Get off your ass and do something about it. Do not subject people to this in a PUBLIC building.
Next you will be wanting the act of sex in public to be protected free speech. At that point we will have become Rome.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
San Francisco Library Installs Porn Privacy Screens
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
Get off your ass and do something about it. Do not subject people to this in a PUBLIC building.
Next you will be wanting the act of sex in public to be protected free speech. At that point we will have become Rome.
at the college I attended the library was also a branch of the public library system and you'd often find homeless people in there watching explicit videos and pictures. They did not care whether or not there was children around them so I think that the privacy screens are a good thing.
Actually I think it'd be the first of my worries.
"What?? I'm fired!?! What the hell am I going to do for porn!!"
Sounds reasonable to me.
terrybogard21
Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2008
- Messages
- 645
^ I like this man's thinking. "Hey Baby, want me to show you a few lessons at the library?"
no wonder kids are so dumb these days.
TeeJayHoward
Limpness Supreme
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 12,271
What you call porn and what I call porn are not the same thing. Rather than subject everyone to the moral viewpoints of a single person, filters were installed so that that one person can continue on with their life blissfully unaware of the "porn" being viewed nearby - which was actually just a criminology major performing academic research. Heaven help you if you ever take a human sexuality class!
The problem with restricting what people can do is that it costs money to enforce those restrictions. Thus, the library goes from keeping a single network tech on-call for outages and maintenance to implementing a block on porn sites (or violent sites, or whatever the local government has decided is inappropriate this week, and paying those government employees to sit on a committee of morality). In addition, the library would have to keep several part-time or one full-time technician employed so that they'll have at least one on-site for making real time exceptions to the firewall.
Or we could just accept that some people are going to look at porn, and, as long as they're not otherwise being a public nuisance, leave them alone.
Stone Cold
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 1,146
Changing the DNS to Norton doesn't take much effort at all, and cutting out the public pervs would reduce usage, saving money. And, I don't agree with you that blocking porn is a slippery slope to blocking anything else. For one, the courts would call blocking nearly anything else censorship.
If they weren't a public nuisance, this wouldn't be an issue.
Now everyone has to be annoyed by monitors set under tables so that they can accommodate privacy screens.
cthulhuiscool
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2006
- Messages
- 3,002
go figure, when ever someone does something looking out for the well being of pervs and random weirdos its gotta be the bay area.
mynamehere
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2007
- Messages
- 1,763
I don't know about you, but this seems oh so wrong to me.
DeathPrincess
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 18,205
JayteeBates
[H]ard|Poof
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2007
- Messages
- 5,104
I have personally seen two people unemployed for 24+months...because they will not take a manual laborious job that is beneath them. Still get the monthly check. I have to wonder if that is the main reason for a lot of these folks being unemployed so long.
Is that what you would call.. hard porn?
For 15-20 seconds. Then it's soft porn.
Or a Sear's catalog.
I agree they are a good thing.
celeron300
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2009
- Messages
- 514
Just have a coindrop next to each computer. Library fund shortfall solved!
awsiemieniec
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2004
- Messages
- 810
Just have a coindrop next to each computer. Library fund shortfall solved!
Does the chair being to vibrate, too, after dropping that quarter in the slot?
Monkey34
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2003
- Messages
- 5,140
First, the issue isn't about poor people having access to the internet. Besides, "poor people" can get subsidized internet for next to nothing anyway.
Really. There's no "right to porn at the library", otherwise they'd all have porn sections right after the reference racks.
Uhh......how about alone in the bushes, or a public toilet?
Freaks. If I saw that, I'd kick him in the sack so hard, he'd be tasting his own balls.
People who have a problem with this would be well-served to look up the relevant SCOTUS cases. I doubt you'd prefer to have your free speech rights eroded just so that someone else can't look at tits in the library on a monitor you can't even see. The library is a bastion for free speech, even the kinds you don't like. It does create some potential issues with exposing underage and sensitive members to inappropriate content, but that's why you use recessed monitors and privacy screens. The privacy screen is just as valuable for checking your bank account at the library and buying products online as it is for viewing potentially objectionable materials. Privacy is something everyone can enjoy and benefit from, not just those with "something to hide."
awsiemieniec
Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2004
- Messages
- 810
You make a good point. I often check my bank account via my phone or my desk computer and I have "privacy" in the back of my mind while doing so, too. I do, however, know what is appropriate and what is not appropriate for viewing in a public area. I would like to see these shrouded PCs in an area that is away from the children's area. True that you'd really have to look hard over a user's shoulder to see what is on screen, but kids have no shame and will walk up behind a stranger so they can see whatever is on screen (if they are just curious about whatever). Why should it be (morally) ok to view porn at a library but not in your office job?
I am completely against the porn shrouds, plain and simple. If one wants to view porn, fine, do it in your home. I also don't like the idea that I'm paying for someone to get an aroused.
The argument about price to stop the porn viewing is lame, too. Set the DNS to a family-safe DNS site like OpenDNS offers, BAM! 3 minutes later you're covered (minimal cost). Firewall costs? Minimal at most. pfSense with DansGuardian and Squid. I know you need a commercial license but still it's very cheap. The shroud needs a complete new desk with the privacy glass, shroud and monitor mount. This isn't anything a remote tech couldn't loosely monitor and maintain. One tech could easily handle many libraries.
Argument about the college student doing research: Perform your research at your private, college library or at your parent's/friend's home if you don't have home inet or a computer.
Argument about poor people can't afford internet: That's a valid point, too, but like it's been said a million times above, if you can't afford subsidized internet then put your pants back on and go get (another?) a job. Use the library or local county unemployment office to browse job listings, work on your resume and send emails. Don't use a public computer for porn when another person who's in your same situation needs the computer for job searching or research.
Stone Cold
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2010
- Messages
- 1,146
Porn filters are pretty standard in public libraries across the country. I haven't heard any outcry that they're actually getting in the way of legitimate library computer usage.
San Francisco is just messed up.
San Francisco is just messed up.
It varies based on jurisdiction, and much of it comes down to state law. In some states, filters are actually against the law (which may be the case in California, or SF in particular, I don't know the relevant law there), where as some states, like Washington, have laws that allow filters but do not make them compulsory. In any case, there is never anything "messed up" about not installing filters as long as the library takes precautions necessary to protect the privacy of patrons (both the ones using the internet and anyone with stray eyes) and it sounds like San Fran is taking a proactive stance toward protecting the privacy of users. It's always a careful balance between protecting patrons and providing unfettered access to information, regardless of its intent or popularity. As posters here well know, no filter is perfect and legitimate information can always be snagged in its net. Additionally, filters can be used, even unintentionally, to block access to sensitive political, religious, news etc. information that everyone should have access to. Libraries walk a fine line and what's right for one community isn't necessarily an effective solution for another. I did some work while I was earning my Masters in LIS with the American Library Association and the Office for Intellectual Freedom surrounding the banning of books, and so I am opinionated on this and similar issues, but also knowledgeable.
Here's an article from the ALA about some of the concerns and issues faced by libraries when implementing filtering and privacy measures:
http://www.ala.org/offices/oif/iftoolkits/litoolkit/librariesinternetfiltering
My first reaction to this was incredulous - why would they spend $ to enable pervs looking at porn in public!! ect..
But after reading the arguments about true freedom of information, relative differences in what's morally "acceptable" in different areas, etc. I've definitely changed my mind. This is a good solution to the problem.
and public masurbaters can diaf... Maybe it's the puritan in me but I would fight someone if I saw that shit going on.
But after reading the arguments about true freedom of information, relative differences in what's morally "acceptable" in different areas, etc. I've definitely changed my mind. This is a good solution to the problem.
and public masurbaters can diaf... Maybe it's the puritan in me but I would fight someone if I saw that shit going on.
Xrave
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2004
- Messages
- 7,816
This seems like a pretty cheap way to fix the problem to me.
Also this helps people who might not be looking at porn but instead checking online information that they might find confidential (health info, banking, etc)
Not that i would every look at confidential info on a public computer....
Also this helps people who might not be looking at porn but instead checking online information that they might find confidential (health info, banking, etc)
Not that i would every look at confidential info on a public computer....
Monkey34
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2003
- Messages
- 5,140
Hmm. No [H]ard member would take a poke at this eh? Guess no one's attention was aroused enough to notice this?
So does the porn "pop-up warning" warn YOU you have a pop-up, or warn the other library patrons? Maybe a booth would better allow you some privacy to adjust that pop-up before standing.
I knew a long-time contractor at AT&T who was fired for watching porn on the job. He was about 65.
I was also in the school library last year where the printer queue broadcasts across the network who and what document/url has been printed. The print queue pops up with two urls to something like "www.dirtyhotsexassrapeyourmom.com/fudgepackhardcore.jpg" printed by SysAdmin." Thinking it might be a joke, I looked over at the SysAdmin doing the printing - dead serious.
So yes, people actually do browse for porn in the library.
Golly. I'm in Orange County, CA and have 1.5Mbps. Yes, it's true.
It always kills me seeing people whine about not being able to get 50Mbps, when they were oblivious to the time when 33.6kbps was "fast." You will never believe what was before that... Unless you are watching copious amounts of porn, you can browse around on ~1 Mbps just fine. Spending $$$ on cable is a waste.
That's right... back in my day, uphill, in the snow, both ways!