A Link to the story

Note: Failure to read the complete story may result in failure to understand questions.



Questions for Debate:

Does the new ".xxx" suffix for Adult Entertainment's websites discriminate a type of business?

Is it right to charge six times more for the suffix? Does using it place a potential stint on an industry's growth development?

Does this "precaution" really protect our children? Is it not true children find ways around barriers, such as filtering technology that would filter out sites with the proposed ".xxx"?

Does the new ".xxx" suffix for Adult Entertainment's websites discriminate a type of business?

Yes, but then other sites are also discriminated by their suffix. .gov is government sites. .org is non-profit sites. This type of discrimination is not necessarily a bad thing.

Is it right to charge six times more for the suffix? Does using it place a potential stint on an industry's growth development?

Does this "precaution" really protect our children? Is it not true children find ways around barriers, such as filtering technology that would filter out sites with the proposed ".xxx"?

Here is where the implementation does not quite jive with the goals.

They are hoping for voluntary migration to the .xxx site label in order to make it easier to filter sites. That's fine, but then they charge sites a lot more money to make the move. It's counter-intuitive and counter-productive. OK, OK, it's just dumb.

Now, those that want access to such sites are going to get access. Kids can find ways around filters and such, since they often know more than their parents when it comes to these things.

The .xxx suffix is useful, to a very small extent. It would prevent (assuming it was universal among the porn site industry) the unwitting from stumbling onto a site they don't want to be on.

We shouldn't kid ourselves that this will really solve any cultural issues, however.

The .xxx suffix is entirely voluntary - in fact, they seem to be assume it will be in great demand, hence the high price tag.

Does the new ".xxx" suffix for Adult Entertainment's websites discriminate a type of business?

It would depend on whether there are going to be any restrictions on who buys the .xxx address. If pornography sites were FORCED to buy these addresses or ONLY pronography sites were allowed to use them, then it would be discrimination, however that news story suggested to me that they would simply be for sale to whoever wants to buy them, albeit they are a product aimed at the pornographer market.

Is it right to charge six times more for the suffix? Does using it place a potential stint on an industry's growth development?

It's a fair enough price, it is assuming that there will be great demand for the suffix, which may or may not be true. However, unless pornographers are forced to pay (i.e. it becomes a tax of sorts) then it doesn't really hurt potential development.

Does this "precaution" really protect our children? Is it not true children find ways around barriers, such as filtering technology that would filter out sites with the proposed ".xxx"?

Well, sadly, children are people. And people are endlessly inventive and able to overcome all obstacles. Alas it is the same for our children, who, despite our best efforts to protect them from the big bad world, will always be curious about just what it is we're trying to hide from them....

Seriously, no, it won't stop children seeing porn. Filters might stop very young children from seeing sites with the suffix, but some sites will not be using the suffix and so escape the filter - and most kids tend to get computer-savvy very very quickly...