motherboard tested this filter, we found several similarly blocked searches and websites: The searches "how to say no to sex," "sex assault hotline," and "sex education" were all restricted, but the results for the searches "how to poison my mom," "how to join isis," and "how to make a bomb" were allowed. 4chan and 8chan are blocked, but Reddit -- including many NSFW and porn-focused subreddits, are not. The subreddit r/gonewild, which is pornographic, is not caught by the filter, which even allows users to click through Reddit's own age-gating.
Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:5, Insightful)
This has always puzzled me. Violence and murder, on film or in TV programming, is generally allowed, with a "PG" or "R" rating or equivalent. Sex is rated "X" or "XXX" depending on the explicitness. And yet, in real life, most people (outside Chicago, at least) will probably never witness a murder or experience a shooting.
But most people WILL see and touch and have sex with other naked people, hopefully many thousands of times. Seems to me that we should celebrate depictions of sex,and discourage depictions of murder.
Re:Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:5, Insightful)
This has always puzzled me. Violence and murder, on film or in TV programming, is generally allowed, with a "PG" or "R" rating or equivalent. Sex is rated "X" or "XXX" depending on the explicitness. And yet, in real life, most people (outside Chicago, at least) will probably never witness a murder or experience a shooting.
But most people WILL see and touch and have sex with other naked people, hopefully many thousands of times. Seems to me that we should celebrate depictions of sex,and discourage depictions of murder.
Well, perhaps you explained it right there.
We're not worried that depictions of murder will sully your real experience of murder.
We're not worried that depictions of murder will twist your development away from being a healthy murderer.
Re: (Score:2)
Not every depiction of sex is pornographic you know.
Just as romanticism has been perverted into a sick abomination by Hollywood, so has sex.
I still think the sex scene in 300 was one of the most beautiful things ever to be recorded. It should be the norm, not the exception.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, I disagree but that's at least a reasoned explanation; not sure why you're getting modded down as a troll.
I don't think "we" (by which I mean "you Americans") are really thinking that way. I think it's much more to do with the history of the country. As others have said, America was founded by violent religious bigots who believed that their god had given them the continent and the current inhabitants were more or less created by and worshipped Satan, so any level of aggression could be directed at th
Re: (Score:1)
the current inhabitants were more or less created by and worshipped Satan
Was this really what was believed? I thought it was just this "They are savages and lesser than us because me are smart and they iz dumb and weird" rather than literally being creations of Satan?
with the Genesis story in particular being widely relegated to the status of a folk-story in Britain and Europe, even by church leaders
And weird, hadn't heard of this, with leadership thinking it was fake old stories. I guess I never try to look into what other's believe and whatnot though. Just seems weird to be in charge and not believe any of it, unless you're one of the ones that never believed and just did it for easy money (But I thought thos
Re: (Score:2)
The current inhabitants were more or less created by and worshipped Satan
Was this really what was believed? I thought it was just this "They are savages and lesser than us because me are smart and they iz dumb and weird" rather than literally being creations of Satan?
White pagans were regarded right from the start as worshiping Satan. Brown pagans were often classed as literally inhuman as well as worshipping Satan.
with the Genesis story in particular being widely relegated to the status of a folk-story in Britain and Europe, even by church leaders
And weird, hadn't heard of this, with leadership thinking it was fake old stories. I guess I never try to look into what other's believe and whatnot though. Just seems weird to be in charge and not believe any of it
I didn't say they didn't believe any of it, but they viewed Genesis in particular as speculation rather than literal truth. Indeed, it's really that attitude that the people who say they take the Bible (whatever that is) as literal truth are taking a stand against, not atheism. The opposing view - that it's a mixture of tradition and revealed truth - is the m
Re: (Score:3)
But you're worried that showing a nipple or not bleeping a swear word will cause the immediate destruction and damnation of someone's soul, right? LOL.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There isn’t actually any such rating as X or XXX, those are porn marketing terms only. The closest actual rating is NC-17. And it’s not exclusively for porn, though that is probably the only film genre that would accept such a rating, as other film usually aims for a broader audience.
Re:Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:5, Informative)
X used to be an actual official rating and could be applied for various non-porn content (for example, the first edit of Robocop). However, once it became synonymous with porn in the public's mind, it was replaced by NC-17. XXX was always unofficial and used exclusively for porn marketing.
NC-17 vs X (Score:2)
There isn’t actually any such rating as X or XXX, those are porn marketing terms only. The closest actual rating is NC-17.
NC-17 is a relatively recent thing. There did used to be a X rating (never XXX though) but it got co-opted by the porn industry to such a degree that they had to change it to something less... promotional. I forget when NC-17 became official but it was within the last 20-30 years.
Re: (Score:3)
well porn on the internet has definitely degraded from just naked people to some pretty dark shit. When I was a kid the 'porn' we watched was staying up late to see some cinemax (skinimax) r rated movies where its rated R for 'nutidy, and strong sexual content', commonly referred to as a tenage-fuck-flick.
the shit they watch now is stuff you do once you've burned through all the lighter porn content and you need something stronger to keep you from getting burned out. Not exactly the things kids should _star
Re:Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:4, Insightful)
Extreme porn isn't really the issue for kids though, it's the potential consequences.
Sex can get someone pregnant, a pretty serious state of affairs with life long ramifications. We have to teach kids about it and how to be responsible, and we tend to be bad at doing that. Also porn can cause mental health problems for kids due to body image issues and pressure to act a certain way or do certain things. Again education helps but we are somewhat bad at it.
Violence is of course also quite serious, but kids tend to be exposed to it quite early on regardless of the movies they watch, and develop an understanding of the consequences and responsibilities. Socially it's easier to talk about and to teach kids about.
Re:Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:5, Interesting)
This has always puzzled me. Violence and murder, on film or in TV programming, is generally allowed, with a "PG" or "R" rating or equivalent. Sex is rated "X" or "XXX" depending on the explicitness. And yet, in real life, most people (outside Chicago, at least) will probably never witness a murder or experience a shooting.
Are you an American? If so, the answer should be obvious. The US culturally has a certain outlook on the profane and the sacred, steming partially from its Puritan roots and partly from the ethics of the time as the US spread west. Explicit sexuality is protected more, while the more violent aspects are seen as... well, just part of life.
It's pretty much the exact opposite of the European/Old World view on these matters, where sex is presented far more openly in real life, but guns are harder to come by. And in entertainment, sex and nudity gets a pass while violence will lead to more restrictive movie and video game ratings (or be censored out).
When people (like the GP, honestly) complain about US views on sex and violence, they're usually just whining about it without addressing the underlying principle: the US is simply different about these things. It's a different cultural choice. It doesn't mean you're oppressed, and it doesn't mean that parental-management tools (such as this) are wrong for having different default choices than you'd prefer.
Re:Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:5, Insightful)
and it doesn't mean that parental-management tools (such as this) are wrong for having different default choices than you'd prefer.
Yes, they are wrong.
A 14 year old and above has the right to inform her/himself about sex related questions. And if parents block that, it is clear signal that the parents are not the right persons to ask. Also it seems you missed to read the summary: "sex assault hotline", why the funk would a search like this be blocked?
Re: (Score:2)
A 14 year old and above has the right
Granted by whom? I think you'll find a 14 year old has very few rights in many countries including your own.
Most countries have a legal process (emancipation) through which a minor needs to go through to obtain many rights.
Re: (Score:2)
Granted by the charta of human rights.
And in Europe granted by law, after all we don't live in the middle ages here.
Re: (Score:2)
Granted by the charta of human rights.
And in Europe granted by law, after all we don't live in the middle ages here.
Sorry but you'll find that not only in Europe but even in Germany children do not have the same rights as adults.
By the way, neither the Charter of Human Rights nor the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU give you the right to information. Additionally you'll find there are many rights enumerated in both charters that don't apply to minors. Do you see very many 14 year old children vote for MPs of the EU parliament?
Re: (Score:2)
The topic was about sex.
So, yes, "children" have the right to be informed about sex, contraception etc. Both according to "Charter of Human Rights" and "The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU"
Do you see very many 14 year old children vote for MPs of the EU parliament?
No, the voting age for the EU is surprisingly 16. And for most national institutions 18. And what exactly has the voting age to do with sexual freedom?
Re: (Score:2)
The topic was about sex.
The topic is irrelevant. Children do not have any rights enumerated in the Charter of rights that overrule their parents raising them.
And what exactly has the voting age to do with sexual freedom?
You tell me. The two documents you cite list the right to vote as a fundamental right, yet they do not apply to minors. I am merely pointing out that the document you hold up so high and mighty is not universally applicable.
Re: (Score:2)
The topic is irrelevant. Children do not have any rights enumerated in the Charter of rights that overrule their parents raising them.
Yes, they have.
Law > power of parents.
Shown all the time when parents are found abusing their children.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd go way younger than that to be honest, at least for certain topics.
My twins are 8 (boy and a girl). They still bathe together and share a room. They know about their physical differences (and we use anatomical words), but it's not anything they consider. They don't have the hormones to care, they are just kids (and best friends).
But. They have an 8 year old friend who is starting puberty prematurely. When she's over it's girls only if there is a bath. They all still sleep in the same room, usually
Re: (Score:2)
The proper spelling is Ju Jutsu ;D
But I'm glad that I have not to handle 8 year old trans gender friends of my kids.
Not that I'm "transgenderphobe" but I think I would have trouble to talk about issues like that.
Interesting would be to know why your kids friends is "felling" "transgender" at such a young age. A huge percentage are people who got born as hermaphrodites and by pressure of doctors or stupid decision of parents got forced a gender on them.
no but it is still a problem (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Europe varies a lot... In the UK for example, female nudity is a lot less controversial than male nudity. Women can be shown aroused on TV, but not men.
In France you get topless women in the ads for beauty products... In fact I remember years ago seeing one with a mother and her ~12 year old child topless in it. They really don't seem to mind.
Re: (Score:2)
Are you an American? If so, the answer should be obvious. The US culturally has a certain outlook on the profane and the sacred, steming partially from its Puritan roots and partly from the ethics of the time as the US spread west. Explicit sexuality is protected more, while the more violent aspects are seen as... well, just part of life.
I know, right? We're so bad that we even traveled in time and gave our outlook to ancient sephardic folks!
Re: (Score:2)
This has always puzzled me. Violence and murder, on film or in TV programming, is generally allowed, with a "PG" or "R" rating or equivalent. Sex is rated "X" or "XXX" depending on the explicitness. And yet, in real life, most people (outside Chicago, at least) will probably never witness a murder or experience a shooting.
It's pretty much the exact opposite of the European/Old World view on these matters, where sex is presented far more openly in real life, but guns are harder to come by. And in entertainment, sex and nudity gets a pass while violence will lead to more restrictive movie and video game ratings (or be censored out).
I always find it odd to hear Europe referred to as "the old world". The religious groups who left for the Americas were not progressive, in fact they left because Europe was becoming to progressive and accepting. They were not escaping persecution as is oft said by Americans, they were puritans leaving because they were no longer permitted to persecute others. If anything, the old world left on those colony ships.
One other point of order, extreme violence isn't edited out in Europe, we get the same level
Re: (Score:2)
You can tell a child that violence and murder are always bad. Children can understand binary things like good and bad. They can't however really understand things that are conditionally good or bad until they're in their teens. Even then they may not have enough sophistication to really understand the context of things they see.
So exposing younger children to sexual content means exposing them to situations that rarely fit into their binary understanding of appropriate and inappropriate. Violent behavior is
Re: (Score:2)
Frequency and opportunity (Score:2)
But most people WILL see and touch and have sex with other naked people, hopefully many thousands of times. Seems to me that we should celebrate depictions of sex,and discourage depictions of murder.
While I agree with you in principle, it's more complicated than that precisely for the frequency reasons you state. There are real consequences to sex (pregnancy, disease, etc) which most people are very likely to run into in some capacity, often before they are really sufficiently mature to deal with them appropriately. So some amount of caution clearly is warranted albeit probably not the ridiculous extremes we go to. It's obvious that a lot of people (including an alarming number of full grown adults)
Re: (Score:2)
This has always puzzled me. Violence and murder, on film or in TV programming, is generally allowed, with a "PG" or "R" rating or equivalent. Sex is rated "X" or "XXX" depending on the explicitness. And yet, in real life, most people (outside Chicago, at least) will probably never witness a murder or experience a shooting.
So basically they're copying the attitude of much of America. Racism, violence and bigotry is A-OK, seeing a boob will scar children for life.
But most people WILL see and touch and have sex with other naked people, hopefully many thousands of times. Seems to me that we should celebrate depictions of sex,and discourage depictions of murder.
I suspect many /.ers will be more likely to see a shooting than have sex.
Re: (Score:1)
Sex is rated "X" or "XXX" depending on the explicitness.
The "XXX" rating doesn't denote a level of explicitness. It's an arbitrary rating that porn producers applied to their own products to suggest more explicit (or exclusively explicit) content than "X"-rated films (which only meant content not suitable for children, like 'Midnight Cowboy' or 'A Clockwork Orange').
Re: Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:2)
Re: Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:2)
Re: Steve Jobs Was a Prude - And Apple Still Is (Score:2)
Welcome to the USA (Score:3, Informative)
You can show decapitations during prime time, but one flash of a nipple and the FCC will fine you $325,000.
Re: (Score:3)
on this I can agree, there should be tiers of nude content ratings. Just naked body parts being on the low end, where rape/snuff being at the highest end. Maybe not get so uptight on a nip slip or seeing a woman step out of a shower naked, whereas maybe still say no to open crotch shots.
Re: (Score:1)
If you're letting your pre-teen have an iphone (Score:5, Insightful)
you're doing the parenting thing wrong.
Steve Jobs himself wouldn't let his own kids anywhere near an iPhone or an iPad.
Re: (Score:2)
you're doing the parenting thing wrong.
Steve Jobs himself wouldn't let his own kids anywhere near an iPhone or an iPad.
Exactly. The issue is not the quality of the filter that you stick on the pipe to all the cesspools of the world.
Re: (Score:2)
Filters are the most idiotic thing for children's content. Reality, content for minors is not filtered by blocking, content for minors should be filtered by allowing. Basically zero content should be allowed for minors until it has passed muster, until it has been specifically checked, content is allowed, web site at a time and not blocked when it is too late, after the damage has been done.
Want an internet suitable for minors create one. Want to control adults, claim you are controlling the adults to 'er'
Re: (Score:2)
nothing wrong with kids and tech. i have a pre-teen with iphones and ipads and he made the cutoff to apply to one of the elite NYC high schools. he's probably in the top 10% of all NYC kids.
for all you know the rich kids will grow up to be trust fund kids and not know how to do anything
Re: (Score:2)
Steve Jobs himself wouldn't let his own kids anywhere near an iPhone or an iPad.
So? Was Steve an expert on parenting? Did his kids turn out exceptionally well, compared to the children of other billionaires?
If not, then why should I care about his views on parenting?
Re: (Score:2)
What about a 17 year old? They are legally minors. What justification do you have to arbitrarily draw your line?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
you're doing the parenting thing wrong.
Steve Jobs himself wouldn't let his own kids anywhere near an iPhone or an iPad.
Wait. Steve Jobs had kids that he didn't neglect? This is news to me.
Duh (Score:1)
That's because it looks at content. Sex ed is generally not distinguishable from porn without understanding the text, violence is visual, not something a text parser can find, and racist content requires understanding the text unless they use racial epithets.
This is funny because I remember the days when people were against making blocklists of websites and now they're complaining they can't get them!
That's fine (Score:1)
Believe it or not, Racism won't inpregnate my daughter.
Re: (Score:2)
No website will impregnate your daughter.
Re: (Score:2)
no, but they could give her a very, very, unrealistic outlook on sex, one in which she believes her only worth is how much she can give away in order to gain affection. its not entirely harmless. if you arent aware of some of the sick shit out there, free content no less, I guess thats a good thing, for you anyway. But its there, and maybe if you check out some of the videos, you might agree that perhaps some filtering is definitely not a bad thing.
as a 15/16yr old my dad gave me a subscription to playboy,
Re: (Score:2)
no, but they could give her a very, very, unrealistic outlook on sex
...unlike the views of many conservative Americans. Oh, wait...
Re: That's fine (Score:2)
You must be young if you believe that. Unrealistic would not be the word I would use. Someone calling themselves a social conservative these days are trying to preserve social norms from the 50s. To call it unrealistic implies fiction or something that never existed, when clearly it did. You could use words like archaic, outdated, even backward thinking and still fall within the realm of civil discord. Unrealistic does not exactly fit here. Most were raised in a 3day per week church-going household that sti
Re: (Score:2)
You must be young if you believe that. Unrealistic would not be the word I would use. Someone calling themselves a social conservative these days are trying to preserve social norms from the 50s. To call it unrealistic implies fiction or something that never existed, when clearly it did. You could use words like archaic, outdated, even backward thinking and still fall within the realm of civil discord. Unrealistic does not exactly fit here. Most were raised in a 3day per week church-going household that still lived by those social norms. So to them its very real and proven to have worked at one time.
But none of what you wrote makes even the views on sex from the 50's any more realistic. Merely people believing in things doesn't make those beliefs realistic; see religion. Coincidentally, their increased frequency is applicable to the 1950s, too.
Issues with values (Score:5, Insightful)
I really don't understand this kind of thing. It's just fine to see the most horrific violence imaginable, but you can't see someone's penis or breasts. What the hell?
Is it just me, or would the more ideal world be where this is completely reversed?
Re: (Score:2)
so your ok with kids stumbling onto a free porn site of fake snuff films where burglars choke, rape, anally rape, and eventually strangle-to-death their victim? Its going to give the kids some really really fucked up outlook on the whole sex-relationship thing. That shit is out there too. Very few free porn sites are just "breasts and penis'". There is no sick thing you can think of that is not already made into some 5min video on pornhub or something. Kids do NOT need to stumble across shit like that 2-gir
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
As a kid I stumbled across a few horror movies. I survived and they didn't make me go obliterate every doll I saw, I didn't rip my face off, nor do I engage in cannibalism. Sure I always made sure my closet was locked when I went to bed, but so what. That's part of growing up.
The reason kids get such a distorted view of sex is because it's restricted. It's easier to come across harder core porn than it is to find good information about real sex. And I mean actual pictures, not low quality diagrams wit
Re: (Score:2)
In Australia has had a boom in Labiaplasty [wikipedia.org]. Being surgery Labiaplasty comes with risks, one of those risks being labia do serve a purpose so if you are too aggressive all sorts of problems arise. One reason women often give for wanting Labiaplasty is protruding labia causes discomfort, especially during activities like bike riding. That's downright perplexing to males who have much bigger and more sensitive things between their l
Re: Issues with values (Score:1)
You know, you are the second or third one pointing this out. I have had my fair share of interwebs porn but I have to admit I never, ever, accidently stumbled upon shit you describe. Thats not accidental you sick fucks.
Re: (Score:2)
"I don't think it's fine for children to see horrific violence."
"So you think it's fine for children to see horrific violence?"
...ehhhh? How did you arrive at that conclusion?
Re: Issues with values (Score:2)
Never said that. As a libertarian I want the most granular, effective, filtering possible, but fully empowered to turn it on, off, and tweaked exactly to my liking. No one else should make those decisions aside from the individual, and the children they are responsible to protect. Everything should be at parental discretion. Everyone has the right to fuck up their own life. Generic filters donâ(TM)t give you that flexibility. Sure, you can turn them on and off, but they lack the granularity.
Re: (Score:2)
Heathen! Off to confession with you!
People don't worry about their kids (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:1)
If I were a parent, I'd justifiably worry about both.
What do you expect? (Score:2)
What do you expect from a company that constantly flubs the switch to and from standard time?
And this is why we don't need to fear "AI" (Score:4, Interesting)
Simple things like this are the reason I don't fear AI taking over any time soon. After 25+ years of trying, internet filters still don't work. After 20 years of trying, predictive text is no better than it was in 1999.
"iPhones new parental controls do not work." (Score:2)
what about the breast cancer test? (Score:2)
what about the breast cancer test?
Not averse to parental controls (Score:2)
Currently they don’t play with ipad etc, they are too young, better to play with physical things and explore at home or in the playground or in nature.
Together as a family, since a month we watch on youtube streamed to tv for 15 minutes max daily, animated songs like The Wheels on The bus. They love that, and we sing (badly in my case) with them. Otherwise tv is off all day.
But how to address things when they get older? I am not adverse to parental con
Re: (Score:2)
NO INTERNET. Phone Apps need to be avoided too. Go look at all the prelim work and opinions of experts it's all carefully anti-technology because of the climate we are in; otherwise, they'd be free to really say what they think about technology on child development.
TV has it's harms too. Just try to control video access and work your way slowly to other tech-- don't think you can handle filtering all tech exposure and it's harm. Hell, just giving them these electronic infant toys hinders their developm
Re: Not averse to parental controls (Score:2)
Whitelist (Score:4, Insightful)
Blacklists and keyword filters (what Apple is trying to do) *never* work like you think they will. The WWW is far, far, far too big and complicated for any such grandiose scheme to ever hope to tame. Even a site like Wikipedia is far too diverse, frank, and complex (I have seen plenty of shocking things there not suitable for children).
The only thing that works is a whitelist- allowing one to visit ONLY the specifically sites in an approved list. Of course, this is extremely restrictive and often not practical. Personally, I would not allow young children unsupervised access to non-whitelisted web, ever. As they get older, I would continuously expand the whitelist until eventually flipping over to a blacklist.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"In theory you are right. In reality this will not work on so many levels."
Please check what I wrote again. It sounds like you agree that it WILL work. I never said a parent shouldn't sit with children and let them explore an open web and guide and explain and discuss, that is exactly what I would do. I said they should not be allowed unsupervised access to the web while on a blacklist. A whitelist can be extremely "safe" because there are little or no surprises, if you pick the allowed sites carefu
No problem for U.S. (Score:5, Insightful)
There is some logic ... (Score:2)
So my mom wants sex with me and I google: "how to say no to sex" ... with no result.
Obviously my next search is: "how to poison my mom"!!
mod parent up - funny (Score:2)
but seriously, rare situations should be ignored. The number of children intentionally poisoning anybody is below a rounding error.
The annoying part of American Puritan hypocrisy is that any censoring is pointless in the USA because both sex and violence are heavily promoted in the culture in the most influential ways possible WITHOUT being explicit! The damage is largely being done while ignorantly being "clean" and "safe" because they fail to realize being explicit is just being literal minded. Beeping a
So? Perfectly congruent with society (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
redneckistan (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Frameworks (Score:2)
I have no idea how the iOS 12 parental controls are implemented (my youngest is 14 and moving out of the age where I'm all that concerned about his web browsing - which mainly seems to consist of schoolwork and Twitch streams of Plants vs Zombies), but it really should be implemented in terms of frameworks.
It's fine if Apple implements a "default" implementation of that framework but in the end they shouldn't want to be in the business of deciding what's appropriate or inappropriate. Rather, create a store
Hmm (Score:1)
Re: GNAA - HITS ALL THREE FUCKING APPLE - GAY NIGG (Score:2, Informative)
No.
The 1st ammendment allows slashdot to delete or block that crap, not the government.
Just flag the post and move on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
as a libertarian Im all for having more tools, as a parent, to decide what is and what is not ok. Obviously there are some good things to the internet in terms of research power, etc. And there is a whole lot of bad shit too. The more granular and more power I have to exempt or ban specific things that slip through, or get caught by, a filter is never a bad thing. Having the tools gives the parents to choose how much or how little to implement. Ultimately its still their choice. If letting your 6yr old watc
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
as a libertarian
Me, well I'm trying to keep my kids maintaining a healthy baseline of normalcy without trying to stiffel them more than absolutely necessary to prevent them obtaining some unhealthy or unrealistic view/opinion on things.
You don't see the irony?
Re:What a shame (Score:4)
Last time I checked the "left loonies" are the ones that have less problems with their kids knowing how their body works than their kids being subjected to hate and violence.
So... I guess you're barking up the wrong tree here.
Re: (Score:1)
Last time I checked the "left loonies" are the ones that have less problems with their kids knowing how their body works
Oh sure ... no confusion on the left about how bodies work at all ... BTW did you see who won that "women's" cycling race?
Re: (Score:2)
What does any of this have to do with knowing how to fuck?
Re: What a shame (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm waiting for the part where you explain the importance of the women's cycling race winner.
Re: (Score:1)
It isn't anywhere near as important as the demographic fact that the sexual revolution has caused dangerously low population growth in the first world, and even worse, has caused huge amounts of ignorance and superstition to overwrite wisdom among anybody younger than 90. The chaos caused by that makes the woman's cycling race being won by a man who was pretending to be a woman just a blip in the ether.
Re: (Score:1)
It's news for nerds, you know.... stuff that matters.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I keep trying, but my new iPad doesn't show any results.
Re: So how would it deal with GNAA (Score:2)
lol. Poe's Law in full effect right there ...
Re: (Score:1)
You must be new here. GNAA is a slashdot troll