Comments on: Airlines decide to block naughty websites from in-flight internet

By: John

John — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 01:24:20 +0000

watch a movie, listen to some good music, read a book sleep, talk with your spouse, play a game – who NEEDS the internet on a plane???

By: -=Ben=-

-=Ben=- — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 00:00:44 +0000

I am all for filtering.
Do it!

Good to go…
How can people do that in public is beyond me….

I am a male, FYI…
umm, yeah…

-=Ben=-

By: GadgetNut

GadgetNut — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 20:55:07 +0000

Good call, mwilsonemt
You beat me to it.

And if the nosy little 9yr-old jerk in the seat behind you won’t stop leaning over your seat to see what you’re doing, then tell the flight attendant to put the little rugrat in the baggage compartment with the rest of the untamed animals.

By: mwilsonemt

mwilsonemt — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 14:51:27 +0000

Why not have privacy screen filters so people outside of the direct line of site can’t see what others are browsing. The airlines can rent to those who want them and require people use them if a flight attendant or passenger has an issue with any visual content (web or hard drive accessed).

By: Sampi

Sampi — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 13:21:53 +0000

I completely disagree. What if you visit a harmless but unpopular website? Site-specific access is way too restrictive.

Instead of blocking certain sites, which can be arbitrary sometimes (I should know, I live in China), the airlines should simply implement policies to prohibit passengers from viewing pornographic content in the plane. This would mean forcing the passengers to behave, not blocking content arbitrarily.

By: Alex

Alex — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 12:18:00 +0000

There is a much safer and easier approach to this which should keep the majority of people happy and could even be quite profitable for the airlines. Instead of providing internet access with filtering software to prevent objectionable sites, why not provide specific site access. So only allow certain well-known websites that cater towards the greatest needs of the passengers, for instance: all major email clients, major entertainment sites (excluding adult-only sites of course), major news sites, etc.
The airlines could setup surveys to see which sites passengers would like added to the list, it really wouldn’t be that difficult to do and of course they have control over the available site so there wouldn’t be any in-flight arguments over what is deemed “objectionable”.

By: Daisy

Daisy — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 06:46:48 +0000

I’m no prude either, but as a women who travels alone a lot I would have to say I’d feel really uncomfortable knowing that the person next to me is looking at erotic material and getting aroused.

I really don’t care what you do in your own private space, but really in a plane you just don’t have private space, unless you take your laptop to the on board bathroom (which I’d be fine with).

By: Andrei Buiu

Andrei Buiu — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 04:48:37 +0000

You’ve got internet on planes?? Or is this on Trans-Atlantic planes or long flights? I’ve traveled a lot in Europe and no plane had internet on board.

By: Kevin W.

Kevin W. — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 04:06:03 +0000

Okay, I’m no prude – far from it. And I generally don’t like people telling me what I can or can’t look at. But I think this issue is pretty cut and dried. There are people all around you (including children) on a plane and I think it is entirely reasonable for an airline to prohibit you from indulging your porn habit – whether it’s on the internet connection they are offering you as a convenience or in a magazine you brought on board. You can forestall your autoerotic escapades. That’s what the taxi ride from the airport is for, after all.