From: Jeff Shultz 

On Sun, 28 May 2000 20:35:44 -0700, "Gregg Strom/BRYX Int'l"
 wrote:


>The government has required set manufacturers to include it. (Have they also
>required broadcasters to send the signal?)
>
>I have to pay for this.
>
Yes, you do. If you buy a new TV. I admit, as someone forced to pay Al
Gore's internet tax because my phone line is the second one in the
residence, this bothers me.
OTOH, it may keep prices down to the current level, or only a minimal
increase, instead of what might happen if the manufacturers had to run two
production lines, with the extra hassles in stocking and whatnot.

>> and start loosening up the fasteners in every piece of furniture in
>> the house, having a V-Chip doesn't mean you need to use it.
>>
>> But don't take away the functionality for those who do wish to use it.
>
>Those who wish to use it can pay for it themselves.

Care to dream up a scheme where it can be added as an aftermarket feature
where it can't be circumvented by a halfway intelligent teenager? If the TV
functions without the chip present, you've just subverted the whole thing.

>
>> I could also note that your profession forces a bit of bias on this
>> issue.  (are you that interested in kids watching you?)
>
>No. But I don't want people prejudiced against erotic materials by
>government controls.

 government controls would be about the last thing on my list
of things that would prejudice people against erotic materials...

For that matter, the FCC couldn't even make their "limited programming
hours" thing hold against Playboy.

>(At a minimum, I think religious programming should be included in the
>blockable categories....for it>)

If someone reasonably intelligent was setting up the categories (doubtful)
I wouldn't mind seeing _everything_ categorized somehow. Personally I'd
like to guarantee that I'd never see Barney or bad saturday morning
cartoons on my TV again.
--
Jeff Shultz
http://www.wvi.com/~jbshultz
"I'll be very glad when this term is over."

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5