[PLUG] Internet addictions and technology.

[Russell Johnson]

While the content below WAS written from a work perspective, the very same points work just as well from the home. 

On Feb 14, 2011, at 9:39 AM, Russell Johnson wrote:

> 
> On Feb 14, 2011, at 1:08 AM, Michael C. Robinson wrote:
> 
>> 
>> As far as a fireable offense, this is a home network which I'm sure many
>> people have.  That said, what is viewed from this network is still a
>> concern.
>> 
>> On a non technical note, how do other people deal with addictive
>> Internet content whether it be: gambling, social media, or 
>> pornographic web sites (which includes hulu depending on what you
>> watch).  You can let yourself go of course, but if surfing certain 
>> types of content is a fireable offense at work, why get in the 
>> habit at home?  The Internet is not policed at all or pornography
>> wouldn't be freely available to anyone.  There is such a thing as
>> decency which broadcast television had mostly observed until recently,
>> the Grammy's tonight being a prime example.
>> 
> 
> Personally, I find that my own personal responsibility is very easy to use. But then, I've been trained, and I keep my training up. Work is work, and vice versa, Not safe for work content isn't viewed at work. The fact that there's an acronym for this content indicates how much this topic gets discussed. NSFW content is always on the radar.
> 
> Some of my places of employment have employed content filters, and most of those were setup with a user usable bypass for the case of the false positive. False positives are logged and could be checked out. Usually, the content filter is in the IT closet, where it's under lock and key, so relatively few people have access to it. Most of my places of employment placed these content filters in place to block content that was accidentally requested, as in the case of a typo, or during an internet search where content was lumped into a search, but was not appropriate. The by-pass is for cases where content IS work related, yet it is inadvertently listed in the filter. I've had both scenarios happen to me. 
> 
> While reducing the amount of lost time at work is a nobel goal, is it the job of the IT department to eliminate the chance that people will be people? I think not. The fact that it IS a fireable offense is enough of a deterrent for more folks, and those that it's not, do you really want them working there? Are you really a baby-sitter? We're supposed to be adults, and you have the ability to track traffic. If someone wants to hang themselves, they will find a way.
> 
> Also keep in mind the words of Princess Leia. "The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
> 
> On another note about your inline filter. How are you going to stop people from setting up their own connections to the internet? More and more cell phones are capable of being tethered, and more and more are capable of being wifi hotspots. Several droid models, and the iPhone of Verizon are prime examples.
> 
> 
> Russell Johnson
> russ at dimstar.net
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PLUG mailing list
> PLUG at lists.pdxlinux.org
> http://lists.pdxlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug

Russell Johnson
russ at dimstar.net