Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Bills to Restrict Campus Internet Access

emmett posted more than 14 years ago | from the please-define-specific-educational-purpose dept.

Education 656

Slackrat writes "This article in the Arizona Daily Wildcat details the efforts of Rep. Jean McGrath, R-Glendale, to restrict dormitory visitation, require the installation of Internet filters, and allow students to to use campus Internet connections only for a "specific educational purpose" on all Arizona university campuses. And you thought banning Napster was rough." It goes beyond Internet access; opposite-sex dormroom visitation is on the block, too.

cancel ×

656 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

... (0)

Signal 11 (7608) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341346)

My response:

Nuts.

-- Lieutennant of the 101st Airborne, surrounded by german divisions.

Take your head out of your ass! (2)

ccoakley (128878) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341347)

Actually, this reminds me of an art exhibit that a student made at UCSB last year. She took hard-core porn that she found on the internet and used photoshop to place the images into popular advertisements that were scanned in from magazines. You know that RCA ad with the two dogs sitting in front of the TV? You couldn't imagine the filth they were watching. Anyway, I'm betting that her art work material-gathering research would have been banned under this bill. Censorship stinks.

I have one question: Exactly what are students with high speed connections supposed to use their bandwidth for now?

3 words (0)

the_rock (112067) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341348)

what a bitch

Hope that Ms. McGrath is for term limits. (1)

father_guido (124189) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341349)

Because if she keeps pushing on this one, there is NO WAY she'll get re-elected.

What an unbelievably LAME concept.

So friggin what?? (1)

JustShootMe (122551) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341350)

This is not for the legistators to decide. This is a matter of individual University policy. It sounds to me like some overly moralistic legislator is attempting to regulate something that should be self-regulated.

I don't like it when U regulators make these rules either, but at least then you can go to another college in the same area. This regulation is effectively trying to take this option away.


If you can't figure out how to mail me, don't.

Words fail me... (2)

Ian Pointer (11337) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341351)

McGrath said yesterday she has decided to remove another provision in the bill that would have required residence hall administrators to conduct random monthly inspections of all
residents' rooms for prohibited items.

That was nice of her 8-).

Re:Lack of Slash 0.4 Release == hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341352)

moderate this idiot to -2 and kill the post. remember moderators - you can now go to -2. do not pass go.

Preparing students. . . (2)

dispensa (57441) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341353)

Wow, this is just what will be needed to ensure that our graduating college students are well-prepared for taking direction from "superior" individuals/corporations/governments rather than being able to think for themselves. What is this, 8th grade? 9th grade? *When* is this? 1955? 1957? INTERNET FILTERS?? I thought we were finally getting past this stuff. Guess not.

There goes my motivation.... (1)

Jestrzcap (46989) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341354)

Next thing you know they will require using Microsoft on your dorm computers! Dammit. Just leave us alone! They are running out of people killing each other so now they have to nitpick ever fscking thing. Maybe if more people started killing each other they'd remember that downloading mp3s is harmless. DAMNIT!!

~Jester

Re:!!A MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM!! (2)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341355)

I couldn't decide if I should moderate up/funny or down/troll.
So I just replied to say ROTFL

Arizona has some problems (5)

TheLaser (122479) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341356)

I am a new student at Arizona State University, and much of what goes on here politically is very confusing. One thing to understand though, there isn't really much behind these bills, they are just fodder for future political mudslinging... Banning co-ed dorms here would be entirely impossible because there is one dorm (the one I am currently in) that holds a huge majority of all on-campus residants, if it were to become male, or female only, there would be next to no other available space. There is very little chance of it actually occuring.

I also doubt the internet restrictions will pass, and suspect they are also just political manuvering. I wouldn't put it past the legislature here to do something like that though, but it isn't much of a concern as the dorms aren't wired anyway, the only place we have internet access is in the computer labs.

That settles it... (1)

jjeffries (17675) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341357)

Welp, that's it for me. We're just going to have to kill all of the fasci^H^H^H^H^H Republicans. They are going to make this country a laughing stock. "Look at them," others will say. "They believe they have freedom, but it's only an illusion. They used to set the precedent by which other nations were judged, but now they are another third-world country that just wants to put all of their 'citizens' in jail." I'm gonna move to Canada.

what people think: (1)

Spydr (90990) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341358)

i live here in tucson, don't go to the U of A, but have plenty of friends that do. Most of the people i have talked to don't really mind, since they don't use their connects for much more than chatting and the occasional download.

only the 'geeks' are the ones that are mad about it. Since there are so few of them(us) i don't think the U of A will listen much.
oh well... I won't be going there anytime soon.

---
http://www.spiderinteractive.net

Re:So friggin what?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341359)

This is not for the legistators to decide. This is a matter of individual University policy. It sounds to me like some overly moralistic legislator is attempting to regulate something that should be self-regulated.

What you want to be he's a mormon.

don't like it when U regulators make these rules either, but at least then you can go to another college in the same area. This regulation is effectively trying to take this option away.


Just go to another state. I hate to say it but it's all comming down to which state is the best for your needs I sincerely hope that there is a good state out there that can be friendly to it's inhabitants.

// Posting Anonymously because of some slightly // intollerant religious right

opposite sex (4)

Michel (8815) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341360)

If opposite sex dormroom visitation gets banned, I guess that means that gay/lesbian couples can still go at it to their hearts desire... ;-)

Yeah, this'll work (2)

griffjon (14945) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341361)

So people will go through a proxy server like the defcon proxy or anonymizer, at worst. I can't imagine this even getting to a functional level, as I've found priceless info on geoshitties pages from time to time. In any case, the tech will be gotten around if it ever becomes functional.

as for no-opposite-sex visitation/restricted hours... riiiight. Who's enforcing those rules? RAs? Y'mean, fellow students? I've walked in the front door of dorms way past the witching hour. I've been smuggled in to women's halls. It's great fun to get around the security, why should this pleasure be restricted to only a few, when the entire nation could have the fun?

I should add that any campus looking to implement these rules should also instigate "first-two-years-must-be-spent-in-our-dorms" rules as well, or they'll get to see some awfully empty dorms.

Gotta keep minds focused (1)

astrotek (132325) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341362)

You cant have those real and cyber sluts coming in to the male dorm can you? I mean what else is there to do other than bake your mind outside in the sun.

Crap (1)

mal3 (59208) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341363)

Thats what this is. I was thinking of going to the U of A. But with this going down I doubt it. Republican's are getting so bad these days I'm saddened to call myself one. I remember when republicans used to run their campaigns on the simple fact that democrats always screw up the economy, now they're just getting all uber-moral. Even Steve Forbes the guy I thought was a great money man is running on moral issues now. If the democrats knew anything about how to manage money, I'd be voting for them. Guess this is JAEoFUAP (Just Another Example of Fucked Up American Politics).

I'm going to do a write-in vote for Cthulu, why settle for the lesser evil.


funny... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341364)

"restrict dormitory visitation" that the kind of things that started the "revolution" in May 1968 in Paris...

what irony.... (2)

Just Your Average Li (70368) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341365)

> McGrath responded to this scenario: a student
> uses a campus Internet connection to decide
> which political candidates to support. That
> person is misusing university equipment, she
> said, just as if she used her legislative
> office phone to make long-distance personal
> phone calls.

I would guess that the "campus Internet connection" ISSUE will help students "decide which political candidates to support".... Not her for sure.

Supposed to be "Just your Average Linux User" but it got chopped off when they upgraded....

Oh my *sarcasm* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341366)

Well, well, well .. what have we here? It couldn't possibly be yet another theocratic social conservative Repuglican who feels that it is her duty to legislate the morality of others. A total ban on opposite-sex visitors to dorm rooms? Are you fucking kidding me? Apparently this ridiculous shrew believes that men and women cannot be in close quarters without ripping their clothes off. "The porn problem?" Give me a break.

She then talks about how when she went to school in "the 1950s", there were plenty of things to do and places for "boys and girls to meet." Sweet Jesus! I live in the USA, but when I see stories like this, I understand completely why so many people outside of the US find us completely puzzling. This story floors me. It really does. Sure, it's only one lone person, and she's probably drunk, but this doesn't do much to help the US's image as a prudish theocracy that is hostile to anything that falls outside of its narrowly-defined boundaries of allowable behavior.

[OT] -2? (1)

slashdot-terminal (83882) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341367)

Maybe but did I miss something but when did slashdot officially anounce -2 level moderation?

Hetero Discrimination (2)

psychophil.com (2573) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341368)

My college tried to pass the same type of 'opposite-sex' dorm room visitation as well. We were able to have it killed very quickly when many students pointed out that this rule discriminated against heteros since gay/lesbian students could have their partners in their rooms without any restriction.

10 years later this same campus has 6 co-ed dorms with only 2 same sex dorms.

Somebody should ask the senator if this means he is 'pro-gay' and see how fast that gets re-worded.

wont pass. (1)

Zurk (37028) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341369)

this bill isnt going to fly. firstly, it'll drop the quality of education in setting up and running such a huge and costly monitoring network..anyone realise that network traffic at universities is 10 Mbps per node and EVERY node will have to be monitored under this proposal ? most big univs have at least 5000 nodes on their networks. plus each ethernet jack which can take a DHCP machine will have to be monitored..at 4 jacks per wall per room..plus the external traffic will have to be firewalled/filtered AND monitored at speeds of 2+ Gbps and above at most univs. most univs dont even bother firewalling since its too expensive and costly..theres no finnancial data or anything important on campus networks anyway. The proposal to ban opposite sex meeting in their rooms is laughable at best. methinks the senators slowly going insane.

Re:That settles it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341370)

Oh shut up you dumb dick. This doesn't have anything to do with Republicans, it won't pass, and it's hardly fascist. It's just heavy-handed and stupid.

Oh, wow. (1)

MaximumBob (97339) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341371)

Wow, this is kind of fascist. I mean, seriously. One can make a good argument for only allowing campus internet connections to be used for educational purposes. I don't agree that it's worth the effort, but I can see the argument.

But restricting opposite-sex dorm visitation? Excuse me? Most college students are above 18 (re: the age of consent). I don't think that the government has any right, or reason, to tell me that I can't have a girl in my dorm room, for any purpose, at any time of day.

Dorm Life (1)

jegolf (78804) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341372)

This woman appears to believe that all dorms are created equal. I live at ASU in dorm housing with two bedrooms, a kitchen, family room and balcony. I'd say that the supervision already in place with 24 hour on duty Resident Assistants is sufficient to deal with any disturbance problems. The audacity of this woman to tell me that I cannot have opposite sex friends over in my family room is unbelievable! Maybe she will let us come over to her house to study.

Interesting idea (1)

Jimhotep (29230) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341374)

I can see it now.
"These young people come to our universitys to learn and perpare themselves for the future. They
should have no need or spare time to explore the
filth offered by the internet. So we must regulate
this unproductive use of our state owned equipment."

"And, while we are at it, we should increase tuition
to cover the cost of our internet connections"

From a staff perspective..... (1)

provolt (54870) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341375)


I work in a residence hall and this proposal would be a nightmare to enforce. At my school we have escort and guest hours. During most of the day we can roam freely between buildings. During escort hours everyone that does not live in the building must be escorted by someone who does. After 2:00am, only residents are allowed in the building.

Those are the rules, but they are CONSTANTLY broken, and extremely hard to enforce.To try to enforce something like what is being proposed would take huge amounts of staff, or it would simply be broken routinely.

-------
provolt

Re:Lack of Slash 0.4 Release == hypocrisy (0)

MattXVI (82494) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341376)

Viva la revolution!

YAWTKGFGA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341377)

(Yet Another Way To Keep Geeks From Getting Any.)

The obviously selfish reason that I have is simple. I'm in New York. My girlfriend is not. As it is, it's not easy to see her. If I'm not even allowed in her dorm, then it's even tougher, obviously. If this practice spreads, then we geeks won't even have long distance relationships to fall back on! It'll be the end of civilization as we know it! Within three generations, all humanity will be as dumb as a post, all thanks to politicians. Somehow, I'm not surprised.

Adults & tenant privacy (1)

adam (1231) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341378)

Last I checked, most college students are over the age of 18, which makes them adults for all purposes other than drinking alcohol. Are there any tenant-privacy laws that would prevent this sort of thing from happening? Seems to me that for housing purposes, at least, the students are simply renting rooms from the university (which is owned by the state), so the relationship is tenant-landlord.

So the legality of this would depend on whether it's legal for landlords to prohibit these kinds of activities through a lease. Which, unfortunately, I believe it is. Still pretty damn lame, though.

On the bright side, perhaps this will wake up Arizona college students and get them to vote in large numbers...:)

sounds like she didn't get any in college. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341379)

How lame is that?

Once the government starts telling you who you can have visit you in an apartment you are paying for, they have well-overstepped the lines of what they have the right to do.

Here's an interesting one... (1)

pen (7191) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341380)

She said both of the Internet bills are designed to "get at the porn problem." She responded to First Amendment objections by saying that the proposals have been reviewed by lawyers, who found them constitutional. (The bolding is mine.)

Do I really need to comment on this?

--

Re:Take your head out of your ass! (2)

slashdot-terminal (83882) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341381)

Actually, this reminds me of an art exhibit that a student made at UCSB last year. She took hard-core porn that she found on the internet and used photoshop to place the images into popular advertisements that were scanned in from
magazines. You know that RCA ad with the two dogs sitting in front of the TV? You couldn't imagine the filth they were watching. Anyway, I'm betting that her art work material-gathering research would have been banned under
this bill. Censorship stinks.


Interesting what exactly was the message? That television was bad/degrading? I however agree that censorship does indeed suck.

I have one question: Exactly what are students with high speed connections supposed to use their bandwidth for now?


Downloading the linux kernel and slashdot silly!

Absurdity (1)

Asperity (9314) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341382)

McGrath responded to this scenario: a student uses a campus Internet connection to decide which political candidates to support. That person is misusing university equipment, she said, just as if she used her legislative office phone to make long-distance personal phone calls.



On the other hand, the same student, viewing the same pages for a class assignment, is using the equipment properly, she said.




That's exactly the same as forbidding students to use the university library unless they're only checking out books directly related to some class assignment. What a great way to further Arizona students' education, huh?

Re:That settles it... (2)

jjeffries (17675) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341383)

Fascism, n. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.

-dumb dick

What a knucklehead... (1)

MAXOMENOS (9802) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341384)

Oh what I wouldn't do to be living in this person's district, so I could run against her.


TOYWAR [toywar.com] !!

Re:[OT] -2? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341385)

they didnt. but its online now. you can kill a post to -2 since around 3-4 stories back.

Re:!!A MUCH BIGGER PROBLEM!! (1)

quadong (52475) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341386)

Great, except you got the numbers wrong. It is 75 cents to the dollar now, not 60. I heard this figure on NPR just this morning. So really the men only get 25 cents, or one third of what the women get. Much worse than you thought, eh?

(To all you people who will misunderstand me: Yes, I am kidding, I understand that he is kidding, please do not flame me for being stupid, at worst, I am failing to be funny.)

Monitoring internet == Way more $$$ (1)

Lxy (80823) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341387)

First of all, the whole idea of "wasting taxpayer money for unrelated activities" is old and unsubstantiated. The cost of wiring dorms for internet access is the same whether you're researching or downloading p0rn. The act of monitoring requires extra software and extra staff. Our e-mail system here at work is tax funded, and we KNOW that at least 30-40% is non-work related. The cost of hiring two full-time techs to monitor every transaction far outweighs the tax money lost by sending unrelated e-mail. The same principle applies to dorm internet access. It's just not worth it. People are responsible for their actions, and whether they're researching or whether they're e-mailing bomb threats it's not the university's problem.

I find it interesting that she can even compare today's dorms to the 1950s. Back then people weren't in need of computers. Going to school now almost requires having full-time computer access, especially in the dorms. If McGrath wants dorms from the 50s, the school has to follow suit. This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

5 words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341388)

I am glad I graduated!

Four years is not that long . . . enjoy your mental prison camp!

Cut off the phone, to (1)

Nerds (126684) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341389)

Maybe students should only be able to make phone calls to their professors to ask for help. It's not like the students are getting a bargain, tuition gets more ridiculous each year. For what they pay they deserve all the bandwidth they can use.

They will be burned at the stake. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341390)

You missed the part of the legislation that calls for the public execution of all known and/or suspected homosexuals and lesbians. It will be kind of like that bonfire at Texas A&M, only on a smaller scale. It would be immoral to allow same-sex relationships to occur at any place in a God-fearing country.

please moderate (0)

Bad_CRC (137146) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341391)

if these are at 0 I have to see them (cause thats what most anonymous posts are) but at -1 I can just read real comments.

Re:So friggin what?? (1)

TheLaser (122479) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341392)

This is not for the legistators to decide. This is a matter of individual University policy.
I agree with you on this point, but something the article neglected to mention was that this bill applies to the state-run and regulated universities. It may not apply to private universities, and as such they have more of a right to regulate what they are paying for. (Though it is still very annoying)

Then why give them all dorm room access? (3)

AllynKC (88909) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341393)

High speed internet connections have become a selling point for universities that have it in the dorms; and a major stumbling block for those universities that don't.

Now, after investing who knows how much, they want to take away a large degree of that usability? These systems clearly have the bandwidth, so they can't claim that all the non-educational activity is stealing from students involved in educational research. Just another case of someone trying to superimpose his/her morals onto society. As long as no crime is being committed, the students should have full access to the internet.

As for that visitation thing; get real. At my school, some dorm halls had that, and those who wanted it could live there, but they always had a tougher time filling those rooms than those on the rest of campus. Apply it to the full University system, and off campus landlords will be rejoicing.

first amendment rights? (1)

Daala42 (99562) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341394)

frankly i don't see what we have to worry about from this republican. students in college are 18+; they are full adults. they can vote, they can enroll in the army and sacrifice themselves for the country should we go to war.
and i would hope that most people understand that college students are not children. they're on their own. the fact that they can vote demonstrates that they are trusted to be able to make THEIR OWN decisions on what's right, and on what's wrong.
since they can make their own decisions--why do they need some grumpy old, stuffed-shirt politician to do it for them?
not to mention the first amendment rights that it violates. freedom of speech--freedom to peaceable assemble--these are violated by restricting internet access (a means of speech) and by restricting co-ed visitations to dorms (a means of peaceable assembly, even if it be only a few people for a party or whathaveyou).
in short..it'll never happen.

(((one more time to kill the pain)))
visit my webpage [cjb.net]
-----------------------------------------------

Filters....bleh. (1)

aTRaTiCa (141651) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341395)

What about the students studying art? Some consider pornography and art. Most college students a 18 so they should be smart enough to know what their doing and be mature enough to be productive. I can possibly see banning napster if it was talking a large chunk of bandwitch, but not filtering unpolitically correct information or stuff to that sort. That violates many freedoms we have... Hell, here at Penn State and most other campuses I've been at and visited you can pretty much find any mp3, program, or whatnot on the local LAN. Why bother using the outside net? :-) heh....

Re:what people think: (1)

zempf (4454) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341396)

I think the worst thing about her bill was not the internet access problem, but her talk of banning people of the opposite sex from dorm rooms. I don't know what puritanistic students she talked to ("we are only responding to the requests of students"), but I can't see this being received well by anyone on campus.

-mike kania

Let's be rational (1)

kilpatjr (65285) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341397)

I see two ways of looking at this, in terms of property. The most direct way of looking at things is to say that the state owns the schools, and the lines leading to the dorms. Therefore, they should have the right to restrict access to the internet. However, this isn't like some parents burdening their kids with NetNanny; these are public institutions. By installing a "filter" to close off access to certain sites, which may be vital in expressing opinions held by the students, this legislation would restrict free speech in schools. Further, who is to say what is educational in the first place?

Why shouldn't they and a better solution (2)

swb (14022) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341398)

While it does seem to smack of censorship to limit internet access at schools to specific educational usage, it doesn't seem totally out of whack.

Given that bandwidth is a limited commodity, shouldn't that commodity be doled at an educational insititution *first* to those using for legitimate educational purposes? Tying up that bandwidth downloading porn, MP3s, playing games or anything else that's not specifically educational seems to be limiting network usage for people who are trying to do something educational with it.

The answer is probably not in censorship per se, but in tighter control of bandwidth. When I was a CSci student many moons ago, we were given mainframe accounts with a specific allocation of connection time AND CPU utilization. If you screwed around and played games, you burned up your CPU or connect time and coulndn't do assignments unless you went and bought more time. Assigned time was pretty generous and I always had a bunch left over.

Internet connections should have the same type of limitations. Each quarter you get X Mbytes of throughput. Use it for school or for screwing around -- but run out, and you're paying out of pocket. People who need more time (ie, I'm a CSci student writing networking software) would be granted more time, people doing internet-specific research could have their departments buy them time, and so on.

There should perhaps be "peak" and "offpeak" time or similar models so that screwing around at 3AM doesn't "cost" as much as doing so in the middle of the afternoon.

Re:5 words (2)

slashdot-terminal (83882) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341399)

Four years is not that long . . . enjoy your mental prison camp!

And I thought that college was supposed to make a person liberal. When does life stop being a prison camp. We now have life being crappy from K-12 now we have life being crappy for 4 more years if you want to go to college. All I can say to this is ***************DOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHH!!!!*****.

priorities? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341400)

Maybe the politicians should be making sure dorms have adequate fire protection (ala Seton Hall) before wasting time on this crap.

Of course this is the same state that had certain politicians freaking out about the PIII serial number, wanting to ban it. (Intel is a big employer here).

Aren't politicians the best? - Former Sun Devil

Notes from the inside... (5)

Patman (32745) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341401)


As both a computer science student and a Resident Assistant, I fall on both sides of this edict - those affected by it, and those who would(if in Arizona) be required to enforce it.

Although RA's, in general, get a lot of flak for not "letting people have any fun", there is one thing that RA's generally have in common - we don't want to enforce more regulations then necessary.

In this case, I have a whole lotta problems with this. In effect, a regulation like the one dealing with inter-gender dorm visitation would require me to stop people from having sex.

I won't be doing that.

Mind you, this isn't a moral judgement. If you want to have extramarital sex, so long as it's legal for you to do so(i.e., age of consent), I'm not planning to stop you. That's your choice. I'm not planning to pigeonhole residents who live for me just because some state senator decides that Sex Is Dirty.

The network restriction is even more ludicrous. Porn viewers don't really hurt anyone. True, they take up shared bandwidth, but I doubt enough porn is shoved through ANY school's machines to make a noticeable difference in network traffic or available bandwidth. Second, this idea of filtering cuts to the very heart of free speech - in effect, you are preventing legitimate adults from using services that they have paid for in ways that are perfectly legal and don't hurt anyone. Some schools decide that they don't want porn on a school-by-school basis. While I may not agree with the decision, it's something that each school needs to decide. Personally, i don't see many schools deciding that monitoring porn habits is a good use of employee time.

Finally, I don't think that filtering enhances "education" any more. Is Slashdot eduicational? Well, I don't have any classes that talk about it, so not really. Same with the Weather Channel Online, CNN Interactive, etc. Where do we draw the line between educational and non?

The answer: Don't regulate it. If a school has a bandwidth problem, and they want to regulate, fine. But, don't regulate me because you have a "moral" problem with what I do, and because you're a state senator.

Everyone, install a proxy yourself (1)

jsm (5728) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341402)

The more proxies there are available, the less effective any kind of censorship can be. Here's one easy-to-install CGI-based proxy [jmarshall.com] . OK, it's a shameless plug, but there are other proxy programs available, both CGI-based and "true" port-based proxies (which are harder to conceal). But stash away copies in case you need them in the future, or to send to others who need them.

Re:YAWTKGFGA (1)

aTRaTiCa (141651) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341403)

Thank god my girlfriends college doesn't have such a rule. I don't know what I'd do without spending those long weekends with her in her dorm... mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.... Er, I should shut p now :-)

Re:Words fail me... (1)

Drath (50447) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341404)

good thing I have a log on the fridge in my dorm room.. for educational purposes.. yeah that's it..

When will ppl ever learn.... (1)

AnarchoFreak_00 (126755) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341405)

When will ppl ever learn that cencoring contect will never work.

1. It dosn't sovle the problem, just covers it up.

2. It never works anyway, ppl will find away aroud it, or they will just blatantly keep in doing it. And i say good for them.

If you spend all ur time downloading porn, who really cares, they'll grow up. Of couse they are keep away from what they wan't the'll just want it more.

Censor ship sux, it never has worked, never will, and just ends up causing more harm then trouble.

do u really think that if everyone, every TV show, freely said fuck, or cunt, that those words would still be offensive.. i think not...

- - -

Reality Check? (1)

mackd (179) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341406)

What the hell? Somebody actually sits in a room somewhere and thinks this trash up?

This is like telling a college student that they can't use their TELEPHONE to call home since it isn't for specific educational purposes! This lady should get down off her soapbox and take a chill pill. I think by the time someone graduates from academy, they're well equipped to think for themselves. What a concept!

If she was in any way endowed with intelligence, she would realize that many students would go somewhere else rather than be subjected to something as lame as this.

Get a grip.

Banning servers (1)

Roger_Wilco (138600) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341407)

At some U. Waterloo residences the people are not allowed to have servers. But with static IPs and the total absence of any sort of firewall, the rule can easily be overlooked. (My residence does not dissallow servers, so I know I'm all right).

I would say that running a Linux server is "appropriate educational use", especially for anyone studing computers.

No, it's even worse! (1)

Marvin_OScribbley (50553) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341408)

The woman gets 60 cents, and the man who gets the other 40 cents is the TAX MAN... so the real man is left with zero!

Cry me a river (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341409)

So tech nerds in higher education CANT run porn, vcd, mp3, warez FTP sites in their dorm. BFD! Half of the people who deal with VCD's are on *.edu sites. The only real problem with this is their yearly fee's for school actually pay for these networks so they should be able to do with it as they please. What good is a Internet2 GigaPop when nothing but porn and mp3's pass through it. If they actually use it for education then most of it will be used for plagerism reports.

I wonder if... (1)

bopo (105833) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341410)

Another key issue for McGrath is the use of government resources, paid for by taxpayers, for personal matters, she said.

I wonder if the Representative has ever sent or received email from a family member while at the office...

education is not employment (4)

bla (96124) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341411)

what really disturbs me about this is her comparing using her phone at work to make personal calls to a student using university internet facilities. AFAIK, she is being *paid* by the government of AZ to do her job. the phone in her office is part of the equipment provided for her in order that she can do her job. but a student is *paying* to go to university. this is a state university and, as such, is funded by taxpayers. but isn't also funded by the students' own tuition? so shouldn't the students have some control over the equipment they're paying for? (disclaimer: i don't personally know about AZ, but a PA resident does have to pay tuition to go to Penn State). if students choose to waste their time downloading pr0n, what else are they hurting besides (potentially) their GPA? by virtue of the student paying for their education, i feel that they are in a state wholly uncomparable to that of a Company employee.

and i'm not even going to comment on the blatant attempt to legislate morals here.

YOU CAN'T MODERATE TO -2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341413)

The only way a post can reach -2 is if it is moderated down to -1, *AND* has the -1 "short comment pentalty."

Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty." Make your message very long to defeat the "short comment penalty."

Re:opposite sex (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341414)

lol. tell the republicans who made this bill that, and watch them turn white as a sheet. :)

Half of school is... (2)

Mullen (14656) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341415)

Half of school is what you do outside of the class room while naked with someone of the opposite sex.
Okay, Internet connections are not being used for school work but that is a perk of living in the dorms. Living in dorm is kinda lame, but alot of places you have no choice.
The downside of dorms are someone is always looking over your shoulder, you can't have alcohol or drugs, you have to be around people you don't like, and you lose a alot of privacy. What you get are friends, knowledge of parties and a fast Internet connection. Take any of that away, and living in dorms is like living with your parents but costs *alot* of money.

I think this Republicain lady is alittle uptight. She probably was one those girls in the dorms that did not have sex, do drugs, drink or goto parties. So fo some wierd reason, she is taking it out on everyone else.

Political Web Site Scenario (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341416)

Just wonder about the example she gives concerning the political web site viewing. Seems that would be taking two people doing exactly the same thing, and only prosecuting one of the two though their actions were identical. Does anyone know what the Constitution says about this kind of thing? Seems to me it can't view it in too great of a light.

that's why i got an apartment and cable modem... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341417)

solves those problems.

Re:Preparing students. . . (2)

slashdot-terminal (83882) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341418)

Wow, this is just what will be needed to ensure that our graduating college students are well-prepared for taking direction from "superior" individuals/corporations/governments rather than being able to think for themselves. What is
this, 8th grade? 9th grade? *When* is this? 1955? 1957? INTERNET FILTERS?? I thought we were finally getting past this stuff. Guess not.


Well I say that if they decide to put internet filters on that people should make sure that the sysadmin gets a little "review". Meaning that any slight infraction of the code and the syadmin should be booted out of a job. If they don't set an example then I guess everyone else can do what they want. Just connect via your isp or something and use they service via the university's initial network.

Re:That settles it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341419)

Since when did fascism have anything to do with being a republican? I love all you people out there who are so high + mighty about how great your cause is and how 'open' you are when at the same time you don't try to see the other point of view and instead spend your time making stereotypes and complaining about how bad the "other guy" is. Fix your own damn problems....

Re:5 words (1)

quadong (52475) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341420)

It is too bad you know... People describe high school like that and long for the freedom of college. Now there are people trying their hardest to make us describe college the same way. At least we can be assured that such efforts will ultimitly (pardon sp) fail. There simply aren't enough people out there that favor abolition of sex for it to succeed

stupid (1)

Hard_Code (49548) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341421)

who the hell is congress to say what private institutions can and can't do? If I want to make "Orgy U" I should be free to. Now, it may very well be that government funds these institutions...but depriving colleges' funding because of some groups moral agenda is just plain _wrong_. If nothing illegal is being done then the government should be blind to the specifics.

[rant]

You know, I've come to the realization that there is a fundamental paradox in the conservative movement. Conservatives, in my experience are usually also libertarians. Government is a necessary evil. They want less of it, and none of it in their business. They want complete freedom to pursue their own happines, without government sticking their noses in their business. YET, it is these same people, enjoying their right to picket abortion clinics, bear arms and form militias, who want to ram their special-interest moral-supremecist agenda through government onto YOU. Government shouldn't tell US what to do...unless of course it is restricting YOU from same-sex marriages, abortion, pre-marital sex, "perverting our youth", viewing pornography, saying dirty words, taking the lord's name in vain, being rude to elders, biting your nails, or any other form of being "un-American". Freedom works the same for /everybody/. You can't have it both ways.

[/rant]

Ok, i've checked "No Score +1 Bonus" and put on my asbestos jacket...


Jazilla.org - the Java Mozilla [sourceforge.net]

VPN is your friend (1)

mbyte (65875) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341422)

I don't think that they will monitor ..
Just blocking all services and then only allowing
few selected is MUCH easier. If you install squid
on the gw server, with some descent logfile-analyzer, make squid only accept requests
with passwords, and voila, you have an easy system
for such purposes.
(I administer something like this in an company ... but it's neccessary, without it the employees
would saturate our line 24/7 ....)

A Product of the System (1)

Imortus (133449) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341423)

In Haiku:

Arizona has
students who will not stand for
shoddy connections.

I am a product of the Arizona University system (don't laugh, cry for me instead.) While it's nice that our governor wants to make headlines for herself, her ideas will never pass in this state. Arizona and Arizona State Universities pride themselves to much on being two of the few wells of liberalism in a rather conservative state. Denying students the right to fraternize within a dorm with the opposite sex would cut new (and current) enrollment drastically. As far as scaling back internet access, they would find themselves under less, but perhaps more effective, resistance. In a state that wishes to become a new mecca for tech-savvy employers to relocate, hindering the development of their potential work force would be debilitating. Granted, a majority of useage of the 'net might go towards wasteful projects (ordering pizza, porn, mp3s), enough of it is done in worthwhile pursuit that our governor should seriously reconsider her intentions. When the economy refuses to live up to the high expectation set for it within the state, the people would have no one to blame but their chief elected official.

College is for learning... (1)

Saidin (105994) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341424)

So how can we expect people to learn to be adults, when we continue to treat them like children?

Re:Arizona has some problems (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341425)

I'd rather live in China than Arizona. China has much more freedom.

Scary (1)

glwillia (31211) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341426)

As a student at Arizona State University, representative McGrath's bill would directly affect me (I'm even reading Slashdot from ASU right now!) I have several questions regarding this bill:

1) McGrath states that using school computers/internet connections for anything other than research is a waste of taxpayers' money. If this is all paid for by taxpayers, where does my tuition money go?

2) Would I be prohibited from reading Slashdot and Freshmeat as well as porno sites?

3) I have a friend who's a security guard, and he says one of the most common arrests is of people having sex on the 50-yard line at Sun Devil Stadium. With this in mind, why is MCGrath so concerned about consenting adults doing it privately, in a dorm room?

4) College students are some of the most proficient crackers around. The administrators at ASU aren't the most knowledgeable (they reboot the HP-UX servers every night). Does anyone think a filter will really stop anyone?

I didn't attend college to view pr0n from an OC3, but this just smacks of one lady's deluded attempt to push her Puritan ideals on everyone else.

Right in principle, wrong in practice (1)

alansz (142137) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341427)

If I'm a news administrator, I have the right to decide what to carry on my news server, right? That's why spammers complaining about UDPs don't get very far with me.

Well, the fact is, if I own a network, I probably should have the right to decide what to carry over it. In this case, Arizona owns that network, its people presumably expect to provide that network for educational purposes, and its elected representatives get to decide what can be carried on it. (Unless it's a common carrier, or, as a governmentally-owned system, the 1st amendment applies, of course).

Students may be forced to find alternative internet providers (dialups) rather than use the campus network, just as you might have to find an alternative USENET source if you didn't want to participate in a UDP.

So, the bill can be right in principle (absent the 1st amendment issue). But totally wrong in practice if the goal is to save the taxpayer's money, of course -- it will certainly cost more to enforce than it will save in reduced "porn bandwidth".

(Now, you and I know that the goal is really to return to some kind of imaginary "when I was girl, people were proper" morality, but the argument is made on cost as well, and, if the democratic process works, will be answered that way in Arizona and this bill will go down in flames.)

You americans are cracking me up! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341428)

Yeah I know I'll be moderated down but ... No opposite sex visitation? Bwaah ah ah! And oral sex being forbidden, you can't sneak into the parking lot. BWAAAAH AHA HAHAHAHAAHAHH!!!

SLASHDOT CAN'T HANDLE IT!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341429)

HTTP/1.1 500 Internal Server Error Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 21:31:11 GMT Server: Apache/1.3.6 (Unix) mod_perl/1.21 Connection: close Transfer-Encoding: chunked Content-Type: text/html 255
Internal Server Error
The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request.
Please contact the server administrator, malda@slashdot.org and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error.

More information about this error may be available in the server error log.



------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------

Apache/1.3.6 Server at linux360.dn.net Port 80

On a serious note (1)

Kagato (116051) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341430)

Back in the 50's, yeah University was free or low cost. The state paid most of the bill. Now days you're lucky to get by under 2K a quarter.

My Point: State Funding for school hasn't exactly been on the raise in the past 20 years. Until the state can prove they're paying the majority of the bill I don't think they have any right ot dictate college life.

I think it would be much more productive to look at all the money that goes into college and figure out where that goes. Considering all the money that sports generate, money from alums., money from corporations, etc. Then consider sitting in a 300 student Calc I class being taught by the unpaid non-english speaking TA. Maybe the fact that most students who are paying their own way feel like they've been screwed has something to do with the drop out rate...

Re:Why shouldn't they and a better solution (1)

Foogle (35117) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341431)

Peak and Offpeak huh? If my dorm IP address is "10.10.20.20" do save a buck or two?

Seriously though, it's not a bad idea (your idea, not mine).

-----------

"You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

Re:From a staff perspective..... (1)

Jimhotep (29230) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341432)

you might be on to something there

"huge amounts of staff" = more state employees = higher taxs = more power for the politicians who thought it up in the first place

My seismograph now uses a Klien bottle filled with ink to plot on a mobius strip.

Re:Adults & tenant privacy (1)

Asperity (9314) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341433)

The problem with university housing is that residents don't sign a normal lease. The housing agreements pretty much give away all the rights one would expect from a normal landlord at the outset -- or so the housing director at my university told me when I asked him.

We've got highly-restricted dorm visitation hours here, too, in Mississippi, which aren't controlled by individual universities but by the state college board, so neither the students nor local administration have anything to do with it. I suppose things could change if someone put up a fight, but nobody else seems to think it's a problem. And somehow I doubt voting would change a thing. I mean, both Thad Cochran and Trent Lott are Ole Miss alumni -- we'd only get more of the same.

this out of Arizona? (2)

Barbarian (9467) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341434)

The most corrupt state in the USA? The one where all the spamming MLM pyramid-marketting comes out of (probably the only one where they're legal)? THEY want to get all high and mighty about internet access now?

Re:So friggin what?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341435)

If not - move to Amsterdam

Sen. John McCain of Arizona has the same idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341436)

Sen. John McCain of Arizona (the guy running for president) has the same idea for libraries. Of course the problem is who gets access to the list of censored sites. Who gets to have a say what is censored and what is not. The ACLU was on a censored site list!!

Re:Cry me a river (1)

nukem1999 (142700) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341437)

*Those young whipper-snappers do nothing all day but look at porn* News for you, gramps, we do much more than that at the universities. I'm a student myself, so I think I'd know better than you. Tell me, what do you use your internet connection for? Reading Slashdot? Well, that's not educational. Playing a video game to relieve stress? Not educational. Checking your personal email? That's not educational. Checking web sites to see if you have enough bran in your diet? Nope. Trying to order new computer parts? Not educational. P.S. Please define Internet2 GigaPop

Re:please moderate (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341438)

If these are at 1 I have to see them (cause that's what most useless posts are) but at 0 I can just read real comments.

Pardon the mocking tone, but all you do by replying with a "please moderate" is draw more attention to the post. It really doesn't speed up the moderation process, trust me. You can't expect inappropriate comments to be moderated down inthe first 8 minutes of their existance, jeez.

Not all Americans are xians/republicans/moralists (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 14 years ago | (#1341439)

.. and the ones that *are* are embarassments.

Don't think that we *like* having these people in our midst, but they certainly have the right to be here and make their views known. I'm willing to live with them, so long as I have the right to speak my mind as well. Works for me.

Mass Exodus to Private Universities (1)

Col. Panic (90528) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341440)

Circa soon: Reuters: College students fed up with Rep. Jean McGrath (R., AZ) cited constrictive legislation as the main reason for leaving the University of Arizona for private universities University of Phoenix and Grand Canyon University. One student was quoted as saying, "I might come back in a couple of years when that b*tch is out of office."

[/END RANT]

sounds like me college.. (1)

Ribo99 (71160) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341441)

I went to a private religious-affiliated University (that should probably remain nameless) that had restricted visitation hours. You got caught, you got written up. If it happens many times, you get kicked out.
They had also installed filters to the campus network. They were removed fairly quickly because they didn't work to well. People were getting locked out of espn.com or some other nonesense.
A private University is well within their power and rights to do something like this...but I think they should really think it over before they do.
College is supposed to prepare students for the future. By treating the students like children and making curfues and installing web filters, a university is doing more harm then good. If a student is treated like a child, they will act like a child. I *know* this is true. I went to school with people like this. It was more like high school then college.
I've seen the same thing a hundred times with overbearing parents. My roommate is one big example, he is a child of very overbearing parents, not letting him make his own decisions. He eventually rebelled against his parents and now does whatever he damn well pleases (sometimes not to my aproval as his roommate). :)
Anyone ever read a Clockwork Orange? That example may be a little extreme, but I think the principle holds up well.
Enough ranting...
---

Re:opposite sex (5)

Sloppy (14984) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341442)

This is a great opening. Just start calling it the "Gay Collage Students Privacy Bill" and watch as support whithers.

"So, senator, how are you voting on the Gay Collage Students Privacy Bill?"

"The what bill?!?"

"You know. The one that gets rid of those pesky girls. The ones to keep girls away from our horny studs so that there's less competition."

"Um, uh, er... I .. uh .. hm. I have always supported the rights of gays to .. uh.. er. I uh.. I mean, I disapprove of .. uh. What bill is that again?"

"You know. The one that keeps the horny studs from getting any pr0n and also keeps the girls away. So that when they just have do appease the monster, instead of choking the chicken or banging that luscious coed, they turn to their fellow man for help."

"Um, er, uh... I'm not sure I like the sound of that bill."

"Thank you, senator."


---

Re:Arizona has some problems (many...) (1)

desertfool (21262) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341443)

Arizona is an extremely conservative state (except for Tucson!) and this sh*t happens all the time. At least our state government doesn't take bribes and governors get impeached all every few years.

Oh, geez, what was I thinking. They do.

Out of touch (2)

DanMcS (68838) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341444)

She said when she was a student at Arizona State University in the late 1950s...
Isn't that the real problem? This looks to be just political grandstanding, about issues she isn't prepared to understand, looked at through a viewpoint that's a half-century too old. And you know what? Older people vote, and older people will believe her when she says that:
the atmosphere at Arizona universities as "not conducive to learning." The primary indication of this, McGrath said, is the high number of students dropping out after their freshman year.
Actually, the reason a lot of students are dropping out after freshman year has little to do with the school, and a lot to do with American culture right now, which proclaims that you have to go to college. So people get there, and a good chunk decide it isn't for them. That's where her drop-out figures are coming from.
According to that article, neither the students nor the administrators want this bill, and she's pressing ahead anyway. Legislating morality, indeed. She just needs an issue to get popular on, there's an election coming up.

Out of curiosity.... (1)

Jestrzcap (46989) | more than 14 years ago | (#1341445)

..how much bandwidth does "educational material" require? If all I needed was educational material I would not have a cable modem. People don't buy broadband because they are having problems with getting to www.whitehouse.gov [whitehouse.gov] . They get broadband because they are having problems getting to www.whitehouse.com [whitehouse.com] (i'm assuming everyone knows the difference between those two links). What I'm trying to say here is "What the HELL are you going to use 3MBps on educational material for?" Let people have their bandwidth. Leave us the hell alone.

~Jester
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?