![Spam Spam](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/spam_64.png)
![Communications Communications](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/communications_64.png)
![Government Government](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/government_64.png)
![Politics Politics](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/politics_64.png)
Lawmakers Try to Protect Kids From Spam 332
Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "Some states have moved to shield children from email peddling porn, alcohol and other adults-only products, the Wall Street Journal reports. Critics say the laws, which establish a registry of kids' email addresses, are unfair to marketers and could create security risks. The debate echoes earlier discussion about a proposed do-not-spam national registry that the Can-Spam Law urged, but which the FTC nixed. This time, though, the registries are moving forward on a state-by-state basis, and facing court challenges from the adult entertainment industry." From the article: "Few email addresses have been placed on the state registries so far. Earlier this week, Utah's registry had 1,992 addresses, and 62 schools had registered their domain names to block emails to student accounts. About 160 companies had submitted their email lists for screening. In Michigan, 3,658 email addresses have been registered, along with 41 school domains. About 170 marketers had applied for screening."
Just what we need. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Just what we need. (Score:2, Insightful)
dont be a fanatic and think all laws are bad
Re:Just what we need. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just what we need. (Score:2, Funny)
Because parental supervision supports the terrorists, and parental supervision hates America. Now get your checkbook out, citizen! It's for the children!
Re:Just what we need. (Score:3, Insightful)
This is an ADULT world...it should be for our pleasure. I don't want children to be endangered by criminals who would kidnap or physically harm them, but, I also don't think we need to be so careful that little Johnny can't possibly see something in the world that some think will harm him. If a parent chooses to have a kid, then it is their responsibility to screen what little Johnny sees or experie
Re:Just what we need. (Score:3, Insightful)
Now. If we could just catch more than one spammer/year (not counting the 68 year old grandmother caught for sending out e-mail advertising her cross-stitch mittens) we might be able to make use of them.
Re:Just what we need. (Score:5, Informative)
Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:4, Insightful)
I wonder how many sex offenders work for government.
Actually, I find this really overreaching legislation unacceptable for a free society. When you become a parent, you must accept the priviledge of parenting -- don't push it off on me.
When you tax me, regulate me and force me to monitor what your children are doing, you are putting the brunt of parenting on me. I don't want it. I'm responsible and have no had kids before I was ready. Don't ask me to help you, I don't want to.
I want to run my business utilizing every right I was born with -- including speech. If you don't want my e-mails, you can run a white list and bounce everything not in it. Problem solved, by the free market.
I want to run my life without paying for the legal system required to enforce these tyrannical laws. I have no desire to put another lawyer in the district attorney's office. I have no desire to put another cop in a nice office in order to do a parent's job. I have no desire to put another judge on the bench to take away the freedoms of the citizens put in from of them.
Here's a guide to life:
1. Don't have kids until you can support them yourself (including paying for school, food, clothing and shelter).
2. Join a church or community group focused on family. Help your neighbors with kids and they'll help you.
3. Understand that raising a child means having one parent at home. If you have a child, stop spending money on toys and vacations and new cars and new clothes. Focus your money on your child's present and future.
4. Understand that raising a child means constant care. Don't let your child go anywhere without knowing where and with whom. If one parent is home, this is much easier.
If you can't understand these simple procedures (learned over millenia), don't have kids. I don't want to pay for them, I don't want to raise them, and I don't want to provide free daycare for them. It isn't my kid.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:5, Insightful)
Do it on your own dime...my bandwidth and server space cost me money. Funny how you're all for the "free market" until one of its finer points inconveniences you.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Informative)
Good, it costs YOU money. YOUR bandwidth and YOUR server don't cost ME money.
Make a law, and it does.
Sorry, but the free market requires that you maintain the items you own. Running a server requires paying for securing that server from attacks -- including e-mail spam attacks. Laws won't stop them. Again, the free market works.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
I own a house. I am required to maintain my house - including security. Yet there are still laws against people breaking into my house.
Feel free to send all the marketing materials you want to anybody who wants to receive them. If not enough people want to receive your emails then offer incentives to do so. Free market at work
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
Viruses = breaking into your house (I think we should be able to sue virus spreaders for trespass)
SPAM = USPS advertising that clutters up your mailbox.
I don't look at the advertising that comes to my mailbox, I throw it out.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Insightful)
When unsolicited material is sent to me through the USPS I know that the sending party paid the cost to have it delivered to my mailbox.
In contrast, when I receive an unsolicited piece of email I know that *I*, the receiving party, paid the cost to have it delivered to my mailbox.
I pay nothing to have unsolicited material delivered to my physical mailbox, I pay plenty, over time, to have unsolicited material delivered to my virtual mailbox.
How do I pay you ask?
Let me count
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:3, Interesting)
Your Spam = Telemarketers calling collect without the option to refuse to accept.
This law covers requested email, not just spam (Score:4, Interesting)
It's not just about spam - it's about all kinds of speech, and about the technical competence of the lawmakers, who don't understand the implications of the laws they're writing.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Insightful)
Exactly how most spammers think.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't get me wrong, I'm not all about making 3000 laws that do nothing to solve the problem. No amount of laws will fix
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:3, Insightful)
We already have laws that say that if you use other people's property without permission (or against an express prohibition), it costs you money (or, particularly in the latter case, jail time). These laws merely need to be clarified so that they unambiguously apply to the property-rights violation known as "spamming".
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:3, Insightful)
Are you really this obtuse, or are you just playing the part up?
Yes, I have to pay for my server and my connectivity. My doing so is NOT an invitation for you to use it for yo
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:5, Insightful)
But PLEASE don't turn the Internet into some over-regulated ultra-controlled medium, like telephone, radio, and everything else. You may think you are oh so cleverly stopping the Spammers by having the Internet micromanaged by the same people who brought you the Patriot Act... but I garantee that it will bite you in the ass and in the long run will cost you orders of magnitude more that whatever your spam bandwidth costs (and probably won't have any effect on Spam whatsoever)!
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
When it comes to email concerning alcohol, pornograpy, prescription drugs, and other items of an adult nature then the answer is "YES".
Ideally I would like one big law that prohibits all spamming of everyone, but that isn't going to happen, so I'll happily settle for small laws that do no harm and help protect children.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Insightful)
Except, of course, that some of the worst sex offenders can be found in the clergy. And if you think that it's something only Catholic priests do, I have a bridge made out of solid gold to sell you for an unbeatable price!
And, of course, nothing says that nice, conservative, Mr Simpson around the corner, you know, the one who has six kids, is not a child rapist. He may even be one who is going to sell p
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:4, Insightful)
I've been working on putting some of my time into mentoring kids. Guess what? I never EVER am alone with them. It isn't because I can't be trusted, it is so they don't lie.
I've seen VERY successful home schooling programs in my community. One program is about 50 parent-couples who share the responsibility. They do a science day where 3 parents are the teachers (together) for the entire group, a math day, a writing day, etc. They share the burden, but never are alone with the kids.
I would never let my kid be alone with an adult -- ever. In a church I attend the pastor's kid was abused by a grandparent! These things happen, you have to be smart and be secure in advance. Why should I trust anyone, even a "good Christian."
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
I'd like to send you some money or buy you a slashdot subscription for making that decision. Thank you
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:4, Insightful)
In America especially the media have developed this into a situation where no-one cares if a child's childhood is taken away from them through over-protective parenting and their life prospects ruint by rubbish teachers and over-protective teaching methods so long as the risk of molestation is supposably reduced.
Its all beside the point anyway, because as you point out statistically its hundreds of times more likely for the offender to be a close friend/relative.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Insightful)
You simply don't find that kind of atmosphere prevailing in your community's swinger's c
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
The only problem with your theory (well, other than having a unrealistic paranoid nightmare view of the world), is that the $25,000 a year cop you are now puting your faith in to protect your children is in no way more trustworthy than your clergy, or neighbor, or who
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Insightful)
This statement can be true of any group.
* Some of the worst sex offenders are parents.
* Some of the worst sex offenders are school teachers.
* Some of the worst sex offenders are pastry chefs.
* Some of the worst sex offenders are kitten vivisection practitioners.
and so on...
You don't see/hear/read about many parents that are sex offenders; similarly unless there are previous convictions, you don't hear about the next-door
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
You can't trust parents to be alone with their kids...
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
I'm going to mention two things before I get flamed. First, I understand that legislators really don't do much to help the situation, and only impose more silly, ineffective laws. Second, I understand that people have dra
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
WHITE LIST. How hard is it? I help parents at my church set up e-mail accounts for the kids, and there are numerous services that let you set a white list and then lock it out completely. If you want to go further, you can set up white lists for browsing, or join an ISP that white lists content for your kids.
Yea, but accidents do happen as
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
OPT IN LIST. How hard is it?
If you believe that spam is protected by free speech then you believe in pushing your views on people.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:3, Insightful)
A white list is VOLUNTARY. An opt-in list law is COERCION.
If you believe that spam is protected by free speech then you believe in pushing your views on people.
What country were you born in?
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting
the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech"
NO LAW means NO LAW.
Some Points (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Don't have kids until you can support them yourself (including paying for school, food, clothing and shelter).
The average cost of raising a child is $250,000.
2. Join a church or community group focused on family. Help your neighbors with kids and they'll help you.
The church essentially does what you advocate against the government doing. namely, raising peoples children for them.
3. Understand that raising a child means having one parent at home. If you have a child, stop spending money on toys and vacations and new cars and new clothes. Focus your money on your child's present and future.
Raising children has always entailed both parents working. The single working parent was a concept largely confined to 1950's america. Across the globe and throughout time, both parents have usually needed to work to support a family.
4. Understand that raising a child means constant care. Don't let your child go anywhere without knowing where and with whom. If one parent is home, this is much easier.
See previous point. Also along these lines, in the past, children often worked from quite a young age, usually alongside their parents. The modern school system is in essence an alternative to this, enabling parents to work, without simultaniously supervising their children.
Re:Some Points (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Some Points (Score:3, Insightful)
The church essentially does what you advocate against the government doing. namely, raising peoples children for them.
Functionally the same, but symmantically different. For one, you are going to meet and know those people whom your children are going to be exposed to. You are going to pay out of your own pocket for your own kid, if expense is involved. You are not leaving your kid in foster homes/gov't daycare, where you have no clue of the environment your child is in. You are not leaving the finan
Re:Some Points (Score:2)
Bear in mind that a second job is not always a choice of luxury. Maybe people simply cannot afford not to work. This has been the case for most of history as well.
Often, the second job is not so much a question of want, as it is one of need.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
This crock is the single most abused concept of the freedom of speech: your freedom of speech does NOT guarantee you an audience, and all unsolicited email marketing is an intrusion on my right to be free from such things.
There is NOTHING that guarantees you the right that your marketing messages will arrive in somebody's inbox. NOTHING. The Supreme Court even ruled on this once upon a time: see Rowan v Post Office.
If
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2, Insightful)
It should not be my responsibility to keep unwanted solicitations away.
You are stealing my time by sending me this crap, and even with your solution my time and effort to keep it away. But I'll meet you halfway, if I can come to your business and steal your supplies and goods as long as you can steal my time and effort, I could accept that.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
You cannot "watch" a pre-teen/teen 24 hours a day. This will lead to an unhealthy relationship and resentment. Even with filters, etc. this child will see some bad stuff by accident. Yes, it is the parent's responsibility to educate and explain what is seen, but as a parent, I would prefer to have those chats with my children when we collectively are ready, not when some spa
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:5, Insightful)
To your entire premise!
You and everyone else would be highly offended and possibly out for blood if it were legal to approach children on the sidewalk in front of their house, show one's genitals and then say "Buy viagra, see what it does for me!"
The approach by spamming porn marketers is absolutely no different. Slightly, and I'm not sure if that portrays the right meaning, less obnoxious, but the same approach.
It is in EVERYBODY's interest to have a certain level of sanctity in our society for our children. And that means everybody has to chip in to some degree and be willing to live under a reasonable ruleset that keeps perverse material away from everybody's children.
To say that it is the parent's responsibility is a cop-out and totally un-acceptable. Otherwise, you might as well digress to my example at the beginning of this rant where children would not be able to play in their own front yard with any certainty that they would not be molested by the first pervert that happened to come along.
Get real, grow up!
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
No it doesn't. Raising a child means providing for the needs and growth of the child, be they physical, emotional, or mental.
This can be done without having one parent stay at home.
Your blanket assumption that one parent has to stay at home for this to happen is old-fashioned BS. Extended families, etc, are often better means of child care than having one parent stay at home when there is not enough money.
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
This law however is useless. The real spammers are starting to be legalized this way by telling that they can not spam kids. SO keep this law, and you do not do anything wrong??? That is nice. I see some "people" starting "marketing" companies now with that in the back of their minds, and send out all the Viagra mail to anybody as long as they did not p
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
For starters, how is a child meant to learn how to live a full independant life if (especially when they reach their teens) they have to first check off wi
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
I'm no right winger, I'm just offering my point of view. I would never force my point of view on you through law, but that is what you want to do to me -- force your point of view by making a law. Left wing, right wing, they're both part of the same side of the coin actually: the authoritarian side. I'm an anarchocapitalist [blogspot.com], I'm on the other side of that coin.
For starters, how is a child meant to learn how to li
Sex Offenders in government (Score:2)
Is the process perfect? No of course not, but it is being done and does help.
Btw, in this day and age our #3 is not all that practical. it may have worked for generations past and is a nice idea, but today it just doesnt work for the average middle class citizen.
Typos (Score:2)
2006 resolution - start proofreading.. and slow down...
Re:Read: Lawmakers try to replace parents entirely (Score:2)
No, if I don't want your e-mails, I will run a basic spam filter. If you use ANY filter-evasion technique whatsoever, then (in a just society) you get to spend the next 1-5 as the Bride of Bubba, just as if you'd attempted to similarly violate my property rights (e.g. by picking my front door lock).
How do I get on the list? (Score:5, Interesting)
Is this an abuse of the service? Probably. But it would bring me great joy to watch some spammer take a $1K-$5K hit for each e-mail sent to me promising the enlargement of my genitals and/or mammaries. From the article: Now that's satisfying!
If you're wondering what adult products qualify for you to file a complaint: Under the law, marketers are prohibited from sending messages containing or linking to any products or services that are illegal under Michigan law for children to purchase, obtain, view or participate in. These include, but are not necessarily limited to: Alcohol, Tobacco, Pornography or Obscene Material, Gambling, Illegal Drugs, & Firearms
On the converse, I'm guessing that if I did get on the list my Spongebob spam would probably increase.
Re:How do I get on the list? (Score:2)
Seriously, it is all you need. There are at least 20 services out there that will help you filter spam without trying to use some heuristics or algorithms but actual processes that work.
Don't ask the law to try to filter it, you'll be very sad by how the law gets converted into pro-spammer.
Re:How do I get on the list? (Score:3, Funny)
Well, you bring up a good point.
The problem is that my 12-year old airhead cousin isn't going to know how to do this. And she's not going to stop using her angela@britneyspears.com e-mail address.
Why don't you list these 20 services and link them? Why don't you also reveal how much they cost and then tell someone under 18 that they have to pa
Re:How do I get on the list? (Score:2)
Re:How do I get on the list? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:How do I get on the list? (Score:3, Insightful)
With limited exceptions of scatterbombing, they gotta get your address from somewhere... Ahem.
Re:How do I get on the list? (Score:2)
I went for years with zero spam at my work email address, because I never let it get out into the wild. One day, a few years ago, I screwed up and posted to Bugtraq with that address, and it ended up on all of the websites where Bugtraq gets archived. Other than that one leak, and maybe a leak or two to another mailing list, I don't believe my email address has ever gotten into the wild. I've certainly never used that address to do anything porn-related.
Today, I get about 10
Re:How do I get on the list? (Score:2)
I am confused about the firearms. I hunted with my dad and grandfather looooong before I was 18. I hunted from about 12 on. Many kids hunt. At a young age I would have been very interested in a firearms email.
Won't someone think of the spammers!? (Score:2, Funny)
WHO I say! Who will think of the spammers?!
They can heat their trailers with PCs (Score:3)
MEh (Score:2)
Sounds silly and ineffective. Bet some legislator got good press from it though.
The problem with this (Score:5, Insightful)
The lists work differently - you don't get a copy (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Think of the childen!!! (Score:2)
I like. That could work politically. I also wonder how easy it would be to get myself put on the children list. :-)
Great idea! (Score:2)
An email registry of kid's email addresses? You mean there will be one-stop shopping for addresses of the people MOST LIKELY to be interested in my porn-site?
After all, as a foreign porn spammer, I'm VERY concerned about abiding by US law.
The people are idiots! The only thing saving the kids is that they often don't have easy access to daddy's credit card so there is less incentive to market to them.
The EFF is one of the parties opposing the law (Score:4, Insightful)
So think twice before "death to all marketers".
While protecting children from spam is a noble goal, Utahs method of forcing companies to have a third party check their address databases against blacklists (and having to pay a lot for that) will only catch a small part of the spam, while resulting in a giant overhead.
What worries me most is the definition of "inappropriate sales pitches", which can be heavily fined. What is inappropriate? I run a website for free language training, aimed at adults and kids. What happens if a kid requests the newsletter, but the kids school or parents have put its email address on the blacklist? If some right wing christian decides that teaching children the french names of bodyparts is indecent, will I be fined for making an "inappropriate sales pitches"? Smells like CDA [wikipedia.org].
Chriss
--
memomo.net [memomo.net] - brush up your German, French, Spanish or Italian - online and free
Re:The EFF is one of the parties opposing the law (Score:2)
This is precisely why the penalties should apply to spam generally (as a violation of the property rights of the recipient), not to specific types thereof.
List methodology? (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh wait, that would make sense.
Got it all backwards they have (Score:5, Insightful)
How about just stopping the spam with huge fines for the offenders and/or putting them out of business permanently?
I would like to know one person here who thinks that spam emails are a legitimate way to do business.
It is like the electronic equivalent of harassment and email vandalism.
Re:Got it all backwards they have (Score:2)
You were rational.
What you said makes sense, and is probably the
right way to do things.
See? Now you stop that, OK?
Won't somebody think of the CHILDREN?!!! (Score:2)
Come on, speak up. Do we really need to trample everybody's rights to save children from porn spam? Has any child actually been harmed by spam? If so, I'd like to know about it, 'cause it sounds like some virulent spam!
And do we really need a database of childrens' email addresses? That sounds like a pot of gold for all the pedo
Registry of kids email addresses! Great Idea! (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure, the list is only supposed to be available to "authorized third party auditors" or translation: a bunch of minimum wage data entry people. Which means that it will be available to just about anyone willing to pay a few bucks! And don't expect this info not to be given to military recruiters, or anyone the government WANTS to market to your children.
And marketers are not the worst type of people who could have this information!
Re:Registry of kids email addresses! Great Idea! (Score:2)
Re:Registry of kids email addresses! Great Idea! (Score:2)
That's too much work. Just swing by the office with a couple of twenties, and you'll probably go home with the list that day.
I'm Liking an "Internet License" (Score:5, Funny)
Note to moderators: I am kidding. Mostly.
Re:I'm Liking an "Internet License" (Score:2)
If I had mod points...
Re:I'm Liking an "Internet License" (Score:2)
This is unexpected (Score:2)
You get what you pay for. (Score:2, Insightful)
It isn't the governments job to refine the processes and products of the private industry, which is essentially what they are doing. (more and more every day)
They have essentially said "This email thing would be alot better tool/product if we modified it like *this*". But wait! Email was never their technology in the first place! Why would we need them
Re:You get what you pay for. (Score:2)
- Protection money ( to Police/Fire/Ambulance or people who work like them)
- Virus/Adware/Rootkit scanners
- Spam removal companies
etc. Giving money to people to protect you from "other really bad people" only encourages the recipient to ensure the problem continues to exist and is increasingly dangerous enough to warrant periodic increases in price.
Ah (Score:3, Interesting)
The EFF is wrong once again... (Score:2, Insightful)
When people ask me why I refuse to join the EFF, I just point at their spam policies.
Slashdot idiots (Score:2, Insightful)
As for keeping it secure. Gee, what would pedo do with a list of email adresses when during the same breakin or electronic theft he can get the complete details of every kid? The state already keeps full listing of every kid in the state, ad
Re:Slashdot idiots (Score:2)
Umm.. contact them? Even if you have all the background info, you still need a contact point like an IM name, e-mail addy, cell phone or similar. They're not going to send a letter with the postal service. Perhaps the
Re:Slashdot idiots (Score:5, Insightful)
Not that I think it's a problem, but it's absolutely trivial to get a list of kids' addresses in this scenario. I send this list to the sanitation group:
lolita@aol.com
swinger@yahoo.com
bgates123@msn.com
sjobs@apple.com
[...]
They clean it and send me the "allowable email list" back:
swinger@yahoo.com
bgates123@msn.com
sjobs@apple.com
[...]
Oops.
Re:Slashdot idiots (Score:3, Insightful)
I send a massive list of emails to this government office, and they tell me which of those emails to remove from the list... I take that list of names they tell me to remove, and now I have a confrimed list of the children's emails (or at least a huge chunk of the list thereof).
If I was a marketing company, I can send in my half billion name list of email leads, and find out which are
encryption (Score:2)
Why doesn't everyone just use mail clients that only accept incoming mail encrypted with the user's public key? No authentic mail would get labeled as spam, and real spamming would become too resource intensive. It would not be too difficult to make the whole encryption process total
There is no such thing as "unfair to marketters!" (Score:3, Insightful)
All Part of a Greater Problem (Score:2, Interesting)
No one has parenting skills anymore.
A kid plays violent games and then brings a gun to school to even some scores, and they blame the video games. They don'tblame the parents how did not monitor the child's habits, see the warning signs, take preventative measures. Parents howl they need a rating system, then blatantly ignore it, letting their kids do pretty much whatever they want.
My wife see it time and again -- children who are running their homes. Their parents are afraid to punish them for fear of
Re:All Part of a Greater Problem (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree with most of your post, but then I read the following:
Kids walk around dressed in mismatched, mis-sized clothes. Where di they get them? Most of them don't have jobs, so it must be dear-old-mom-and-dad who are letting them dress like hoodlums, tramps, and reprobates.
What does this have to do with anything? You think the style of kids clothing is a problem? They aren't dressing like "hoodlums, tramps, and reprobates" because those people can't afford new clothing in the latest style or fad. Even
The Name of the Bill... (Score:2, Insightful)
Subject (Score:2)
That is unfair. I propose that instead of these monetary obligations to sanitize their email lists, marketers be allowed to police themselves. Then, if caught sending adult-oriented spam
Screw the kids.. (Score:2)
No 'do not email list' or other nonsence. Until they pay me for my time and resources, spam should be 100% illegal.
Thats a good idea except... (Score:2, Insightful)
Makes sense to me (Score:2)
Adding school domain names to a global blocklist doesn't sound like a bad legislation to me. It's easier to check than a DNE (Do-not-email) registry and not s
What happened to reality? (Score:2, Insightful)
I know 'kids' in their 20s who still feel the need to hide their lifestyles from their parents. Sheltering children sets up for a lifetime of dishonesty between parents and children.
Re:Wrong approach (Score:2)
Because the lawmakers want to show they are doing something about it. All they can do is write a new law, so that's what they want to do.