V chip (was: Going totally OT )

From: Richard Erlacher <edick_at_idcomm.com>
Date: Fri Feb 11 17:38:56 2000

Well, here in the Land of the Free, there's too much exercise of freedome
not guaranteed in any document anywhere, and not tolerated in countries in
Europe. It would be so much simpler if there were only one punishment for
all violations of the law, as so many infractions are worthy of that
ultimate punishment, DEATH. The only thing that seems to vary is WHOSE
death. If every offense were met with immediate extermination, perhaps
followed by a posthumous apology, a lot of people would behave differently,
and nobody would park in my reserved space.

In civilized countries, and NOT the U.S, it's common for citizens to turn in
their neighbors for viloating the law simply because they observe a law
being broken, and not because it has effect on their lives. The fact is
that HERE, in the U.S. a person picking up the phone and notifying the
police that there's a minor crime in progress within his view is considered,
even by the police, worse than the offender.

In the U.S. the observable lack of civilization is evidenced in the
inability of people to inhabit a limited space as the Europeans have known
for centuries to do. For us Americans, it's growing pains. Since there's
no more land to inhabit, we're having to acquire some traits of civilized
societies because we're having to live together with more and more
strangers, often quite different form ourselves, racially, culturally,
linguistically, etc.

Over time we're going to have to move in the direction of the European
model, which we know works, and rely more on common observance of law as
opposed to trying to circumvent it.

Dick
-----Original Message-----
From: John Wilson <wilson_at_dbit.dbit.com>
To: classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org <classiccmp_at_classiccmp.org>
Date: Friday, February 11, 2000 4:18 PM
Subject: Re: V chip (was: Going totally OT )


>On Fri, Feb 11, 2000 at 10:25:38PM +0000, Hans Franke wrote:
>> Let me get this straight - there is some software to be implemented
>> on TVs and VCRs to disable them on a contend related base ?
>
>Right. But remember, we're still the Land of the Free, even though most
>European countries give their citizens a lot more freedom. See, any time
>the majority (or better yet, a well-funded and vocal minority) wants
something
>censored, it's not censorship -- the founding fathers were only trying to
>protect our rights to say stuff that everyone agrees with, they hate
>people with unpopular tastes or opinions.
>
>> Just
>> assuming that there will be some kind of add on signal (at this point
>> I'd like to get some technical information) suplying the level(s)
>> of whatever (what classes are named ?), who is responsible to
>> judge the content ?
>
>There, you've hit the biggest problem. My understanding is that it's just
>a single scale -- from "not offensive" to "very offensive", according to
>someone, somewhere. Since the government likes to see everything in terms
>of strict threshholds (55 MPH = no problem, 56+ MPH = OK to lay down tack
>strips and cause a fatal crash), they've convinced themselves that everyone
>is offended by the same stuff. So some invisible authority gets to decide
>what's offensive and what isn't and everything comes prepackaged (no I
>don't know what the protocol is for labeling the show but I assume it's
some
>between-visible-scan-lines thing like closed captioning is), so you're just
>supposed to set your TV for whatever age your kids are (they're all the
same
>age, right?) and leave it at that.
>
>> Also, are the TV stations also forced to supply the coding all the time ?
>
>I think it's supposed to be done per show. Like the current TV rating
system,
>where they put up a logo at the beginning of each show saying what its
rating
>is. Ridiculous... If I owned a TV network, I'd just set everything to
"most
>offensive" and forget about it.
>
>> BTW: I know there is violence on US-TV - but sex ?
>
>There's no *real* sex on US TV, but the bible thumpers are offended by even
>the hint of it. They think that nudity is inherently wrong, and I just
>*love* the illogic that you can say anything you want but you can't use
>certain words to say it. Say the exact same thing another way and you're
>OK though.
>
>Anyway this is all just another attempt to idiot-proof the world. Instead
of
>just sitting down with their kids at a young age and explaining what sex
>is and why it should be taken seriously, the lazy absentee parents think
>the right thing is for their kids to be prevented at all costs from even
>looking down in the bath tub, so that they have no idea what's really going
>on, and it all comes as a total shock to them when they turn 18.
>
>People are unbelievably repressed in this country though. I thought my
parents
>did a pretty good job of explaining everything, but they left some
important
>stuff out, like the fact that sex is fun! What a mind-bender, hearing
about
>neighbors etc. that had gotten pregnant "by accident", I couldn't possibly
>imagine how people would pull off such a complicated disgusting procedure
>without meaning to. Makes a whole lot more sense now!
>
>> If the judgement is
>> done by the producer, someone of a 'nude acceping' show may have a
>> different feeling about the 'sex rating' then the next guy who airs
>> some TV church stuff.
>
>Exactly! Personally, I'm seriously, DEEPLY offended by anything to do with
>organized religion, yet as far as the government is concerned that stuff
>is all strictly G-rated. So I'll never convince my TV to automatically
>skip those shows. I have no problem with nudity though, and if I had kids
>I'd want them to see plenty of it too, so that the novelty would wear off
>and they wouldn't go into total cranial shutdown the way most Americans do
>when they see it (since we're strongly conditioned to think that the only
>time anyone shows any skin is when they're about to have sex with you, so
>we act like idiots when we see people naked in other contexts). But that's
>the *main* thing the government wants to stop us from seeing.
>
>Anyway, I'm not saying the government is trying to gradually eat away at
our
>rights and subtly turn the USA into a totalitarian state so slowly that no
>one even notices. But if they WERE trying to do that, they'd go about it
>exactly this way!
>
>Well anyway, I was pissed off the *last* time the gov't forced everyone to
>pay for an unneeded feature in their TVs, which was closed captioning, but
>now I use it all the time! It's really handy when the actors are mumbling,
>or when they're talking in funny voices for no apparent reason (but the
>caption explains that they're quoting from a 1930s movie I never saw), or
>when my wife falls asleep but I want to keep watching.
>
>Yech, sorry about all this OT stuff, this has gotten pretty far from
finding
>goodies in dumpsters. I once hauled an IBM 029 keypunch out of a dumpster,
>does that make up for it? It was at the company I worked for so there was
>no problem with permission, the guys who tossed it in really relished the
>experience (I guess they hadn't been big fans of that keypunch back when it
>was the company's only input device) so they were telling everyone, I
flipped
>out of course but the same guys were nice enough to help me haul the thing
out
>again.
>
>I've also had pretty good luck with the friendly neighborhood engineering
>school, especially because they're too cheap to get dumpsters for every
>building so a lot of the time stuff sits on loading docks for weeks before
>it gets hauled off, so you can just take it away (as long as you're sure
>it's scrap). I got a mostly-complete ASR33 and another terminal that way a
>couple of years ago, and a few other things (found a VK100 GIGI minus the
PSU
>sitting by the curb with some other trash, outside RPI's linear accelerator
>a few years back). No need to get waist deep in transformer oil or
anything
>yucky like that...
>
>John Wilson
>D Bit
>--------------
>P.S. guess I spoke too soon about the drought of idiotic winter accidents
>being reported on our local TV news as "tragedies", apparently just last
night
>some bozo in Utica went snowmobiling in the dark and ate a tree at high
speed.
Received on Fri Feb 11 2000 - 17:38:56 GMT