FOX News is gonna RUIN SL with this video!

Ancient thread is ancient.




I read the first post, and the thought that occurred to me was, "if my grandmother watched Fox news I'd have more serious problems than just SL being on it."

you'd think he was experiencing the internet for the first time, let alone second life!

there are already active efforts and self-policing of the grid to protect against 1) minors being on the adult grid, -period-, 2) the exposure of randier areas and materials to -adults- who do not wish to see it, let alone children (and set to lowest by default, so it needs age-verification to get set any higher), and 3) explicit depictions of virtual child porn (of course the most focused-upon and trumpeted by the net-loids, but by being so, also incredibly sparse and short-lived).

all of this is already done by (controversial in all of the following senses) the developer, and the grid community (already made up of citizens worldwide), and both of these from the general input of each and every country's citizens and governments.

it's like the u.n., but more fun. it's messy (but so is the u.n.) most of the time deadlocked and ineffective, but on the things everybody can agree about (we all care for our children, re kennedy's speech), there should be no problems coming down to a few core basic values.

parental controls on computers and web access are ubiquitous and set tame by default anymore, and by now past the 'issue awareness' level, and really needs no more pounding into people's heads - the 'horrors of the net' in general have become pretty much 'common knowledge', the first generation that 'needed protecting' have already become the next generation that knows how to protect their children. any responsible adult anymore, anywhere, setting up a networked machine for their child knows to make sure it is set for their protection. our governments do not need to step in, and they have better things to concentrate upon that are more appropriate with their level of sheer mass of power and money (provided by us).

there's still lots of stupid oppression that exists in this world. people in general are sensible, and don't need that much policing from their own governments. if someone comes trying to break down our door, or is assaulting someone, we know we can call upon the police (unless you're 'special' enough to afford a monitoring service to do it for you; most of us live without. regardless of whether or not you have such a 'security service', likely the damage is done by the time anyone arrives to help protect you or your loved ones - that is life).

but people like cong mark kirk think that life can be like 'minority report', arresting people before they have a chance to 'be bad'... that average citizens cannot be responsible people, and that govt's must further micro-manage our lives (probably with their super-kewl 'deep packet' toys). funny! ;0 i thought dose repubs were all s'pposed tabe'bout 'small, focused government that didn't intrude upon our private lives.'

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

p.s. the reasons to ignore this congressman's 'piss into the wind' are multitude. we still have the majority of the u.s. military force in iraq, and the deaths on both sides haven't stopped, -simply because we are there.- i wanted to write this earlier re: u.n., but here after a few hours i find this:

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hwK_CSpBxsNuVUEaDuOwmSSCiqGwD994I7KO0

Fireworks over Baghdad as Iraqis take over cities
By KIM GAMEL and PATRICK QUINN – 3 hours ago

BAGHDAD (AP) — Iraqi forces assume formal control of Baghdad and other cities on Tuesday after American troops hand over security in urban areas in a defining step toward ending the U.S. combat role in the country.

Fireworks, not bombings, colored the Baghdad skyline late Monday, and thousands attended a party in a park where singers performed patriotic songs. Loudspeakers at police stations and military checkpoints played recordings of similar tunes throughout the day, as Iraqi military vehicles decorated with flowers and national flags patrolled the capital.

"All of us are happy — Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds on this day," Waleed al-Bahadili said as he celebrated at the park. "The Americans harmed and insulted us too much."

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

why has the majority of one country's force (the u.s.'s), -eight times the size of china's,- needed to be so concentrated within one country (iraq) in the middle east? we sure didn't take over iran. saudi arabia. egypt. syria. palestine. cuba. columbia. russia. north korea. china.it wasn't all that 'strategic' even, in a long-term view of fossil fuels. it was 'strategic' because it was 'easy', because it was 'weak'.

it's about 'corporate interests', not 'military tyranny' anymore. follow the money, and you see where it all goes, and 'comes from.' i say, study what they do, and disconnect from their economy as best you can. make it as expensive as possible to make them practice what they do.

consider we let probably the worst company in the world - halliburton, cheney's pet project - do nearly all the 'green zone' work over there, with problems ranging from 'racketeering' us taxpayers to -ELECTROCUTING TROOPS.- and those are -cheney's boys- doing that. and all they've ever done is -change their names to hide the fact that it was they that were doing this shoddy work.- does anyone - -ANYONE- want halliburton/whatever-they're-named-now to build their own families' homes or temporary residences?? and that -asshole- was our VICE-PRESIDENT.

once with a friend, we were hungry and wanted just plain ol' cheezeyburgers, so we knew there was a wendy's nearby (in chicago - in the indian section). so we went, and it was all indian women working and serving... after walking out with our yummy, greasy bags, i said 'i don't feel so hungry anymore.' 'why?' my friend asked. 'we just ordered double-gods with cheese.'

a stupid anecdote maybe - but seriously, american corporate megalomaniacalism is sick and insulting to other entire cultures, who have their own culture that can't stand up to such an 'assaultive' level as presented by american-based/ideologically-corporate institutions. most 'family-owned'-style neighborhood businesses cannot withstand the intrusion of megalo-marts like walmart and such corporate entities. do people in new dehli want 'wendy's'? do people in bagdad -want- 'kentucky fried chicken'?? ('chicken that was fried from the other side of the world from us?') do people in the middle-east want robotic cold-calls in the middle of their dinners soliciting them for services they do not want or need? (a practice i've never heard of being a problem in any other country, so i presume we have not exported that 'industry' enough yet.)

'american corporate megamaniacalism.' they do not want our so-called 'acceptible practices' here in the states. the conservatives have been riding the wave of public discontent so far maybe, 'well we live with this bullshit; why shouldn't you?' - but now people are waking up, and realizing 'hey - we don't have to live with this bullshit. and neither should anybody else.' and since it's -us-, we -can- control this.

nobody wants -our- business anymore. not until we straighten up our act. the world trusts obama. at least, the world trusts obama a helluva lot more than they trusted jr. take that to the bank, and refile any unfounded paranoia you've got into the trash bin. they would not possibly trust a person that would not pass their 'eye test' - and besides, if he's just that cunning and would actually take over the world, wouldn't you like that anyways?? ;0 or, conversely, were he actually to 'take over this country' (uhh, knock-knock - he -is- already the 'president'), wouldn't he be capable of taking over the world with our overamped military?

freedom for every country. freedom from ideological tyranny stoked by corporate interests: iran; iraq; saudi arabia; egypt; syria; palestine; israel. honduras. cuba. columbia. russia. north korea. china. england. australia. the united states of america.

in terms of world consciousness, we're far past the point of knowing and realizing (and feeling subsequently responsible for) that we can be a danger not only to each other (often upon innocent bystanders, upon on a global scale, with little effort and weapons... terrorist bombings, hijackings, forced fascistic control of access of information or the public sqaure, or whatever else).

but also upon ourselves, with the self-same techniques... iraqis against iraqis. iranians against iranians. americans against americans. oklahoma. the holocost museum. the abortion doctor. (for better or for worse, what he did was not just 'choice' here, it was the -law.- so the guy who did what he did was breaking -two- laws.) the encouragement of these paranoid fantasies only encourage the extremists. maybe there's no helping them, but once upon a time, people put emphasis upon making sure every child was properly educated by well-paid teachers. (i once heard ice-t being interviewed, and saying 'hey do you wanna learn or take advice from some shlub wearing a bad suit and driving a crappy car? pay teachers well, so they show up in a nice car, a fly suit, and the kids'll listen.')

the majority of the world now realizes just how easily really any of us can be not only a danger to others, but to our own citizens, to ourselves, our own friends, family, and children. and we are becoming active. we want to protect ourselves from those who would harm us.

and -this- guy... mew, mew, mew... wantsta passa byll tht'll pr'tect our chil'drin. mew mew mew! well get to work man, write up something else. something serious that warrants everyone's time and attention.

more good news, conversation and info for an american perspective:
http://www.dailykos.com/
http://www.crooksandliars.com/

what was that ren and stimpy character, 'joe beer - american' or something? sign me "2000-2007, american; 2008-on - slightly more proud american."
p.s. SHORT VERSION of that video: this is extremely tasteless and offensive and infringes upon his family's private rights at the moment. buuut, i just had a thought flash across my brain:

"WE'RE ALL MICHAEL JACKSON NOW!"

I abridged your quote.

It was a bit lengthy but you summed it up in the first sentence.

Kids already have to go to lengths and bounds to sign up for second life, get age verified to get into an adult continent now to have sex with pixels and hope mom and dad don't catch on. Let alone, the way Congressman Mark Kirk talks, he'd have you think 4 year olds were logging into Second Life and having cybersex.

When all they have to do is type www.youpo....... or any number of other totally free streaming real life, hardcore porn to your eyeballs, if you are adept enough to click on the [YES I'M 18] box.

That's why all their tirades about the evils of video games and virtual worlds in particular and other social games and websites is just too hilarious for words.

Don't believe Fox News, don't believe CNN, don't believe ABC, don't believe DailyKoz. JUST BECAUSE IT MATCHES YOUR VIEWPOINT YOU STILL HAVE TO LEARN TO THINK FOR YOURSELF.

Not everything Fox airs is false, not everything Huffington Post writes is false, not everything NBC airs is true. You gotta think. Yeesh. Some people just wanna drink whatever flavor of Koolaid their friends and comrades are drinking.

End of rant.

dk and other notable liberal sites are self-monitoring, like second life. unlike some conservative/fox-style blog sites, that rely upon a musselini-like figure to top-down manage and moderate.

these sites are not the expression of one single corporate entity. they are open to anyone and everyone with a confirmable story, or a self-ingrained 'opinion' - it is upon their posting of what they say that has to pass the mill of public opinion and yes, approval - just like wikipedia, the encyclopedia britainica and your family and friends of your betrothed. if it is unfounded, it is discredited. if it is solid information, it becomes confirmed. if you contribute a bright, insightful 'opinion' about the facts of the day and/or the world, it is commented and improved upon. if you're just blowing smoke out your ass, it gets called as such. only fact-based reality is acceptable. fox, o'reilly, limbaugh-types need not apply.

p.s. good politics is boring, bad politics is enticing/exciting. do not be fooled by your own 'titilation' factor. good citizenship takes reading and homework to learn. that's also why most americans are currently not well-educated voters; because corporate interests manage to keep citizens pushed against their economic 'bottom line', leaving them with little decompression time during the day to spend the time finding and absorbing the information they need to be well informed.

education does not come on a bumper sticker.

How's the Koolaid? You just proved my point. Read my post again carefully.

kirk looks like the guy on mad magazine covers

i already read your post (carefully). and not only disagree, but find your argument cognitively underpowered.

in fact, you are shitting upon a large and powerful crowd that would ally all of our cause (that is, presuming you are against cng. kirk's bill as an 'intrusive waste of time.')

What argument? It was a statement. If you don't understand the difference, there's no point in, uh, arguing further. Have a nice day.

And work on that caps key will ya?

He isn't blind, he just doesn't want to see.

AHHHH-HAHAHAHA! AH-HAHAHA! HAHA! HA... HA... ha... heh.

see? my capslock works -juuust- fine. so does my 'add to ignore list' functions, which will soon follow.

also, your statement -was- an argument. you proclaimed 'u was also x quality like y and z .' your 'statement' was in error, hence it was a lie, and hence an 'argument' against reality, like 2+2=5. and so, you have been properly corrected.



then why do i see perfectly clear 'loud, arrogant redneck' right underneath your name?

bye bye.

and i remind and encourage others to note, you can just click on the person's name in forum and then 'add to ignore list' in their profile. don't like what someone says, ignore them and never have to see what they say again.

it's the new way. fact is, if someone is wrong more than 50% of the time, why ever, ever bother wasting time listening to what they say? the world's full of smarter people than that whose opinions already diverge.

just like what should happen to congressman kirk. i sure as hell do not want to pay for his salary. or his goverment-paid (omfg, SOCIALIZED!) healthcare.

Well, it MIGHT arguably "teach" the man who engages in a rape simulation with a consenting (supposedly) female partner that, gosh, yeah! Women DO fantasize about rape! They are right INTO sexual violence! After all, she clicked on "Accept," right? Right?

Of course, it may well be that our "rapist" is a thoughtful and highly-educated man who is very conscious of the differences between RPing a safe fantasy, and the fear with which women live of REAL rape. And then again . . .

CNN had a wake up call during the second gulf war when Bush gave an exclusive interview to Fox instead of to them.

Their reporting seemed to magically get less biased after that, lol. It is still a long way from the best in the world.. I would consider the BBC the best.

Until she says 'no' to something and he is powerless to do anything about that

this video is from last year..and this kirk is one of the reasons there is a Zindra now..
now he has a new video out saying the same exact things..

he could inform himself a bit more..i am willing to bet he has never even seen the inside of second life..

Sadly, saying "No" to a rapist in RL seldom works.

My point, of course, is that rape simulations can reinforce RL attitudes about women and sexual violence. "She wanted it!" is one of the oldest refrains of the cornered RL rapist.

well between kirk going after adult content and feminists going after adult content and adult content going after child avatars.. and all these people not wanting adult content..it may not be a problem much longer..

every body has to be the hero i guess..when does this crap every end??

DUH....
look at the date of the video..
breaking news my a**
May 07 2008

*snore*

I won't pretend to speak for every feminist, Ceka. There is, as you probably know, even a strong pro-porn element in feminism today.

But just to clarify, I ain't going after adult content. I have problems with VIOLENT sexuality. And personally, I'd prefer to see nonviolent depictions of sex still permitted in "Mature" areas.

it just seems lately that everything sexual that is being moved to zindra is under attack..
or certain types of avatars are under attack..

right now more than ever these types of worlds are under the microscopes of politicians.people have problems with a lot of things..people are offended by all kinds of things..everyone has their theory of this being bad that being bad..
if everyone got their way and all things that offended everyone was taken out..we wouldn't have a prims or resident on the grid..

if something bothers you don't go to those places..sl is turning into a campus with everyone having an agenda to break it down to their safe liking..

here is kirks new video ..lets see just how much has changed even though SL has made the changes he was scolding them for in the first place.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Kzwp9nWsFs

Holy Necropost, Batman!

(This thread started over a year ago. Old, old news!)

I've been very wrapped into the Zindra / Adult Content thing for awhile. From all that I've read plus a few personal emails from several Lindens, the Lab has been making these plans well before Kirk was even a teeny tiny blip on the radar screen (if he's even that now). The fact that that we also have a Democrat Congress with a fairly healthy majority and a Democrat President should likewise offer clues that Zindra has nothing to do with Rep. Kirk.

Just when I think I'm out, they keep pulling me back in!

there has been talk about this change for over 2 years now..before there was talk about zindra..
some didn't think there would even be sexual adult content today..kirk isn't the one that is doing the ground work..he is only the voice for it..and i said one of the reasons..not the main reason..