Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sony PlayStation (Games)

PlayStation Home And Porn - No Problems 69

Posted by Zonk
from the match-made-in-dallas dept.
Via Eurogamer, a post on the 'semi-official' ThreeSpeech blog essentially saying that Sony doesn't see porn as an issue for the upcoming Home PS3 service. Sony's Phil Harrison was on the other end of the blog's questions, and after reminding us that avatars won't be able to interact, it will be easy to blacklist people, and they will have lots of filters in place: "Well I'm disappointed that you would use those as the first questions ... I think Home should be used for a much wider and more beneficial scope than [porn], but I think that people can express their creativity inside Home in a wide variety of ways and it's not necessarily for us to dictate what that should be."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PlayStation Home And Porn - No Problems

Comments Filter:
  • by mgabrys_sf (951552) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @04:58PM (#18435413) Journal
    Then you have a problem.
    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      PS3 doesn't have vibrating controllers. It's lose-lose with this console.
      • by trdrstv (986999)
        PS3 doesn't have vibrating controllers. It's lose-lose with this console.

        Right. You want the Wii instead. It's the only system with a one handed vibrating controller. Ideal for Porn...

  • by antifoidulus (807088) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @05:05PM (#18435539) Homepage Journal
    "N'uh, it's my turn with the sex box, and her name is Sony"
  • by Runefox (905204) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @05:14PM (#18435663) Homepage
    I think that this is an incredibly mature, forward-thinking thing to say, coming from the inherently egotistical corporate giant. While it sounds like I just like my pr0nz0rz, which may or may not be true (you, the reader of this drivel, decide!), I honestly do believe that censorship, even in pornography, is the exact opposite to being beneficial to society as a whole. I'm all for cordoning off the areas and age-checking, however.

    That said, on a completely unrelated note, apparently Firefox doesn't underline the word "pr0nz0rz" as being a spelling mistake. Hmm.
    • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

      by ZakuSage (874456)
      Any word with a number in it is marked as not being a spelling mistake.
      • Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)

        by shaitand (626655)
        Last I checked Firefox doesn't correct spelling mistakes. Google toolbar does though.
        • by Threni (635302)
          > Last I checked Firefox doesn't correct spelling mistakes.

          No, but it flags errors with a red dotted underline - you can right click for alternatives, or add the word to a dictionary.
          • by malsdavis (542216)
            Now if only they could get a spelling suggestion system which doesn't suck, that would be good.

            Personally, I'm sick and tired of Firefox's spell-checker coming up with ridiculous suggestions when I've only mis-spelt a single letter or two. I know Microsoft Office acquired the patent for the only decent spell-checker algorithm and Firefox doesn't have the capability to do a funky statistical analysis like Google, but surely they can come up with a spell checker which isn't almost completely useless!

            Oh well,
            • by powerlord (28156)

              I know Microsoft Office acquired the patent for the only decent spell-checker algorithm


              Just as an FYI Safari seems to do a decent job of correcting spelling also.
            • by Drantin (569921)
              So long as it marks the misspelled words, it isn't completely useless.
              • by malsdavis (542216)
                I suppose it is called a spell-checker after all and it does do that well enough. It's the spell-correcting facilities which leave a lot to be desired.

      • by Runefox (905204)
        That's a little silly, considering how most acronyms are considered spelling mistakes. Like NAND, DAC, AGP, PCI, etc.
        • NAND isn't an acronym, it doesn't stand for anything. It's just capitalized because logical operators are usually capitalized. NOT, AND, and OR aren't acronyms either.
  • So now I have to have to make up for the lack of avatar interaction with much hotter sexes chat? Geeze Sony way to move more work onto the consumer!
  • by Ravear (923203) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @05:16PM (#18435695)
    Because everybody's playing with their Wiis.

    Duh.
  • by cowscows (103644) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @05:23PM (#18435773) Journal
    I think Sony's best bet is to not really worry about what individuals are doing on their service in terms of porn, and just make sure it's possible for a parent to fully lock out their kids from the home service if they so desire. Trying to monitor what everyone's doing isn't realistic without taking out just about every way that individuals can customize their "homes." And once you've done that, then what's the point?

    They should just not care, and let people make out of it what they want. Sure, it'll probably end up just like Second Life with better graphics, but pretty much anything with significant user created content is 95% crap, and a large percentage porn.

    Maybe all Sony's going for is a glorified chat room. If that's the case, then I don't see the initial excitement about it lasting much beyond release. If they're instead trying to tie in to more of the myspace/flickr/blogging mindset, then they're going to have to give people some free reign to be creative. And yes, that means there's going to be a lot of people trying to do dirty things. But you know what, give the customers what they want, and they're going to be more willing to give you money.
  • Will there be parental locks and a "net nanny" service available for concerned parents?

    This should have been part of Sony's basic market research.. it's a real need that many parents have, no matter what you might think of it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      There is going to be no adult oriented content in any public space on Home.

      However, personal spaces are getting their content from each person's personal PS3. So if you have have adult content on your PS3 it can be used as a media source for your personal space. The only way you can enter and view someone else's personal space is to be directly invited by that person. So unless you actively seek out someone to invite you into their personal space and watch their streaming porn, it isn't going to be an issue
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Cadallin (863437)
      Here's a hint: If your kids are still so young that they need this kind of supervision, DON'T give them unsupervised access to on-line social networks, or the internet at all. You are the parent. It is YOUR responsibility. Don't want them surfing for porn? Don't let them surf the internet unsupervised! Because if you think Net Nanny et al are infalliable, boy are you in for a surprise. Gaming is an ADULT hobby. If you are letting your child have unsupervised access to Multiplayer Online games, you a
      • by QuantumG (50515)
        Way to totally miss the point. It doesn't matter what you or I think. It matters, to Sony's bottom line, what the bible belt thinks. You can't dictate to people what they should want from a product.

        Basically you've just outlined why the PS3 is not something the majority of parents in the US feel they should buy for their children.

        • by Yorrike (322502)
          The American Bible Belt is hardly Sony's major focus market. The rest of the world doesn't have as much a problem with porn as the prudes in fly-over country generally seem to (or at least the loudest citizens of which want you to believe). I just don't understand people's problem with porn. It's the recorded chronicle of human sexuality, and if there's one thing the major demographic of PS3 users, ie teenage boys, love, it's porn. The GP is right. Parents, as bad as most of them are, need to take respons
        • hell, don't just stop at Playstations, go ahead and keep the kids from using PCs and anything else attached to the internet. This will only retard the kids from those 'bible-belt' families and eventually lead to less job competition for the rest of us.
          • by QuantumG (50515)
            Well the point is that PCs have products that meet the needs of worried parents. If the PS3 doesn't, then it won't sell.
            • by nschubach (922175)
              ..then it won't sell in a small part of the world. "Net Nanny" PCs make up so very little of the internet traffic that it's not even funny.

              Just because some people are louder doesn't mean more people are standing behind them.
        • by Cadallin (863437)
          Hear that? Its the sound of millions of Bible Belt Denizens NOT running out and buying 1080P televisions.

          Screw the Bible Belt. Pandering to that market is like asking hobos what they look for in a sports car. Who gives a rat's ass what bible thumping, trailer park dwelling inbreds want? They don't have the cash to buy a PS3 in any case.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Ant P. (974313)

        Gaming is an ADULT hobby.

        Damn right! I _tried_ to tell them Pokémon was a satan-worship and bestiality simulator, but all I got were funny looks!
      • by fhage (596871)
        You missed the point. I'm that responsible parent. If Sony can't provide a way for parents to lock their kids out of unacceptable content, then many people will never purchase the device. I've taught my kids self discipline and don't have to enable any parental locks. However, if my kids lose my trust, I want to have that tool available. Without such control the only solution is to disable or remove the whole device. I can see so many potential risks and so few benefits using the Sony HOME, that I probabl
        • by pla (258480)
          You missed the point. I'm that responsible parent. If Sony can't provide a way for parents to lock their kids out of unacceptable content, then many people will never purchase the device.

          Wrong.

          You count as a tech-saavy parent. Most parents have absolutely no frickin' clue that the current gen of gaming consoles can let little Billy get porn easier than sneaking a peak at Dad's "Hustler" collection.

          You not buying a PS3 for that reason amounts to a piddling little drop in a great big bucket. Can you
        • However, if my kids lose my trust, I want to have that tool available. Without such control the only solution is to disable or remove the whole device

          Taking childrens toys away has worked well as a tool of discipline for millenia. The practice has not suddenly become outlawed, they are your kids.
      • by amuro98 (461673)
        Gaming is hardly an "adult" hobby, despite the shift in the demographics over the past 10 years.

        That said, the concern is a real one. I have a friend who has a 12 year old daughter. While she knows she's not supposed to go looking for certain types of material, every so often she'll get spam or come across something that's wildly inappropriate for her despite her following the rules.

        Sony's taking a HUGE risk here by forcing "Home" down everyone's throat, unless there's a way to turn "Home" off completely.
        • by Shados (741919)
          That always cracks me up when people point out concerns over kids having access to this kind of material, then give, as an example, a (most likely) post puberty teenager as an example.

          Aside the occasional retard who goes and meet total strangers offering candies and end up getting raped in the process, whats the worse that can happen to a 12 years old having access to that kind of content, may I know? I was watching hardcore porn when I was 8, and, ironically, I am now whats most likely considered a very "s
          • by xtracto (837672)
            Well, for starters you are on slashdot. Which means there is a *very high* probability that you are a geek. This by itself could mean that you are not "confident" to have relationships with women. You might be afraid of them or think they are X, Y or Z. You might see woman as an object and think of them only as "bitches", etc.

            The problem is not on looking nude people. The problem is *what* kind of porn would you see. I also watch porn, I have watched *almost* every kind of porn you can think of (I never cou
            • by nschubach (922175)
              The fact that I'm on Slashdot doesn't immediately classify me as insecure about approaching a woman. When you find me a woman that isn't overweight and takes care of herself (call me an ass if you will, I don't care), doesn't believe in "God", and could cares less about Valentine's day, then I'll walk up to her and ask her if she wants to grab a bite to eat somewhere. I don't have a problem walking up to them. The problem I have is finding a person that fits in my belief structure and doesn't try to push
        • by Cadallin (863437)
          Wrong. Gaming is an adult hobby and always has been. That the advertising material is targeted at males in the 13-20 age group tells you nothing about who actually plays games, or who always has. The average gamer has always to tended to be around 28-30. Surveys pop up about once a year revealing this startling revelation. They have been since the late 80's. Everyone always acts surprised and then promptly forgets about it and assumes gamers are all 15 year old adolescents. Now as to why immature 12
          • by amuro98 (461673)
            Gaming has not always been an adult hobby. Sure, adults have always played games, but they weren't the majority of the market, not for a long time.

            Gaming was for adults, eh?

            So, it was *ADULTS* who were plugging quarter after quarter into machines so they could play games like Space Invaders, and then a few years later, PacMan?

            And of course, this explains why the adult-oriented store, Toys R Us was the best place to buy computer and console games during the 80s.

            Who can forget telling your parents to put dow
  • by FlameboyC11 (711446) on Wednesday March 21, 2007 @05:38PM (#18435961)
    This is actually quite interesting as Sony refused to release Porn on the betamax format, which some argue was a deciding factor on the adoption of VHS. Granted, this isn't a format war but still interesting...
    • I believe Sony also disallowed porno games on the PS1 (and PS2?) as well.

      Even if they disallowed porno games on the PS3, Home opens up all sorts of sordid possibilities.

      I predict that before Christmas, we'll start hearing about local newscasters doing "Shocking expose'" stories about how the PS3 is a portal for porn and child molesters to access your child.
      • by nschubach (922175)
        That's interesting. If you connect to the PSP Network, you can actually filter games based on "Adult Only" status.
      • "I predict that before Christmas, we'll start hearing about local newscasters doing "Shocking expose'" stories about how the PS3 is a portal for porn and child molesters to access your child."


        Depends on how much control over the media Sony has. AFAIK Nintendo has no media ownership, Microsoft has a lot, and Sony...well, Sony is everywhere.
    • They are talking about the online home, not the blueray disks, so that's a different matter entirely. If you do a search for "+porn +sony +blueray" in google you'll see that sony have done the same thing for blueray as they did betamax....

  • Calling it either the Pronstation3 or the Play*coff*with yourself/other*coff*station.

    Of course when it won't read the disks anymore...blue-ray/balls will work its way into the joke,
    or the Office Space "Two chicks/controllers *at the same time*".

    Heh.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    This comment is porn and you can avoid it by not reading it again. I hope you appreciate our beautiful moderation system.

It's a naive, domestic operating system without any breeding, but I think you'll be amused by its presumption.

Working...