back to article Stupid law of the week: South Carolina wants anti-porno chips in PCs that cost $20 to disable

Lawmakers in South Carolina are mulling over banning the sale of computers, tablets and phones unless they have a device that automatically blocks pornography from popping up on-screen. The Human Trafficking Prevention Act amendment, introduced by State Representative Bill Chumley (R‑Spartanburg), calls for manufacturers and …

  1. ma1010 Silver badge
    Facepalm

    More Magic Technology

    Brought to you by our brilliant politicians. Put it on the shelf next to the advanced crypto that's unbreakable by any foreign nation state -- but easily read by the cops here.

    And while you're at it, how about reviving that law making pi = 3.0? That would sure be a help for kids in school - make those math problems easier, you know.

    1. Anonymous Blowhard

      Re: More Magic Technology

      You forgot to mention "guns that only fire at bad people".

      1. Version 1.0 Silver badge

        Re: More Magic Technology

        So everyone just watches porn on their phone instead of their PC, wait - isn't that what they are doing now?

        1. Mark Cathcart

          Re: More Magic Technology

          Shame you only read the headline, not the actual article...

      2. John H Woods Silver badge

        Re: More Magic Technology

        Meanwhile the UK's own DaFT is proposing "new technology" that blocks mobile phones in cars.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: More Magic Technology

          "Meanwhile the UK's own DaFT is proposing "new technology" that blocks mobile phones in cars."

          So what if there's a crash and someone has to call the emergency number?

          1. This Side Up

            Re: More Magic Technology

            <<"Meanwhile the UK's own DaFT is proposing "new technology" that blocks mobile phones in cars."

            So what if there's a crash and someone has to call the emergency number?>>

            It's legal to call the emergency numbers so any device would have to permit it.

            Anyway they can't even block mobile phones in prisons which ought to be possible using microcells or by erecting a faraday cage around the whole caboodle. Actually it might be more productive to snoop in prisoners' calls which of course they can't be making because mobile phones aren't allowed.

          2. This Side Up

            Re: More Magic Technology

            <<"Meanwhile the UK's own DaFT is proposing "new technology" that blocks mobile phones in cars."

            So what if there's a crash and someone has to call the emergency number?>>

            It's legal to call the emergency numbers so any device would have to permit it.

            Anyway they can't even block mobile phones in prisons which ought to be possible using microcells or by erecting a faraday cage around the whole caboodle. Actually it might be more productive to snoop on prisoners' calls which of course they can't be making because mobile phones aren't allowed.

    2. Kane Silver badge
      Boffin

      Re: More Magic Technology

      "And while you're at it, how about reviving that law making pi = 3.0?"

      Ahem, I bring to you the Bergholt Stuttley Johnson "New Pie" Mail Sorting Engine.

      1. JimboSmith Silver badge

        Re: More Magic Technology

        Have an upvote for the sir Pterry reference.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: More Magic Technology

      I live in SC, and I'll say this, this is the first time that anyone, myself included, is hearing of this. There has never been any discussion of this prior and Local news has not even reported on this yet, so, is this real? I'm thinking someone has played a joke and everyone has fell for it.

      1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

        Re: Anonymous

        Oh it's real. From your legislature's .gov website:

        "A BILL TO AMEND THE CODE OF LAWS OF SOUTH CAROLINA, 1976, BY ADDING ARTICLE 5 TO CHAPTER 15, TITLE 16 SO AS TO ENACT THE "HUMAN TRAFFICKING PREVENTION ACT", TO REQUIRE A BUSINESS, MANUFACTURER, WHOLESALER, OR INDIVIDUAL THAT MANUFACTURES, DISTRIBUTES, OR SELLS A PRODUCT THAT MAKES CONTENT ACCESSIBLE ON THE INTERNET TO INSTALL AND OPERATE A DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY THAT RENDERS OBSCENITY INACCESSIBLE AND TO SET MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BLOCKING CAPABILITY"

        C.

        1. Dr Scrum Master

          Re: Anonymous

          A DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY THAT RENDERS OBSCENITY INACCESSIBLE

          The true extent of blocking access to "obscenity" has hardly been touched on...

          Though perhaps obscenity-sensitive sunglasses would be useful, but they may prove dangerous in Walmart....

          1. billse10

            Re: Anonymous

            "The true extent of blocking access to "obscenity" has hardly been touched on..."

            True, after all, there's this:

            http://www.scstatehouse.gov/billsearch.php?billnumbers=3003&session=122&summary=B

            And of course, this:

            https://www.snooperscharter.co.uk/

            Both are certainly obscene.("repulsive by reason of crass disregard of moral or ethical principles", or "so excessive as to be offensive" - Merriam Webster)

            1. Sherrie Ludwig

              Re: Anonymous

              obscene.("repulsive by reason of crass disregard of moral or ethical principles", or "so excessive as to be offensive" - Merriam Webster)

              Wow, that means I get NO political news out of Washington DC? Sign me up! If I never have to see the Orange Cheat-o's face or his porn queen third wife again, it might be worth it.

              1. bombastic bob Silver badge
                Devil

                Re: Anonymous

                obscene.("repulsive by reason of crass disregard of moral or ethical principles", or "so excessive as to be offensive" - Merriam Webster)

                in the realm of legalese and ninny-nanny anti-pr0n laws, they usually include the words "prurient content" to distinguish smut from art. And like watching paint dry for several hours to rate a rather funny effort at thumbing nose and 'dropping trou' at the sensors, these people have to actually *WATCH* the content in order to BAN it.

                Just sayin'

            2. TheVogon Silver badge

              Re: Anonymous

              ""so excessive as to be offensive"

              Isn't pretty much all US culture an obscenity by that definition?

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Anonymous

            I wonder if climate science counts as obscenity.

            I wonder who decides what is obscene? Is this compatible with freedom of speech? Why not simply make it copy all your traffic to the NSA (oh, it probably will),

            I really can't see any reasonable way of blocking generic themes of content (a worry for when my kids grow up) although a DNS block could be far easier to implement elsewhere.

            Even educational content can be considered obscene though. Our medical doctors and nurses still have to know what is, and is not supposed to be in certain places. Not sure you want them to find out for the first time when you are really in trouble.

            Maybe students/schoolchildren will be exempt ?

            Its all very sad really...

            1. Johnr

              Re: Anonymous

              To all concerned:

              As a resident of the United states I apologize.

              It should be readily apparent to any observer that the dismantling and dumbing down of the school system here in the US has exceeded beyond their wildest dreams.

              We now have a majority of the population devoid of any critical thinking skills whatsoever

              We are now a nation of morons as can be witnessed by the recent election.

              It would appear however that South Carolina has garnered more than their fair share of the aforementioned morons.

              1. Tom Paine Silver badge

                Re: Anonymous

                Can't speak for anyone but myself, but as a Brit with plenty of (sane) Murcan friends -- I feel your pain :(

                As a side note, ISTR one of them pointed out to me that one particular state (Texas? Oklahoma? Kansas?) had *specifically* named "critical thinking skills" as an outlawed, verboten topic in schools. Mindblowingly perverse and self-destructive. I sometimes wonder whether there's a secret underground of the nuttier sort of evangelist, the ones who get all excited about the second coming and the rapture and the mahdi* and all that malarkey, and they're secretly working from within the state to bring about apocalypse and trumpets and the dead rising from the graves and so on and so forth. Or... wait. Scratch "secretly". It's hidden in plain sight isn't it...

                1. Wzrd1

                  Re: Anonymous

                  "As a side note, ISTR one of them pointed out to me that one particular state (Texas? Oklahoma? Kansas?) had *specifically* named "critical thinking skills" as an outlawed, verboten topic in schools."

                  It was Texas.

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Anonymous

                  That would be Trump's pick for Department od Education, DeVos. She and her husband are for dismantling public schools for taxpayer funded religious schools. They do promote for-profit schools, but only as an means to enabling the creationist ends.

              2. Scott 53

                Re: Anonymous

                Johnr

                It's "succeeded", which I think proves your point.

            2. Dave 15

              Re: Anonymous

              Fat people.. I find fat people, especially those on the beach in swimming costumes obscene...

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Anonymous

                "Fat people.. I find fat people, especially those on the beach in swimming costumes obscene..."

                So when I thought was vacation I was actually doing pornos?

                I'm feeling a little smug....

            3. bombastic bob Silver badge
              Childcatcher

              Re: Anonymous

              "I wonder who decides what is obscene?"

              It's the usual bunch. The 'ninny-nanny' moral guardians. It's "for the children" !!!

              They'd have a cow over a good portion of the anime I like to watch. I'm sure they'd ban it and arrest me if they could, and none of it is really "porn". After all, to THESE people, men have a DISEASE because they like looking at the naked bodies of YOUNGER women [even in animation or photographs or art], and both the religious ninny-nannies _AND_ the feminista ninny-nannies are "in bed together" (ha ha ha) on THIS one. It's all about "the control", but they SAY it's for "the children", right?

          3. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Anonymous

            I wonder if said device would also block Trump..... Or anything pertaining to him. I'm still in shock he is going to be the future president of the USA. God help the world.

        2. Smooth Newt
          WTF?

          Re: Anonymous

          The preamble seems very confusing, as it suggests that it is the device serving the content that contains the blocking rather than the viewing device.

          TO REQUIRE A BUSINESS, MANUFACTURER, WHOLESALER, OR INDIVIDUAL THAT MANUFACTURES, DISTRIBUTES, OR SELLS A PRODUCT THAT MAKES CONTENT ACCESSIBLE ON THE INTERNET TO INSTALL AND OPERATE A DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY THAT RENDERS OBSCENITY INACCESSIBLE AND TO SET MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR THE BLOCKING CAPABILITY;

          If turning the block off doesn't happen fast enough then the bill offers the consumer an alternative, as it will

          AUTHORIZE A CONSUMER TO SEEK JUDICIAL RELIEF IF THE FILTERED CONTENT IS NOT UNBLOCKED WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME;

          Is that where they disappear into the lavatory for twenty minutes with a copy of the Handbook on Constitutional Law?

        3. bombastic bob Silver badge
          Childcatcher

          Re: Anonymous

          "Oh it's real"

          I had no doubt as to the validity of the article's claim. Never underestimate the ability of "feely" politicians to manipulate their constituents into voting for your re-election, and maybe create a gummint revenue stream at the same time, by the use of stupid legislation that has no practical way of actually doing any good...

          and worse, it's a "rider" on something that may actually do some good [in name, that is, not the actual final legislation].

          "for the children" indeed...

        4. fidodogbreath Silver badge

          Re: Anonymous

          THAT RENDERS OBSCENITY INACCESSIBLE

          So, no Trump news, then.

        5. x 7

          Re: Anonymous

          " A DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY THAT RENDERS OBSCENITY INACCESSIBLE"

          Well thats one way to block Donald Trumps press releases and twatter posts

        6. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: Anonymous

          DO THEY HAVE TO SHOUT????

          Or is literacy a problem in SC?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Anonymous

            DO THEY HAVE TO SHOUT????

            Masturbation makes you deaf.

            I SAID: MASTURBATION MAKES YOU DEAF!

      2. bish

        Re: More Magic Technology

        "this is the first time that anyone, myself included"

        If you didn't know about it, how were you able to determine whether anyone else did?

        'Hey, Buddy! Do you know about that thing I haven't heard about and which might not even exist? What do you mean 'which one'? Well, ok, I'll just mark you down as a 'No'.'

        1. Yesnomaybe

          Re: More Magic Technology

          Completely impractical and very poorly thought out. It is virtually guaranteed to pass.

      3. Wzrd1

        Re: More Magic Technology

        No, it's actually real.

        One of those wonderful suggestions that die in committee when it's learned that large corporations will move to a saner state if the bill gets passed into law.

        1. Charles 9 Silver badge

          Re: More Magic Technology

          "One of those wonderful suggestions that die in committee when it's learned that large corporations will move to a saner state if the bill gets passed into law."

          Oh? North Carolina HB2 (concerning gender and bathrooms) passed AND was signed into law...IN SPITE of threats (which were in turn carried out) of varied businesses up and leaving the state.

          So don't hold out your hopes of bills like this dying in committee. Some people would rather live the life of a destitute bumpkin than defy the supposed words of their deity.

          1. Mark 85 Silver badge

            Re: More Magic Technology

            This in today's news.... NC is working to repeal that law.

            1. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: More Magic Technology

              "This in today's news.... NC is working to repeal that law."

              This in last night's news. Session adjourned with nothing happening. Finger-pointing all around. Like I said, for many what they consider right is more important than anything, even if it's different from everyone else's.

    4. TheVogon Silver badge

      Re: More Magic Technology

      How would such a device differentiate between naked flesh in say an orgy, and the acres of bare flesh in an average American's holiday photos?

      1. Fungus Bob Silver badge
        WTF?

        Re: More Magic Technology

        "How would such a device differentiate between naked flesh in say an orgy, and the acres of bare flesh in an average American's holiday photos?"

        Why would you want it to?

        1. My-Handle

          Re: More Magic Technology

          So that I could watch porn but block Facebook?

    5. fidodogbreath Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: More Magic Technology

      Both the UK and Australia have proposed similar nonsense in recent memory.

      Oz wanted to build a pr0n add-on for their Chinese-style Great Firewall, and Britain wanted the nasties filtered at the ISP level.

      "The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power, pure power." -- George Orwell, 1984

    6. ricardian

      Re: More Magic Technology

      I wonder if there's a relative of Professor Dionysius Lardner in the legislature?

      http://www.computerhistory.org/babbage/dionysiuslardner/

      "He was sometimes ridiculed for his colorful predictions many of them risibly wrong: he warned that high speed rail travel with steam locomotives was impossible because passengers would asphyxiate in tunnels, and that crossing the Atlantic by steamship was impossible because of water resistance. "

  2. Chris G Silver badge

    Out of State

    Bad for businesses selling PCs in the State, good for anyone over the border.

    Is there actually a politician alive who has the faintest idea what they are asking for when they pull these marvellous ideas out of their arses?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Out of State

      Well, they voted for Trump so what do you expect.

      Perhaps their next law will be to build a wall around the state. That will keep the pron out.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Out of State

        Well, they voted for Trump so what do you expect.

        I think that the global political establishment of all colours and persuasions have missed the memo on Trump, Brexit, the Italian referendum, and indeed quite a few other things as well. The memo reads something like "Stop fucking us over, and passing shite laws like an incontinent anus, stop dipping your filthy grasping paws in the till, and just do the basic job to a minimum standard of competence".

        I can appreciate that turkeys don't vote for Christmas, so the politicians are all sticking their fingers in their ears. At a more proletarian level though, Guardian readers in particular don't seem to understand the message, despite the utter collapse of their preferred party. As a right winger myself, I don't rejoice in that, as I'm no happier with Mrs May's "progressive" attitude on social engineering, and her total failure to address the unaffordable follies of prior energy polices, or government's ridiculous and unproductive foreign aid obsession. Clearly the Tories haven't got the memo either.

        1. Bucky 2

          Re: Out of State

          The memo reads something like "Stop fucking us over, and passing shite laws like an incontinent anus, stop dipping your filthy grasping paws in the till, and just do the basic job to a minimum standard of competence

          Pundits have been saying this since the election. The problem is that it doesn't make a lick of sense.

          If this were the memo, voting for Trump would be the LAST thing anyone would do. He pretty much embodies the very behavior this analysis says the Trump voter is trying to reject. No. That's what everyone ELSE wants. It doesn't define the Trump voter at all.

          1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

            Re: Out of State

            If this were the memo, voting for Trump would be the LAST thing anyone would do. He pretty much embodies the very behavior this analysis says the Trump voter is trying to reject. No. That's what everyone ELSE wants. It doesn't define the Trump voter at all.

            Whilst, yes, Trump would be the last person to vote for in this case, you are wrong about the Trumo voters - most of who voted for Trump for these very reasons, but were too stupid to realise he was feeding the bullshit.

            The main difference between Trump voters and others is not their position regarding the political system - it's their intelligence.

            1. Smirnov

              Re: Out of State

              "Whilst, yes, Trump would be the last person to vote for in this case, you are wrong about the Trumo voters - most of who voted for Trump for these very reasons, but were too stupid to realise he was feeding the bullshit."

              Not much different to Brexit where people fed up by austerity, bed room tax and other government shenanigans decided to protest by ejecting their country from the single largest market on earth - after having voted the same lot that caused all the misery in the first place voted back in again just a year ago.

              Churchill was absolutely right when he said that the best argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with your average voter. Stupid is as stupid does.

          2. DougS Silver badge

            @Bucky 2 - Trump voters

            People who are pissed at politicians fucking them over probably should have voted for Trump. It makes perfect sense. First, he's not a politician, and secondly he was running against the most insider presidential candidate since Bush Sr.

            Now I think you're right that those voters won't get the result they were hoping for - he's nominating capitalist cronies who are probably even 'cronier' than Clinton would have, so he's not only not draining the swamp he's adding a 25th layer of muck.

            However, the way the independents who voted for him looked at it, a vote for Trump was a vote against the status quo, and gave them an outlet for their anger. It made them happy to reject Clinton, since they KNEW things wouldn't get better for them under her, and could at least HOPE things would get better for them under Trump.

            They won't, of course, because Trump just used their anger for their votes, and now he's installing by far the wealthiest cabinet in history. And because they are longing for the days when the US was the manufacturer for the world, and no one in either party can bring them back because it is simply not possible to turn back that clock. Unless WW III happens and the world's manufacturing base is destroyed while the US is untouched, as happened during WW II...hopefully that is not Trump's secret plan!

            The problem Trump and the republicans face in 2020 is that those voters will be even angrier, and that anger will turn towards Trump for failing to change anything. I'm sure he'll be full of excuses as to why, or claim he needs four more years to fully enact his plans, but it will be pretty hard to blame the democrats when the republicans control congress. Not that this will help democrats much, because that anger will quickly turn against them. If a strong third party candidate arrives in 2020 or 2024, he has a very good shot of winning it all.

            1. JetSetJim Silver badge
              Coat

              Re: @Bucky 2 - Trump voters

              >If a strong third party candidate arrives in 2020 or 2024, he has a very good shot of winning it all.

              Go Kanye!

            2. Tom Paine Silver badge

              Re: @Bucky 2 - Trump voters

              I've got to say you're really reaching to imagine Trump running again in 2020. I fully expect that by this time next year one of two things will be true: 1., Trump will be gone (various scenarios); or 2. we'll all have been converted to charcoal briquettes or whiffs of nitrogen, carbon, hudrogen and a few trace elements.

              I'm not even kidding. The pigeons will come home to roost very, very quickly if he acts in office as he has as a candidate and PE. Take China alone: triggering a major trade war will crash the Chinese AND American economies, and the ripples are likely to tank Europe as well,. That's a lot of people who are suddenly poorer than they used to be. That is a very good way to motivate them to express displeasure in ways and at volumes that will get through to the half-way sane Republicans in Congress. Either way, he'll be gone by Christmas 2017 -- or long before.

            3. Charles 9 Silver badge

              Re: @Bucky 2 - Trump voters

              "However, the way the independents who voted for him looked at it, a vote for Trump was a vote against the status quo, and gave them an outlet for their anger. It made them happy to reject Clinton, since they KNEW things wouldn't get better for them under her, and could at least HOPE things would get better for them under Trump."

              So to use a satirical comic plot, they rejected the Beast and voted in the Smiler. Now I feel like wanting a bandolier of grenades to blow up in frustration.

          3. Public Citizen

            Re: Out of State

            What most of the rest of the world is failing to appreciate the number of voters who cast a ballot for Trump not out of ~approval~ for Trump but as a ~rejection~ of Hillary Clinton.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Out of State

              What most of the rest of the world is failing to appreciate the number of voters who cast a ballot for Trump not out of ~approval~ for Trump but as a ~rejection~ of Hillary Clinton.

              Yes, the equivalent of shooting yourself in both feet to register your disapproval of gun control.

              Well done. Enjoy the next 4 years.

            2. DougS Silver badge

              Re: Out of State

              What most of the rest of the world is failing to appreciate the number of voters who cast a ballot for Trump not out of ~approval~ for Trump but as a ~rejection~ of Hillary Clinton.

              True, but most elections in the US are about voting against the person you don't want. Once a generation you get a candidate that inspires enough people that the majority of the votes he gets are FOR him (Reagan, Clinton, and Obama in their first terms) but most of the time you have a choice like Bush I vs Dukakis or Bush II vs Gore and you are voting against the person you think is worse rather than actually wanting the guy you voted for.

              I guess once every couple of generations you have to endure a really terrible no-win deal with the devil choice like Nixon vs Humphrey or Trump vs Clinton. Maybe those come around less often because you have to wait for most of the people who made the mistake the last time around to be dead, like how most of the people who voted in the 1968 election were during the 2016 primary season.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Out of State

          >"Stop fucking us over, and passing shite laws like an incontinent anus, stop dipping your filthy grasping paws in the till, and just do the basic job to a minimum standard of competence".

          Yeah its a good thing they picked a reality TV star born with a silver spoon and and complete lack of understanding of the concept of conflict of interest to carry their message. That will show them, might be mildly amusing picking the band nerd for class president but sadly all this will do for the proles in the US is allow them to learn exactly what powers and constraints the POTUS has the hard way.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Out of State

            Yeah its a good thing they picked a reality TV star born with a silver spoon and and complete lack of understanding of the concept of conflict of interest to carry their message.

            Those were The Options. See, if you can't change the course of the ship, maybe the new captain can run it aground and you can at least get off the damn thing. With luck, some rich and fat person might be eaten by wildlife.

            That is the point of Donald Trump.

            Unfortunately, I think he will do OK, like Ronald Reagan.

        3. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Out of State

          > Mrs May's "progressive" attitude

          Yeah, that progressivist Ms May and that other hippie, Ms Tatcher. Liberal pinkos like Stalin, the lot of them. When are we going to get a proper, unscrupulous backstabbing liar who knows how to start a war on the flimsiest of excuses? We right wing nutters *demand* a real leader!

          Just don't bring Bliar back. No need to go over the top.

        4. Steve Knox
          Paris Hilton

          Re: Out of State

          The memo reads something like "Stop fucking us over, and passing shite laws like an incontinent anus, stop dipping your filthy grasping paws in the till, and just do the basic job to a minimum standard of competence".

          If that's the way it's supposed to be read, why is it always written as a vote for the most boneheadedly stupid option available?

          1. whileI'mhere

            Re: Out of State

            Because after the usual suspects at whom the memo is directed are excluded, the only options left are the boneheadedly stupid ones. But at least they are an option (the memo writers figure, not paying attention to that option's consequences). If they do not vote for the only other option available, the memo does not get sent.

        5. strum Silver badge

          Re: Out of State

          >Stop fucking us over

          So we elect someone who's going to fuck us over, rough us up and steal our bed? Dumb, dumb, dumb.

          1. Dave 15

            Re: Out of State

            As I understand the problem you could have elected someone who is going to fuck you over rough you up and steal your bed, or you could have elected someone who is going to fuck you over, rough you up and steal your bed.

            Similar happens in the UK though we have a pretense of other parties the way Lab and Cons have rigged the system mean that the system always will return one of them regardless of 25% voting for an alternative

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Out of State

            So we elect someone who's going to fuck us over, rough us up and steal our bed? Dumb, dumb, dumb

            Shouldn't that be Trump, Trump, Trump?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Out of State

        AC "...keep the pron out..."

        You spelled 'pr0n' incorrectly.

        Or perhaps you spelled 'prawn' incorrectly, but that wouldn't make much sense.

        I'll stick with the first interpretation.

        1. Wzrd1

          Re: Out of State

          "You spelled 'pr0n' incorrectly."

          Or perhaps, due to concerns about content filters that would trigger on anything that isn't spelled as pron.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Out of State

        "Perhaps their next law will be to build a wall around the state."

        I wonder what South of the Border (located in Dillon, just south of the NC state line on I-95) would feel.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Out of State

          "I wonder what South of the Border (located in Dillon, just south of the NC state line on I-95) would feel."

          "ich bin ein Berliner" (and yes, i know it's wrong, just using it as the quote)

          1. David Neil

            Re: Out of State

            "I wonder what South of the Border (located in Dillon, just south of the NC state line on I-95) would feel."

            "ich bin ein Gaffney-er" (and yes, i know it's wrong, just using it as the quote)

            tidied

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Out of State

            > "ich bin ein Berliner" (and yes, i know it's wrong, just using it as the quote)

            Apart from the miscapitalisation, there is nothing wrong with your sentence.

      4. a_yank_lurker Silver badge

        Re: Out of State

        @AC - both the donkeys and elephants are adept at idiot laws like this. The only difference is exactly what each focuses on. Agreed this is an imbecile talking but there are plenty of grandstanding imbeciles in any legislature.

    2. Bucky 2

      Re: Out of State

      Is there actually a politician alive who has the faintest idea what they are asking for when they pull these marvellous ideas out of their arses?

      Don't underestimate people with power. Let's assume they know what they're doing. Then we also know that their stated goal is false, since the action they're taking is neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve that goal. Indeed, it's guaranteed to be an impotent gesture.

      No pun intended.

      So they're using this to tell their constituents that "we're on your side" while meanwhile being sure that the constituents remain frustrated and angry. In this way they can stay in power.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Out of State

        "Don't underestimate people with power. Let's assume they know what they're doing."

        No, don't let's assume anything. Let's expect them to demonstrate that they know what they're doing.

        1. Red Bren

          Re: Out of State

          "No, don't let's assume anything. Let's expect them to demonstrate that they know what they're doing."

          We can assume they know what they're doing. But we can also assume that's not what they're telling us their doing.

        2. Dave 15

          Re: Out of State

          I think they do know what they are doing, they just aren't telling us the REAL reason for these things... and looking at the law vs the expressed reason they make no sense. If you look at it with the what are they really trying to do approach they are trying to raise money, trying to make people think they 'care' about something they profess is a real problem (even when it isn't... but it still looks like they care and people will assume it is a real problem without thinking), they want to use methods to increase surveillance and censorship.

          The last is the most worrying... the increase in surveillance and censorship enshrined in recent UK law is staggering. The internet is frightening to government because it allows people access not just to porn but also to news and views which are not sanitized and cleaned up by the state controlled media (and all media in all the world is state controlled whatever they say). More over the internet has been used to organize rebellion... tanker drivers strike, uprisings in middle east and Africa. If you notice since the tanker drivers strike there was a marked uptick in surveillance and a marked decrease in civil disobedience, now they have seen the toppling of other governments they are going further.

          Whether it is dressed as preventing terrorism or preventing child abuse, or even recently preventing the unwashed illegals accessing school... it is about monitoring and control. If this law fails because of devices imported cross border or the failure of the technology then in the interests of protecting they will censor (like they now do in the UK), then of course they can block absolutely anything they want without even giving reasons... anything that doesn't agree with what they want us to know.

      2. Blotto Bronze badge

        Re: Out of State

        @Bucky 2

        >>>"Don't underestimate people with power. Let's assume they know what they're doing. Then we also know that their stated goal is false, since the action they're taking is neither necessary nor sufficient to achieve that goal. Indeed, it's guaranteed to be an impotent gesture."

        The other problem is there is no viable alternative!!!

    3. Commswonk Silver badge

      Re: Out of State

      Is there actually a politician alive who has the faintest idea what they are asking for when they pull these marvellous ideas out of their arses?

      No.

      Simples...

      1. Voland's right hand Silver badge
        Holmes

        Re: Out of State

        There are. But not in USA or UK.

        Some of the Russian, German and Scandinavian examples of the "legislative gem on the subject of the Internet" genre are actually technically literate (especially when compared to the US and UK idiocies).

        F.e, there was a Russian law proposal recently featured on the register which had correct definitions of a peering point, prefix, autonomous system, ip addressing, name servers, zones, etc as well as correct scoping of criminal responsibilities if you fail to secure them enough after they have been designated critical infrastructure. Similarly, if you want a watertight definition of privacy rights, etc open any German law on the subject.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Out of State

          > Some of the Russian, German and Scandinavian examples of the "legislative gem on the subject of the Internet" genre are actually technically literate

          That's because laws which are technical in nature *are* written by technical people, often the regulator with input from the affected industries / lobbies, not by politicians. The latter just get a briefing on the gist of the law and told to present it for approval. Then your group will vote in favour, having no idea what they're voting on, and the opposition, having no idea what they're voting on either will, depending on where you are, also vote in favour or abstain, or vote against because "it was our idea but you're doing it wrong" / "it wasn't our idea" / "it was your idea" / "you are always wrong anyway" / "you vote this thing of mine or I won't vote that thing of yours" / ...

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Out of State

          Similarly, if you want a watertight definition of privacy rights, etc open any German law on the subject.

          Ah, but that's partly a language issue as well. English is a brilliant language for humour and innuendo because you can say so much with one sentence, but that is also the reason why "legal English" (aka legalese) is so awkward and convoluted. German is in this context far more accurate and descriptive so you spend less time burying the actual statement in language related caveats - it's easier to prevent loopholes.

          (caveat: that is based on my own experience with German and English and reading laws and contracts in both - neither are my mother tongue :) )

    4. John 104

      Re: Out of State

      @Chris G

      Sure they do. They know it will never pass, but they do it so that they can show that they are "Doing Something" about X. Its such a waste of money and time.

  3. Notas Badoff
    Joke

    Look at that...

    "It's an issue I'm pretty passionate about."

    That boner is quite large there, a'yep.

  4. veti Silver badge

    Oh, that'll work

    Because there's no way a horny 13-year-old could ever figure out how to remove a porn-disabling chip from a computer.

    I can see a bright side to this: a marked uptick in the average engineering skills of SC's teenage male population. Oh, and presumably it'll create a market for some SC business, which may or may not be owned by the governor's brother-in-law or someone, to make the chips in the first place.

    So all in all, not too bad.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: Oh, that'll work

      Without killing the computer itself? What about suicide circuits?

      1. DavCrav Silver badge

        Re: Oh, that'll work

        "Without killing the computer itself? What about suicide circuits?"

        If you pay $20 to remove it, it must be removable.

        Also, replace the component with it on with one from a non-SC company?

    2. phuzz Silver badge

      Re: Oh, that'll work

      First there has to be a porn blocking chip to disable, that's the main objection here. How exactly do you prevent a device from accessing porn? Sure, you can block known porn sites easily (eg blacklist playboy.com), but what about unknown sites?

      You could try to create a filter which would programatically guess if an image is porn, but that's going to be flagging up your beach photos, while missing someone in bondage gear.

      What if, instead of just browsing to a porn site, you download an encrypted file, which contains porn? Are they going to have a magic porn chip that views everything on the screen?

      And finally, what is porn? There's no coherent argument that covers why Michelangelo's David is art, and (for example) the picture at the top of the article is not.

      1. Charles 9 Silver badge

        Re: Oh, that'll work

        "And finally, what is porn? There's no coherent argument that covers why Michelangelo's David is art, and (for example) the picture at the top of the article is not."

        The people you're talking about would consider it, images of the Lady Godiva, and probably a legal supermodel in a bikini as pornographic. We're talking 1950's "Don't even THINK about sex, the thought of the deed is as evil as the deed" kind of puritanical.

    3. Suricou Raven

      Re: Oh, that'll work

      Computer, easily. Any half-skilled dabbler could do that. But the bill applies to anything that can access the internet, and specifically says the software must be designed so it cannot be disabled without paying. That mean phones and tablets too, from which it could not be removed without rooting the device. Not so easy.

  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Where do we find these numpties

    When I compare such legislative gems (not that the crap coming up on Capitol Hill or the Westminster is much better) to what comes up in front of Russian legislature I can only think, damn, how the hell did we degrade so low.

    Sure, the "Enemy" ALSO has nasty, privacy infringing totalitarian and/or pretend prudish ideas. The difference however, is that once you read the stuff coming up for vote there, you see that it has had a once over by a competent engineer, it is literate, well written and in the realm of the possible and doable. Definitely no boner-protection chips (not that some of their psychotic ultra-right would not mind an anti-LBGT).

    Why is that their lawmakers can actually get an engineer to sort out their idiocies and bring them to an implementable state while we can't?

    1. Someone Else Silver badge
      Holmes

      Re: Where do we find these numpties

      The Republican Party.

      Next question?

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Where do we find these numpties

        "The Republican Party."

        I doubt they have a monopoly.

  6. Sokolik

    Entirely to be expected...

    ...from the final state in the Union displaying the rebel flag on the Capitol grounds

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Entirely to be expected...

      Lucky that all the racial problems of the USA came down to just the symbol of the losing side in the civil war.

      Presumably if all the problems of the middle east, India-Pakistan and SE Asia are due to the British empire then banning the Flag of St George will solve all those as well?

      1. Rich 11 Silver badge

        Re: Entirely to be expected...

        Presumably if all the problems of the middle east, India-Pakistan and SE Asia are due to the British empire then banning the Flag of St George will solve all those as well?

        Well, for that to be comparable, first those regions would have to fly the flag of St George on their government buildings as part of a cultural statement. I don't think that happens, do you?

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Entirely to be expected...

          I don't think that happens, do you?

          Hmm. The Plough in Sutton Courtenay used to fly the St. George flag. It does happen.

  7. MJI Silver badge

    If I was a PC seller

    I just would not bother selling there

    1. Number6

      Re: If I was a PC seller

      Deliver to a spot just over the border for collection by the buyer or his nominated agent. Ownership to transfer at that point so you're not selling in the state. They'd not be able to ding you for sales tax, either because the sale would be completed elsewhere.

    2. Version 1.0 Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: If I was a PC seller

      Let's seal an idea from Douglas Adams - porn sensitive glasses, when they detect porn they automatically darken - of course this might be a bit risky. Go driving down the Interstate and some college girls drive past flashing their tits at you - everything goes dark and you drive off the Interstate.

      You might think that I'm just making this problem up, but in Southern Louisiana during Mardi Gras this is a significant issue,

      1. Kernel Silver badge

        Re: If I was a PC seller

        "You might think that I'm just making this problem up, but in Southern Louisiana during Mardi Gras this is a significant issue attraction,"

        FTFY.

      2. Anonymous C0ward

        Re: If I was a PC seller

        Such a significant issue that it requires painstaking research.

    3. Youngone Silver badge

      Re: If I was a PC seller

      If the various electronics manufacturers decided they could not comply with the law and withdrew from South Carolina the result might be wind up being OK.

      South Carolinians would have to drive to Georgia to buy a new phone or laptop, and Bill Chumley would be out of a job come the next election solving the problem.

  8. Howard Hanek Bronze badge
    Childcatcher

    Unintended Consequences

    Have they thought what effect this will have on government operations? Think of the morale problems government employees will suffer from prohibiting their favorite activity and the sexual frustration that could lead to roving bands of government employees going on rape sprees?

    1. TRT Silver badge

      Re: Unintended Consequences

      Presumably the US equivalent of CEOPS would be able to research still.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Fake news or American news?

    Not stupid for wanting to block access to pornography to minors.

    Stupid for not bothering to consult someone knowledgeable about IT about how to implement this, or research how content filtering is generally done before announcing their policy.

    1. Someone Else Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: Fake news or American news?

      There's a difference?

    2. Dave 15

      Re: Fake news or American news?

      Porn for minors... TBH most minors aren't interested and even if they see it move rapidly on to something they are interested in. Those near age (i.e. 15-18 year olds) might look but frankly they are mainly building up more practical experience.

      Basically this whole 'must protect the children' seems to assume the children are interested in the first place, and as a parent I am sure they are not.

  10. GrapeBunch Bronze badge

    The real effect

    would be slightly to expand human trafficking there. But the larger effect is to annoy people who would never even think about human trafficking or maybe even porn. To punish the innocent, that's a popular meme.

  11. Mark 85 Silver badge

    And it's not even April Fools Day.

    Here, we just finished the election season and this guy says "this isn't about politics"... hmm.. Then comes up with requiring some magical chip or method. This is pure voter bait.

    What the hell is he drinking, smoking, or sniffing? Or maybe he's been talking to someone in one of the TLA's about backdoors, magical encryption, etc.?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And it's not even April Fools Day.

      "Then comes up with requiring some magical chip or method. This is pure voter bait."

      Precisely. While politicians may act ( and possibly are) dumb - many of the electorate in the USA and UK (not excluding other countries) are dumber still on issues of this sort.

      It often seems that the average person in the street has little idea about analysing complex situations - and often little education in relevant grounding subjects. They want things to be simple. When a politician tells them they have a simple solution - then they are happy usually by way of confirmation bias.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: And it's not even April Fools Day.

        Judging from the educational system, this is by design. The closest thing to critical thinking at my academic prep high school was philosophy which hardly anyone took. You had to go to college for the real deal and it was an elective there.

  12. Tikimon Silver badge
    Devil

    It's a Wanker Tax

    Most folks (in NC) who want porn won't figure out how to disable it, live too far from a state line, or simply don't feel it's worth $20 to drive six hours to buy an unlocked computer. They will pay the $20 to keep their access going. Multiply that by the legions of porn consumers, and you've created a nice revenue stream, an indirect Porn Tax.

    What drives politicians? Money!

    Hey NC legislators, why don't you give porn a break and instead make life hard on the plethora of tobacco growers in your fair state? Let's take relative harm into account here! After all, porn doesn't cause cancer, only blindness.

    1. HereIAmJH

      Re: It's a Wanker Tax

      "Most folks (in NC) who want porn won't figure out how to disable it, live too far from a state line, or simply don't feel it's worth $20 to drive six hours to buy an unlocked computer. They will pay the $20 to keep their access going."

      Yeah, and they are really going to be pissed when they find out they wasted their $20 because the lawmakers in question are in SOUTH Carolina.

    2. Richard Plinston Silver badge

      Re: It's a Wanker Tax

      > They will pay the $20 to keep their access going.

      Or just continue to use their old computer for a few more years.

      Duh!

    3. Mark 85 Silver badge

      Re: It's a Wanker Tax

      After all, porn doesn't cause cancer, only blindness.

      Also causes hairy palms.... or so I've heard.

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I reckon they know (or have been told) this is not possible, in which case it becomes a neat way to add a $20 tax per non-compliant sale (i.e. all of them) while making it tricky for people to complain.

    Could be a load of new "morality" taxes when the idea catches on.

  14. vir

    Fun Fact

    Up until about 10 years ago, liquor in South Carolina was only allowed to be sold in the airplane bottle size. So when you went into a bar and wanted a double gin and tonic or what have you, they would have to open and empty two bottles into your glass.

  15. Alan Sharkey

    I want to know how they make it last 10 minutes and 32 seconds

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      >I want to know how they make it last 10 minutes and 32 seconds

      Slow broadband

  16. This post has been deleted by its author

  17. AndrueC Silver badge
    Facepalm

    So..it's a $20 tax on pornography?

  18. dan1980

    "The hardline anti-porno bill will be scrutinized by the state's House Judiciary Committee before going any further."

    Good. Just so long as they don't do anything crazy like get it scrutinized by any tech experts . . .

  19. VinceH Silver badge
    Coat

    "calls for manufacturers and resellers to be fined if they sell a PC in the US state without a gizmo capable of stopping smut from appearing by default."

    Wait!

    There are computers on which smut appears by default ?

  20. Magani
    Happy

    Politicians: Entities with room temperature IQs

    ... introduced by State Representative Bill Chumley,...

    I wonder if he pronounces his name 'Chol-monde-ley'?

    Remind me again where the movie 'Deliverance' was set?

    Exits stage right singing ..

    .'Diddle-um-dum-dum,...... Diddle-ing-ding-ding...'

  21. kain preacher Silver badge

    Now first thing first how are they going to define porn. Are we talking about showing breast or genitals. People screwing but not showing them nude. People having sex in part of a non porn movie (a movie were sex is not the sailing point)but showing the full act. I say $20 is to low. Make it $200 and send the state back to the stone age.

    1. dan1980

      @kain preacher

      "Now first thing first how are they going to define porn[?]"

      What? No, no, no - that's way down the list - if indeed it's even on the list. Actually, the last thing you want to do is go ahead and put any limits on what you can block.

      Think of the technical details of how such a device would work and the logistics of who would be responsible for it and what that means for sales of devices across borders and what the cost of trying to enforce this - if all that is still up in the air, what makes anyone think such a triviality as what it will do is relevant?

      No, the first and only concern is to be seen to be 'doing something'. Actually doing it is optional, let alone doing it successfully.

      1. kain preacher Silver badge

        So then HPE or IBM is going to do the work then ? Moving goal post. Billions of dollars over budget and PC makes filing law suits left and right. Operation cluster fuck is ago.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Politician thought process:

        "They can use that AI thingy in a device thingy to stop people looking at Pr0n"

    2. Fink-Nottle

      > (a movie were sex is not the sailing point)

      ''Celibate Werewolves of the Caribbean", I loved that movie!

      ♫♩ Where can you find pleasure,

      search the world for treasure

      learn science technology? ♬♩

  22. Peter Prof Fox

    I'm a fan!

    It could also be programmed to spot fake news, room-temperature IQ of the user, and embed a Duck Turd twitter feed straight from the White Houses. (Pennsylvania Av. and Белый дом, Krasnopresnenskaya embankment, Moscow.) If they want to make it really popular then guarantee it will give the winning numbers for the state lottery to every user.

  23. Mephistro Silver badge
    Devil

    "Quite how blocking his constituents' access to online X-rated filth is going to help this isn't clear"

    Not only that! It also seems quite counterproductive, for obvious reasons.

    Perhaps it's just that the politicians are trying to protect their investments in the local brothels. 0_o

  24. Dan 55 Silver badge

    How do you like them Apples?

    So what they want is a computer tax because nobody's going to be able to put a magic fairy inside which watches porn and takes card payments.

    Next, a tax on books which let students draw naughty bits in the margins.

  25. Jamie Jones Silver badge

    Politicians arrogance

    The thing is, I don't expect all politicians to be generally tech savie. What is most revelaing about them is their arrogance that they know best.

    There are MANY subjects I know nothing about, but if I was to make decisions regarding those subjects, I'd bloody well research what the hell I was doing beforehand.

    When there were new staff at my last job, I was naturally expected to guide them through issues (it doesn't matter how much you know - every company has rlues/quriks etc. uniquely to them)

    My biggest beef, (and those staff that proved most unreliable), was NOT the staff that didn't know something and would ask, it was the ones that didn't know aomething, but either thought that they did, or that they could bullshit through.

    I was far more willing to trust a task to someone who may even have been the less knowledgable of the two, knowing that if they were unsure, they'd ask, rather than potentially screw something up entirely.

    Is it too much to ask the same of our politicians?

    You see it ALL the time in the media: Politicians bullshitting, or spinning, or avoiding. I'd be far more likely to vote for someone who says "You koiw what? I don't know the answer to that, but trust me, I'll find out before progressing any further on the matter."

    1. Dave 15

      Re: Politicians arrogance

      But isnt this the case 'at the top' in all areas.

      A CEO doesn't need to have any experience or knowledge in the field the company works... look at many examples where guys go from destroying a bank to running chain of chemist shops, or from running a hospital to running a software company... many examples available where this has failed.

      Politicians move from running one department to another with no clue about any. So we end up with a defence minister scrapping all the harriers and all the aircraft carriers leaving a pointless navy and a lack of ground support for troops in a warzone all in one go (and btw opting to use more expensive and vastly less capable American planes or sometimes european ones... but never realizing the ONLY combat proven plane we still possessed was the one he scrapped...)

      Same old same old, I guess I will never fully understand how it is the rich can swan around paying themselves more and more and tinkering while the rest of us spend our lives trying to sort out their mess. Its time for a revolution and put some of these folk against the wall where they belong.

  26. Fojonx
    Facepalm

    TLD solution

    Wasn't there a proposition to establish a .xxx top level domain to make all the "filtering" easier

    1. Suricou Raven

      Re: TLD solution

      About ten years ago, yes. The porn industry opposed it because they feared they would be pushed into a .xxx ghetto and banned from .com, the anti-porn lobby opposed it because they feared it would grant pornography legitimacy and get in the way of their efforts to ban it entirely. The only support for it came from the registrar who paid a of money to try to get it approved.

  27. martinusher Silver badge

    They're Idiots

    Nothing else you can say, really. (...apart from apologizing to those of limited intellect; they used to be called 'idiots' back in the bad old days but they probably wouldn't be so stupid to propose something like this....)

  28. harmjschoonhoven
    Facepalm

    Next will be a proposal

    to insert a chip blocking all reference to natural selection and the right honourable Mr. Darwin.

    This will be much easier than blocking pornography as there are clinical cases of people who are sexually aroused by observing a police-officer in uniform.

  29. wsm

    License to compute

    Would a reference to the Aeropagitica help anyone?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: License to compute @wsm

      thanks for mentioning this ...

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Areopagitica

      (another good day for learning something awesome, here in El Reg forums !)

  30. Steve Knox

    Correction

    The funds will be used by the South Carolina Attorney General's office's human trafficking task force to try to rescue victims of the trade.

    s/b

    The funds will be "earmarked" for the South Carolina Attorney General's office's human trafficking task force but will actually be piddled away by politicians and bureaucrats on pet projects which ultimately help nobody.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Correction, or even ...

      The funds will be used by the South Carolina Attorney General's office's human trafficking task force to try to rescue victims of the trade.

      <cough> The funds will be found to have been misused by the South Carolina Attorney General's office's human trafficking task force on whiskey and hookers ... shortly after the next "election"

    2. Suricou Raven

      Re: Correction

      My guess is that it'll be fed back to pressure groups - the human trafficking task force works with 'non-profits.' So it'll end up funding an organisation campaigning for even more restrictions.

  31. Allan George Dyer Silver badge
    Happy

    Magic chip or method...

    I'm patenting a thin plastic shim that can rest between the contacts of the power button, in combination with a warning label, "No user serviceable parts inside".

    I'll rent them out... I'll only need one per computer shop, and I get paid every time they're removed.

    Where's the "bundles of cash" icon?

  32. bozoid

    It says a lot about our society that politicians try to keep kids from seeing sex, but are totally onboard with them seeing multiple murders every 30 minutes on film or TV.

  33. jMcPhee

    So what

    No big deal. We're talking South Carolina here. So that's, what, 8 or 9 PC's?

  34. Penguineer
    Big Brother

    what makes you think blocking was the point?

    Consider - you can buy a computer without the blocking *right*now* for an extra $20, or wait until a block-enabled device becomes available.

    Who gets the $20?

    Before you get this computer without the blocking, you need to supply some ID so they can register your details....ahem...check your age, so the sale is recorded as being to a proper person.

    Who checks the proof of age? (and presumably records it in case an unblocked computer accidentally gets to an underage person)

    Perhaps the point is that the technology isn't available......

    How else do you raise a $20 tax on every computer sold and keep a track of what people are doing with them?

    1. kain preacher Silver badge

      Re: what makes you think blocking was the point?

      Except the law says it can not be sold with out the chip. I's not just so simple as only selling pc to adults that do not want the chip. The chip must still be present. The point as this bill is to block the sales of PC.

      thik about how many of us get news via the net.

  35. Chris Tierney

    Land of the free and home of the brave

    There's nothing brave or free by gluing blinkers to your citizens heads. Maybe they should start "heading"off their children by some intellectual discussion and robust education.

  36. Adrian Tawse

    Chumley

    Isn't that the name of the rather dim-witted person or Porn Stars!

  37. Winkypop Silver badge
    Devil

    Chumley

    Anyone else old enough to remember Chumley and Tennessee Tuxedo?

    Just as clueless.

  38. John Savard Silver badge

    Red Star Linux

    It's clear that an operating system does exist that would meet the needs of South Carolina. It happens to have been developed in the DPRK, not a country with which the United States is on the best of terms, but this does show that what is proposed, however unfortunate it may be in many ways, is at least technologically feasible.

  39. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Sounds Like...

    South Carolina wants to raise firm funds through mastetaxation...

  40. Mr Dogshit

    V-chip all over again

    I've just been reading up on this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-chip

    I thought that nonsense got slapped down in the nineties and never happened.

    "Televisions manufactured for the United States market since 1999 ... are required to have the V-chip technology" - is that actually true?

    1. Dave 15

      Re: V-chip all over again

      Oh yes, that was Clintons famous prevent teen pregnancies... I thought he did that by spilling his seed on the dress ...

      1. akeane
        Coat

        Re: V-chip all over again

        Clinton was asked if he bought Monica any presents...

        "Well, I did splash out on a dress"

  41. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Let me guess...

    State Representative Chumley's unlcle's sister-mother-brother happens to own a tech shop punting such kit that claims to do the magic filtering.

  42. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Pfft, tax, shmax

    It's an MS technology.

    Clitty pops up, 'I see you're trying to watch porn, would you like a handjob with that?'

  43. Zog_but_not_the_first Silver badge
    Facepalm

    2016

    Truly the Year of the Mad

  44. Potemkine Silver badge

    Sex is bad

    Sex is dangerous, to save humanity we have to stop any sexual-related activity.

    Oh, wait...

  45. Blitterbug
    Unhappy

    No chance

    This has about as much chance of becoming law as a barmy, racist business tycoon has of being elected president. Oh...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Sex is bad

      You seem to think there's a flaw in that plan but surely if we were running low on people then a god could just make some more, right?

  46. Marcus Fil

    I have a solution

    I am unsure what fair trade agreements exist across the (dis)Unitied States, but I think is pretty unfair that the manufacturer or supplier should be bear the cost of this device just to sell in one minor state. I think would be far more reasonable for SC to fund the creation and installation of the necessary technical solution since it is the state that seeks the local benefit.

    It just so happens that I have a solution ("The Magic Fairy Porn Blocker Cookie") that can achieve the desired filtering task. It is available on all platforms with a web browser that have cookies enabled. The license costs $21 per platform with a limited guarantee* to refund the $20 state disabling charge on any platform where a user complains it failed to block porn even though they had not paid the fee.

    *Other terms and conditions apply. The local laws of Ellsworth Land will apply in all matters except where restricted by extraterrestrial treaty.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I have a solution

      From a business perspective, the manufacturers will simply not sell in SC.

      Devices already have razor thin margins and custom boards for a single state will either be very expensive or simply not exist.

      Can't see how it would be effective anyway.

      Back to board and chalk for them.

      1. DrM

        Re: I have a solution

        I'd open a Wal-mart just across the state line.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I have a solution

        >Back to board and chalk for them.

        Wow that is really old school pr0n :-)

      3. Suricou Raven

        Re: I have a solution

        Most such devices are purchased online anyway. It's basically unenforcable.

        I think it's just a ploy. First propose a law that goes ridiculously far, then tone it down during negotiations, and end up getting what you wanted in the first place. Which will probably be something comparatively mild, like more funding for the task force, or a requirement all devices sold include parential control software turned on by default.

    2. Marcus Fil

      Re: I have a solution

      woosh!!

      -1

  47. JimmyPage Silver badge
    Stop

    3 pages, and no one remembers

    the clipper chip ?

  48. DrM
    Thumb Up

    Think bigger!

    Why not a chip that blocks porn -- and also blocks fake news?

  49. NBCanuck

    Dual featured chip?

    Pay $20

    ....blocking function = disabled

    ...and hidden logging/tracking function = enabled.

  50. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    90+ comments?

    I suppose it's a case of knowing your market. Let's face it, 95% of the readership here probably are sex-starved males who spend 10 minutes a night, er, consuming pornography...

    1. Dave 15

      Re: 90+ comments?

      Married so yes sex starved (ask any married man)

      10 minutes.. nope at least 20, I am old and slow

  51. Dave 15

    TV

    So, I recollect from being in WA state that they have public access tv which broadcasts porn at around 1am on Monday morning (amazingly wife found it before me... no comments on that thanks :) )

    So, should my tv or should my tv receiver box have the magic non-porn filter?

    And if I have a (whichever box it is) that I bought in the next door state or even online and move it... do I have to have someone solder a chip in for me?

  52. johndrake7

    Rep Rep Promises Antismut Walls for SC PCs

    And to make sinners pay for it.

  53. J.G.Harston Silver badge

    Define "smut".

    More pertinantly, define "smut" in a computable programmable agorithmic way.

  54. Paul

    it's called an air-gap firewall. stops phishing, viruses, pr0n etc.

  55. Stevie Silver badge

    Bah!

    "It's an issue I'm pretty passionate about."

    As am I.

  56. Stevie Silver badge

    Bah!

    No, no, South Carolina has a history of spearheading bold new initiatives.

    Why on this day, December 20th 1860, South Carolina spearheaded the bold initiative to secede from the Union, and look how that turned out.

    People always rush to judgement but history will have the last word regarding South Carolina and the Magic Porn Firewall of Moral Rectitude.

    1. David Roberts Silver badge
      Coat

      Re: Bah!

      Won't the rectitude be blocked by the pr0n filter?

  57. Suricou Raven

    Has no-one noticed the secondary function?

    If you want to turn the filter off (without hacking), you have to apply for it. And prove your age.

    Which means the state will have to actually create a database of people who have opted to remove their filters!

    I'm sure that could be abused in some way.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Has no-one noticed the secondary function?

      "I'm sure that could be abused in some way."

      I'm sure that would be abused in some way.

      FTFY

  58. Herby Silver badge

    Censorship & The internet...

    When censorship is discovered, the natural instinct is for the internet to route around it. In this case, I'm sure that after a few milliseconds of a hardware device instructions would be published for the work around, and as for software, all I can say is "good luck with that!".

    Stupid is as stupid does...

  59. Public Citizen
    Joke

    There. Problem Solved

    So manufacturers bar the distribution of their products to South Carolina in order to not have to manufacture a special product using a technology and software not yet invented only for South Carolina.

    That way all the tech savy people will be buying their tech devices anyplace but South Carolina, giving the surrounding states and internet sellers the benefit of their business, while denying south Carolina any Sales Tax Revenue from the sale of new tech devices.

    BTW does this bill also cover Smart TV's and Cable Boxes?

  60. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    How To Kill Innovation

    Should someone point out that the driving force behind technology is porn?

    Cave Art, The Printed Word, Painting, Sculpture, The Printing Press, Photographs, Instant Film, Moving Pictures, Camcorder/VCRs, Personal Computer, Web Cams, The Internet....

    It's why we evolved opposable thumbs in the first place.

    1. Charles 9 Silver badge

      Re: How To Kill Innovation

      Oh? What about the telegraph, telephone and radio, three NON-VISUAL communications devices?

  61. Florida1920 Silver badge
    Flame

    "We're not being political."

    Oh, yes, you damned well are! The extent to which some pols will go to get attention (I note with no surprise that he's a Republican) is obscene. FFS, do something useful for your constituents. Take your $20 and buy a clue, for starters.

  62. VanguardG

    More taxes for other states!

    So people just drive a couple of hours and buy their computers in another state, paying sales tax there. Revenue for the other state, less for South Carolina. Money for computer sellers in those other states...less for sellers in South Carolina. And no computer manufacturer is going to make a special computer JUST for South Carolina residents without ramping up the price heavily. Much as the cars with "California Emissions" packages back in the 80s sold for about $500-$1000 more than the exact same car without that package. People won't buy something that costs them more to get the same product *and* ensures they end up on a registry of "potential sex offenders" to be arrested later, since "scientific" research has implied porn leads to sex crimes. In .0000001 percent of cases...and according to the prisoner in jail hoping to blame something/someone else in hopes of having a year or two trimmed off their jail term.

  63. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    A DIGITAL BLOCKING CAPABILITY THAT RENDERS OBSCENITY INACCESSIBLE

    Finally, a filter to block Donald Trump's obscenely stupid remarks. Brilliant!

  64. Durant Imboden

    In other words, the South Carolina state government wants to profit from pornography. (They're already taxing cigarettes and booze, so why not porn, too?)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Yes, a tax like that is bound to have its ups and downs.

      (Why am I reminded of "Carry on Henry" and the idea of a "sex tax"?)

  65. G7mzh

    Have they thought?

    "South Carolina will still be able to get their grumble flicks on demand, so long as they pay a $20 charge"

    In other words, the state government will be selling pornography.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019