Comments on: FTC Report on Kids and Virtual Worlds http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Sun, 27 May 2012 22:43:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Mimo http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-68962 Mimo Sat, 03 Apr 2010 04:38:46 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-68962 <p>There is no doubt there are issues with virtual worlds for kids. I do find it puzzling that they spent very little time and looked and very few virtual worlds for kids. I guess you can take that either way. Either they didn't have to look too hard to find issues or...<br><br></p> <p><a href="http://www.clubpenguingang.com" rel="nofollow">Club Penguin Cheats</a></p> <p><br></p> <p><a href="http://www.mimogames.com" rel="nofollow">Kids Virtual Worlds</a></p> There is no doubt there are issues with virtual worlds for kids. I do find it puzzling that they spent very little time and looked and very few virtual worlds for kids. I guess you can take that either way. Either they didn't have to look too hard to find issues or…

Club Penguin Cheats


Kids Virtual Worlds

]]> By: Mimo http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-67781 Mimo Fri, 02 Apr 2010 23:38:46 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-67781 <p>There is no doubt there are issues with virtual worlds for kids. I do find it puzzling that they spent very little time and looked and very few virtual worlds for kids. I guess you can take that either way. Either they didn't have to look too hard to find issues or...<br><br></p> <p><a href="http://www.clubpenguingang.com" rel="nofollow">Club Penguin Cheats</a></p> <p><br></p> <p><a href="http://www.mimogames.com" rel="nofollow">Kids Virtual Worlds</a></p> There is no doubt there are issues with virtual worlds for kids. I do find it puzzling that they spent very little time and looked and very few virtual worlds for kids. I guess you can take that either way. Either they didn't have to look too hard to find issues or…

Club Penguin Cheats


Kids Virtual Worlds

]]> By: FTC goes looking for sex and violence in virtual worlds, doesn’t find much » Copper Robot http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-64000 FTC goes looking for sex and violence in virtual worlds, doesn’t find much » Copper Robot Sat, 12 Dec 2009 20:55:24 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-64000 <p>[...] FTC Report on Kids and Virtual Worlds This morning the Federal Trade Commission released its report on kids and virtual worlds.  You can read the report, entitled Virtual Worlds and Kids: Mapping the Risks, here.  (I’ve posted similar thoughts over at Terra Nova, apologies for the cross-post). [...]</p> [...] FTC Report on Kids and Virtual Worlds This morning the Federal Trade Commission released its report on kids and virtual worlds.  You can read the report, entitled Virtual Worlds and Kids: Mapping the Risks, here.  (I’ve posted similar thoughts over at Terra Nova, apologies for the cross-post). [...]

]]> By: Joshua Fairfield http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-65138 Joshua Fairfield Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:31:11 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-65138 <p>Yes, and this raises one other important point. The argument that the government can constitutionally restrict explicit content in virtual worlds seems to me to rest in very large part on the idea that the activity constitutes conduct, not speech. But this 92.5% figure puts paid to that idea. Nine-tenths of what the report deems "explicit content" is not conduct, it's not even expressive conduct (like an erotic dance at a Second Life strip club), it's written text.</p> Yes, and this raises one other important point. The argument that the government can constitutionally restrict explicit content in virtual worlds seems to me to rest in very large part on the idea that the activity constitutes conduct, not speech. But this 92.5% figure puts paid to that idea. Nine-tenths of what the report deems “explicit content” is not conduct, it's not even expressive conduct (like an erotic dance at a Second Life strip club), it's written text.

]]> By: Berin Szoka http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-65137 Berin Szoka Fri, 11 Dec 2009 03:05:46 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-65137 <p>The other interesting point here, Josh, is that if the vast preponderance of this "explicit" content is textual, it is therefore also easier for parents to filter or block according to their own preferences, because algorithmic parsing of text is a relatively simple matter, compared to the much more difficult problem of trying to filter video or images, which usually requires some sort of metadata to filter easily. So as you suggested in your <a href="http://techliberation.com/2009/10/21/virtual-parentalism-part-i/" rel="nofollow"><i>Virtual Parentalism</i></a> paper, the better alternative to sweeping government content regulation here would be to empower parents to control not just whether their kids have access to virtual worlds, but what they can do and see in-game.</p> The other interesting point here, Josh, is that if the vast preponderance of this “explicit” content is textual, it is therefore also easier for parents to filter or block according to their own preferences, because algorithmic parsing of text is a relatively simple matter, compared to the much more difficult problem of trying to filter video or images, which usually requires some sort of metadata to filter easily. So as you suggested in your Virtual Parentalism paper, the better alternative to sweeping government content regulation here would be to empower parents to control not just whether their kids have access to virtual worlds, but what they can do and see in-game.

]]> By: Adam Thierer http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-65136 Adam Thierer Fri, 11 Dec 2009 01:49:27 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-65136 <p>Good post, Josh. I think the other thing worth mentioning here is that the report says "most of the explicit content observed was text-based and found in chat rooms, message boards, and discussion forums." In fact, it constituted 92.5% of the "explicit content" the agency found in child-oriented virtual worlds. <br><br>But here's what I'm still searching for in the report and cannot find.. What do we know about that smaller percentage of "explicit content" identified in virtual worlds that was of a graphical nature (that is, non-textual)? Unless I am missing something, the report never tells us. This is important. Are we talking about fleeting virtual nudity because of a scantily-clad minotaur, or were they something really problematic, like virtual bestiality, virtual beheadings or virtual cross-burnings? I fear some people (especially congressional policymakers) will imagine the worst-case scenarios when we do not know what these "incidents" entail.</p> Good post, Josh. I think the other thing worth mentioning here is that the report says “most of the explicit content observed was text-based and found in chat rooms, message boards, and discussion forums.” In fact, it constituted 92.5% of the “explicit content” the agency found in child-oriented virtual worlds.

But here's what I'm still searching for in the report and cannot find.. What do we know about that smaller percentage of “explicit content” identified in virtual worlds that was of a graphical nature (that is, non-textual)? Unless I am missing something, the report never tells us. This is important. Are we talking about fleeting virtual nudity because of a scantily-clad minotaur, or were they something really problematic, like virtual bestiality, virtual beheadings or virtual cross-burnings? I fear some people (especially congressional policymakers) will imagine the worst-case scenarios when we do not know what these “incidents” entail.

]]> By: Joshua Fairfield http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-63968 Joshua Fairfield Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:31:11 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-63968 <p>Yes, and this raises one other important point. The argument that the government can constitutionally restrict explicit content in virtual worlds seems to me to rest in very large part on the idea that the activity constitutes conduct, not speech. But this 92.5% figure puts paid to that idea. Nine-tenths of what the report deems "explicit content" is not conduct, it's not even expressive conduct (like an erotic dance at a Second Life strip club), it's written text.</p> Yes, and this raises one other important point. The argument that the government can constitutionally restrict explicit content in virtual worlds seems to me to rest in very large part on the idea that the activity constitutes conduct, not speech. But this 92.5% figure puts paid to that idea. Nine-tenths of what the report deems “explicit content” is not conduct, it's not even expressive conduct (like an erotic dance at a Second Life strip club), it's written text.

]]> By: Berin Szoka http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-63966 Berin Szoka Thu, 10 Dec 2009 23:05:46 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-63966 <p>The other interesting point here, Josh, is that if the vast preponderance of this "explicit" content is textual, it is therefore also easier for parents to filter or block according to their own preferences, because algorithmic parsing of text is a relatively simple matter, compared to the much more difficult problem of trying to filter video or images, which usually requires some sort of metadata to filter easily. So as you suggested in your <a href="http://techliberation.com/2009/10/21/virtual-parentalism-part-i/" rel="nofollow"><i>Virtual Parentalism</i></a> paper, the better alternative to sweeping government content regulation here would be to empower parents to control not just whether their kids have access to virtual worlds, but what they can do and see in-game.</p> The other interesting point here, Josh, is that if the vast preponderance of this “explicit” content is textual, it is therefore also easier for parents to filter or block according to their own preferences, because algorithmic parsing of text is a relatively simple matter, compared to the much more difficult problem of trying to filter video or images, which usually requires some sort of metadata to filter easily. So as you suggested in your Virtual Parentalism paper, the better alternative to sweeping government content regulation here would be to empower parents to control not just whether their kids have access to virtual worlds, but what they can do and see in-game.

]]> By: Berin Szoka http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-71363 Berin Szoka Thu, 10 Dec 2009 22:05:00 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-71363 <p>The other interesting point here, Josh, is that if the vast preponderance of this "explicit" content is textual, it is therefore also easier for parents to filter or block according to their own preferences, because algorithmic parsing of text is a relatively simple matter, compared to the much more difficult problem of trying to filter video or images, which usually requires some sort of metadata to filter easily. So as you suggested in your <a href="http://techliberation.com/2009/10/21/virtual-parentalism-part-i/" rel="nofollow"><i>Virtual Parentalism</i></a> paper, the better alternative to sweeping government content regulation here would be to empower parents to control not just whether their kids have access to virtual worlds, but what they can do and see in-game.</p> The other interesting point here, Josh, is that if the vast preponderance of this “explicit” content is textual, it is therefore also easier for parents to filter or block according to their own preferences, because algorithmic parsing of text is a relatively simple matter, compared to the much more difficult problem of trying to filter video or images, which usually requires some sort of metadata to filter easily. So as you suggested in your Virtual Parentalism paper, the better alternative to sweeping government content regulation here would be to empower parents to control not just whether their kids have access to virtual worlds, but what they can do and see in-game.

]]> By: Adam Thierer http://techliberation.com/2009/12/10/ftc-report-on-kids-and-virtual-worlds/comment-page-1/#comment-63965 Adam Thierer Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:49:27 +0000 http://techliberation.com/?p=24156#comment-63965 <p>Good post, Josh. I think the other thing worth mentioning here is that the report says "most of the explicit content observed was text-based and found in chat rooms, message boards, and discussion forums." In fact, it constituted 92.5% of the "explicit content" the agency found in child-oriented virtual worlds. <br><br>But here's what I'm still searching for in the report and cannot find.. What do we know about that smaller percentage of "explicit content" identified in virtual worlds that was of a graphical nature (that is, non-textual)? Unless I am missing something, the report never tells us. This is important. Are we talking about fleeting virtual nudity because of a scantily-clad minotaur, or were they something really problematic, like virtual bestiality, virtual beheadings or virtual cross-burnings? I fear some people (especially congressional policymakers) will imagine the worst-case scenarios when we do not know what these "incidents" entail.</p> Good post, Josh. I think the other thing worth mentioning here is that the report says “most of the explicit content observed was text-based and found in chat rooms, message boards, and discussion forums.” In fact, it constituted 92.5% of the “explicit content” the agency found in child-oriented virtual worlds.

But here's what I'm still searching for in the report and cannot find.. What do we know about that smaller percentage of “explicit content” identified in virtual worlds that was of a graphical nature (that is, non-textual)? Unless I am missing something, the report never tells us. This is important. Are we talking about fleeting virtual nudity because of a scantily-clad minotaur, or were they something really problematic, like virtual bestiality, virtual beheadings or virtual cross-burnings? I fear some people (especially congressional policymakers) will imagine the worst-case scenarios when we do not know what these “incidents” entail.

]]>