Apparently the US government is planning on starting up its V-chip program again, which will allow public/cable TV to be censored at will. What does everyone thing about this ploy? And whats next? Chips in my radio, to prevent music, or a chip in my phone to make sure i dont call anyone bad? The V-chip is just as much a privacy/1st amendment violation as the clipper chip is/was. I believe the worst part of the V-chip plan, is to force all new TV's manufactured or imported to the US, to have this new chip. Could this chip even be part of a Chinese lottery? ......fiasco
oO F145C0 Oo <fiasco@echo.sound.net> writes:
Apparently the US government is planning on starting up its V-chip program again, which will allow public/cable TV to be censored at will. What does everyone thing about this ploy?
And whats next? Chips in my radio, to prevent music, or a chip in my phone to make sure i dont call anyone bad? The V-chip is just as much a privacy/1st amendment violation as the clipper chip is/was. I believe the worst part of the V-chip plan, is to force all new TV's manufactured or imported to the US, to have this new chip. Could this chip even be part of a Chinese lottery?
As I understand it, the basic concept behind the V-Chip is to allow selective blocking of material a particular viewer might find offensive based on content information transmitted along with the program. As long as the program material itself is transmitted unaltered, and there are multiple non-governmental providers of content descriptions catering to the spectrum of human likes and dislikes, this sounds like ideal Cypherpunk technology. Concerned Parent can set the V-Chip to read from the Children's Television Workshop content service, available for a small monthly fee, and be certain that graphic violence and sex are pixelated on screen, and that bleep words that the child might practice in front of Grandma are garbled. Mr. Islamic Fanatic can filter out all blasphemy against Allah and his one and only prophet, pork commercials, and women showing more than 100 square centimeters of exposed epidermis. Uncle Ernie can program his set to beep loudly when shots of nude adolescent boys are about to appear in foreign films. Everyone has a filter which they can tune for their own viewing and listening enjoyment, and a free market system of content description services will cater to every conceivable taste. What are the dangers of this new technology? First, the government might want only one description of content, which it controls. My notion of what is offensive probably differs greatly from that of Jesse Helms, for instance. Second, once content descriptions become available, they might be used to control content at the transmission end, not the viewing end. Congress could mandate that the same information that Uncle Ernie uses to alert himself to "interesting" scenes, be used at the transmitting end to pixelate the same material. V-Chips for consumer products are our friend. V-Chips for broadcasters and publishers are not. It should be noted that the V-Chip is currently vaporware, and exists only in the minds of politicians. There probably will never be an actual "V-Chip", just a little additional software in our already heavily computerized televisions, radios, and personal computers. One desirable side effect of the V-Chip. It will probably have the effect of extinguishing hysterical reactions to nudity, sex, bleep words, and special effects violence, by allowing people to gradually increase what they are exposed to as they become tolerant of it. Sort of the opposite of aversion therapy. Perhaps in the distant future, the population will wonder what the thing was ever used for, and why anyone bothered to develop it. Just a few random thoughts... -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd@netcom.com $ via Finger. $
mpd@netcom.com (Mike Duvos) said: MD> oO F145C0 Oo <fiasco@echo.sound.net> writes:
Apparently the US government is planning on starting up its V-chip program again, which will allow public/cable TV to be censored at will. What does everyone thing about this ploy?
Yes, it is censorship. At least, it is if you aren't watching every program on every channel available to you right now, because your channel selection allows you to censor public/cable TV at will right now, without the V-Chip. What the V-Chip does is allow you to censor what is shown on your television, even in your absence. I'll concede that there are positive aspects to this for parents, but I resent the 'you must install it in all TVs' part. If enough people want it, they can get TVs with it.
And whats next? Chips in my radio, to prevent music, or a chip in my phone to make sure i dont call anyone bad? The V-chip is just as much a privacy/1st amendment violation as the clipper chip is/was. I believe the worst part of the V-chip plan, is to force all new TV's manufactured or imported to the US, to have this new chip. Could this chip even be part of a Chinese lottery?
MD> As I understand it, the basic concept behind the V-Chip is to MD> allow selective blocking of material a particular viewer might MD> find offensive based on content information transmitted along with MD> the program. As long as the program material itself is MD> transmitted unaltered, and there are multiple non-governmental MD> providers of content descriptions catering to the spectrum of MD> human likes and dislikes, this sounds like ideal Cypherpunk MD> technology. The content information is transmitted as part of the program, in the between-frame band which is normally not in the displayed area of the picture, not on a separate signal. (Now why can't they use this band for something truely useful, like an automatic time sync and VCRPlus ID, so that your VCR could pick it up, and know that VCRPlus ID 69 is on channel 13, and is broadasting with a +2:30 skew from what you think the time is?) Because of this, there will be _one_ content code, not a select-your-rater content method. The other reason for not having a select-your-rater method is, first, the sheer volume of TV broadcasting. No service could possibly rate all TV content. Second, no service could rate _live_ TV, such as the nightly news, or post-game NFL locker room films. My guess is that the producer of a program will get first shot at putting a label on a program, or not. Then the distributor will be able to keep the producers label, change it, add their own, or remove it. This will continue until the broadcaster gets to decide whether or not to transmit a V-Code, and whether to use the last distributors label or their own. But do you really think that MTV will use a V-Code? (It could be amusing if they did - 10 minutes of blank screen, then 2 minutes of commercials when someone cranks all of their settings to Full Filter.) [...] MD> It should be noted that the V-Chip is currently vaporware, and MD> exists only in the minds of politicians. There probably will MD> never be an actual "V-Chip", just a little additional software in MD> our already heavily computerized televisions, radios, and personal MD> computers. Incorrect. The 'V-Chip' exists (at least according to a demonstration on NBC News ("Home of the Exploding Chevy") the other night), there just isn't sufficient consumer demand for it to have hit the market yet. And, from appearances, it doesn't pixelate the picture, it blocks the signal entirely. They should at least have put a 'Sorry, kiddies, you have to hack your parents passcode to see this.' message up. That's the weakness here - it was only a 4 digit passcode locking the V-Chip level - does anyone really think that some kid who wants to watch HBO or MTV isn't gonna cycle through the numbers, even if it is only a few dozen at a time? Or that there isn't a reset mechanism for when Pop forgets the code and he really wants to watch 'Showgirls' on PPV? -- #include <disclaimer.h> /* Sten Drescher */ 1973 Steelers About Three Bricks Shy of a Load 1994 Steelers 1974 Steelers And the Load Filled Up 1995 Steelers? Unsolicited email advertisements will be proofread for a US$100/page fee.
Sten Drescher <stend@grendel.texas.net> writes:
Yes, it is censorship. At least, it is if you aren't watching every program on every channel available to you right now, because your channel selection allows you to censor public/cable TV at will right now, without the V-Chip. What the V-Chip does is allow you to censor what is shown on your television, even in your absence.
Right. Freedom of TV viewing belongs to those who own one, even if they are not always there to supervise the use of the set. Exactly like freedom of the press. I personally plan to instruct my TV to display only material which does not offend my neo-Pagan, Bohemian, and Hedonistic beliefs.
I'll concede that there are positive aspects to this for parents, but I resent the 'you must install it in all TVs' part. If enough people want it, they can get TVs with it.
The last great adventure in forcing manufacturers to put something in a television set was the "UHF must tune as easily as VHF" boondoggle. The number of UHF stations in most areas was 0-1. Note that when cable provided a plethora of channels in a previously untunable part of the spectrum, market forces instantly resulted in the creation of "cable-ready" sets in advance of government prodding.
The content information is transmitted as part of the program, in the between-frame band which is normally not in the displayed area of the picture, not on a separate signal.
There is currently no official standard for encoding content information for television programs. Manufacturers of various flavors of "parental control devices" have at times demonstrated their technology as the "V-Chip" on Network Nightly News programs. This includes devices which can do selective pixelation, as well as those which merely render the set inoperative during programs having a specific rating. The bandwidth required to transmit content information second by second is very small. It is not a foregone conclusion that such information will be carried exclusively via the video blanking intervals, or that it will be available from only a single source. Indeed, with the movement towards digital encoding of television, it is doubtful that blanking intervals themselves will be around much longer.
The other reason for not having a select-your-rater method is, first, the sheer volume of TV broadcasting. No service could possibly rate all TV content. Second, no service could rate _live_ TV, such as the nightly news, or post-game NFL locker room films.
No one is suggesting that all raters will rate all programming. Movies will probably be the first things raters will provide content tracks for. Next will be widely carried programs in syndicated reruns, and top rated first run shows. Eventually, use of the technology will proliferate, much as the use of closed-captioning has. Much money will be saved in not having to physically edit media, and in having the intelligence at the displaying end. One will no longer have to have a theatrical release of a movie, a television version, a version for European airlines, a version for American airlines, a version for Islamic airlines, etc ad nauseum. Porn will no longer have to be edited into Hard-X, Soft-X, and R versions before being distributed.
Incorrect. The 'V-Chip' exists (at least according to a demonstration on NBC News ("Home of the Exploding Chevy") the other night), there just isn't sufficient consumer demand for it to have hit the market yet. And, from appearances, it doesn't pixelate the picture, it blocks the signal entirely.
Please see prior comments about Nightly News demonstrations of alleged V-Chip technology. Once a standard for encoding content information is established, it is unlikely that there will be some universal specific "V-Chip" that will be used by all manufacturers. Instead, the functionality will likely be implemented in whatever software controls the display appliance. It's not a complicated application, and hardly worth a processor of its own. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd@netcom.com $ via Finger. $
participants (3)
-
mpd＠netcom.com -
oO F145C0 Oo -
Sten Drescher