[DougCxx]

I don't know how old this is, it just came up on Slashdot:
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/03/11/02/1729239.shtml?tid=103&tid=153&tid=99
~

[Darrin]

Oh, how rude is that! :fire:

I knew there was something about their software I didn't like.

[COOL]

I just read an article in the NRA's America's 1st. Freedom magazine.
Seems like CENSORSHIP to me.

[Hazwaste]

I truly enjoyed visiting the "Good Bye Guns" site listed in this article. It was the best laugh I've had all day. The entire premise of gun control, according to this web site, is that the govt is going to "buy back" (never was theirs to begin with!) our guns at fair market value within 1 year. After this, there will be no more guns in the U.S. *poof* Just like that they're all gone, never to return.

-- Just like how prohibition eliminated all alcohol.

-- Just like how the war on drugs has eliminated the illegal drug trade.

-- Just like how making murder illegal has stopped all murders.

-- Just like how making armed robbery illegal has stopped all armed robberies.

-- And on and on...

And do these idjits think about the cost involved? Figure avg fair market value for all guns as somewhere around $400. Times 200 million guns in private hands. Equals $80,000,000,000. Oh yeah, THAT's gonna fly! :rolleyes:

By the way, they have a helpful (and editable) petition that will automatically be sent to the president. Unfortunately, it seems that due to a technical glitch, they sent a pro-gun rights email after I was done filling everything out. Cheap fun. :neener:

[Pilgrim]

-- Just like how prohibition eliminated all alcohol. -- Just like how the war on drugs has eliminated the illegal drug trade.

The ruling elite has just never been ruthless enough in making their "solution" work. Eventually they will figure it out.

Pilgrim

[MikeK]

I was getting ready to renew my firewall s/w from Norton (Symantec). Guess I'll have to go back to Zone Alarm and let Symantec know why. Actually ZA worked better.

[Mad Man]

Symantec Says No To Pro-Gun Sites (http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/03/11/02/1729239.shtml)

Posted by timothy on Sunday November 02, @02:17PM
from the manufacturing-antipathy dept.

cluge writes "A recent American Rifleman (http://www.nrahq.org/publications/tar/) contained small column that said that Symantec (http://www.symantec.com/)'s new Internet Security 2004 (http://nct.symantecstore.com/fulfill/0001.109#form) would block pro gun rights sites (i.e. NRA sites), while not blocking similar anti-gun rights web sites. Being the eternal skeptic, this claim was tested by downloading the trial version and running some tests against it. To my surprise I found the every NRA site was blocked and was in the category 'weapons.' This even included the NRA's Institute for Legislative Action (http://www.nraila.org/). Some sites that were not blocked were notable anti-gun rights sites such as The Brady Campaign (http://www.bradycampaign.com/), and Good Bye Guns (http://www.goodbyeguns.org/). The only anti-gun rights site that was blocked that I could find was Hand Gun Control (http://www.handguncontrol.org/)'s web site." Read on for more.

cluge continues: "My rather informal test still raises the spectre that a large corporate entity may be clandestinely trying to sway you or your child's political views by censoring content from one side of a political debate. This is indeed chilling, especially considering that such software is required to be used in libraries (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c106:S.97.IS:) to protect children. Is this political slant common in censorware? Have slashdotters found similar glitches in other 'parental control' software?"

Slashdot has certainly covered censorware (https://slashdot.org/search.pl?query=censorware) before, but reports like this are still valuable as the world evolves.


Supposedly, the default settings in the software can be changed. But how many people will know that? And of those, how many will know how?

[Rusher]

ewwwwww

That makes me so mad I could scream.....if you pro-gun....anti-gun that's fine but censorship is just plain bad news.......I will never purchase their product again.........gonna give them a choice email aswell!!!!!!

[atek3]

hahha, your $$ figure assumes all americans will turn in their guns :) ROFL.
I'd love to see a law like that fly, I'm sure it wouldn't provoke a massive civil insurgency.

atek3

[DorGunR]

Dangit............I just paid for an update and a 1 year extension on Norton anti-virus.:(
However, my firewall is Zone-Alarm.

[HogRider]

The only Symantec product I have ever used is the Anti Virus. The so called "Internet Security" sucks ( mainly because most people allow anything to pass through anyway, since the get annoyed after a while by the warning messages) and even more does "Norton System Works". I have seen perfectly functioning computers get screwed up by System works. I am not making this up, I am one of those folks that gets paid to fix them. :D

PS: Rumors are that that Symantec has released viruses themselves to boost Anti Virus software sales. :scrutiny: Probably not true, at least not proven, but as they say, there is always a tiny bit of truth to every rumor.

I'd say gun owners should boycott Symantec products, as we should boycott all companies that are anti gun anyway.

[BryanP]

For an alternative to Symantec's anti-virus software (for personal use, at least) I would suggest trying the free personal version of AVG Anti-Virus (http://www.grisoft.com/)

Instead of their firewall software you can always try ZoneAlarm. (http://www.zonelabs.com)

If you have a cable modem or DSL just putting your machine behind a decent $35 home router/switch such as those made by Linksys or D-Link will give you most of the firewall functionality you will need.

[GigaBuist]

The company I work for uses a similar filtering firewall that lits any gun website as "Mature". The product name is SmartFilter BTW.

I did a little diggin on their website and found that the mature categroy considered anything related to firearms or semi-nude people to be Mature content. I'm okay with that. I think it's silly to stop a professional from checking out the Glock, NRA, or keepandbeararms.com websites on their lunch break but maybe that's just me.

Anti-gun sites are fine though....

What really chapped my behind was when I found out the Michigan Militia's website was labled a Hate Group.

[swingset]

So, see if I have this straight:

Everyone who's too dopey to learn their software, read the settings & documentation ends up getting filtered against their will?

Here's a clue for those ready to protest everything, all software is set up kinda funky from the get go, so set stuff up in the manner you prefer.:rolleyes:

[geegee]

We've actually kicked this topic around before:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=32462&highlight=symantec

Glad to see it's still alive though. geegee

[Justin]

Swingset- I'm kind of inclined to agree with you. However problems are going to crop up if this software is installed in computers that are accessed by the public at large. After all, its really pretty unlikely that the network admin for the network in a public library will just let people monkey around with the settings on a computer. So in the end you get a situation where an outright anti, or even neutral fencesitter isn't going to change the settings because they are either bigoted against gun rights or simply indifferent. The result would be that a point of view of a very divisive political debate gets simply shut out because someone is too lazy to check the default settings on a piece of software.

Now, if some raving anti wants to filter out every single gun-related website in his/her own home computer, well, bully for them.

When it happens in libraries and schools, places which should be all about the free access of ideas and information, well then, I think that there is a very serious problem.

[Nathaniel Firethorn]

Deleted, and plonk. Frys-vzcbegnag pbecbengr anaavrf... :fire:

- pdmoderator

[LynnMassGuy]

I run Norton Intenet Security. I doesn't block anything that is not a threat. If we are talking about filters that are set up at your job, as far I'm concerned your employer has every right to keep you off non-workrelated sites durring work. Screw around at home on your own computer.

[molonlabe]

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_i-gear.html

[Dave Markowitz]

http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_i-gear.html

FYI, i-Gear has been end-of-lifed by Symantec. They have something else now, although the name escapes me.

Anyway, it's been my experience that Symantec's product tend to be bloated crapware for which there are better alternatives.

[Guy B. Meredith]

Where does McAfee stand? I had been a fan of McAfee, but went to Symantec because McAfee requiered sign up with VISA verify for credit card purchase and more personal information than I care to give out.

[65_Toy]

I second AVG for anti-virus use.
I'm a router-jockey and that is what I use on my home PCs and on the familys' and friends' PCs that I am roped into being tech-support for. :neener:

[SHOOT1SAM]

Gang,

I just installed Norton Internet Security 2005 (have had 2004 also), & have never had a problem, & have never played with settings/controls.

I went to the THR link in geegee's post, read down to the long letter, & started hitting the links listed there. Again, no problems. Maybe 1 or 2 links didn't connect, but they may no longer be active links either.

Not sure what the problem is perceived to be here.

Sam

Well, after posting the above, it dawned on me that I did have my "Parental Controls" turned off. Turned them back on & sure enough I couldn't navigate to the aforementioned links.

So I thought about this, & this is what occurs to me:

If it is something as simple as turning the parental controls on or off (& believe me, if I can do it, ANYONE can do it-it's really that easy), perhaps Symantec simply did this so as to keep the anti's off their back? I mean think about it, once those ba$***** get onto you, they don't let up and maybe this just is the easiest way to aviod all of the bad press & hatemail they'd receive from the Bradys, et.al. I'm not saying I necessarily agree, but if this is why they have done it, I can understand that reasoning.

[ralphie98]

I don't see how this is such a big deal. I believe that the software needs to be set up to block "weapons" related sites. Just installing the software wouldn't block gun related stuff. If a parent doesn't want their child browsing sites that discuss guns at all, they can block that out. I wouldn't go around saying Symantec is anti just because they give paranoid crybaby parents the option to block weapons relates sites from being viewed on their computer. A lot of corporations block these too because they know that if an employee is browsing a gun site with pics, another coworker might walk by, see some guns on the screen and get nervous/upset. It's easier to block the stuff than to deal with it once somebody gets upset. Heck, if my current employer had this site blocked, I'd get a lot more work done :)

[fastbolt]

I've used Norton's softeware for several years and I've never had problems with it blocking firearms-related sites.

Of course, I also don't have the Parental Control feature activated. I'd have to guess that this feature would block out more than gun-related sites, too, you know ...

If my children were still children, and used my computer, I'd have the feature enabled, and would disable it for my use. Isn't that what it's for?

As it is, both of my grown children know more about computers than I do, and my son had to set up the home network for me.;)

I had nothing but problems with McAfee, though ...

All things considered, I'd offer that this is a real yawn of a topic ...

[Bob41081]

I have been told that Symantec owns McAfee.

Bob

[TechBrute]

I have been told that Symantec owns McAfee. No.

Boy, this thread came from out of nowhere.

[Calumus]

Wow, this is the second thread I've read in the last 2 days that has been revived from 2003. As far as computer security goes, Norton anti-virus is the best, their firewall however, isn't very good. It tends to sap up WAY too much system resources. I put Sygate personal fire wall on my machines, and all of my customers machines. Its small, easy to set up, very effective, and it doesn't double your boot time. Zone alarm would be my second choice as there are a couple of issues with sygate and windows 2000. It will work on 98% of the Win2k boxes out there, but every once in a awhile you'll get a conflict. For a free anti-virus program I put AVG on my customers computers, if you still want to run Norton but don't want to feed an anti corp. it can be "found" many places on the net. You let your conscience decide ;)
Cheers,
Shawn

[odysseus]

Norton anti-virus is the best

Without plugging other products here, I would seriously disagree with that statement and tell you that is debatable. YMMV with their products.

I can tell you that in the backend server environment, they are not hot at all in AV...

Their code is heavy, management is heavy, and they were the first trying to stuff everything the customers way...

I missed this thread, but now that it is revived it gives me another reason to never want give Symantec any of my or a company's money...

Also no Symantec does not own McAfee... McAfee is owned by Network Associates (NAI).

[YankeeRebel]

I use Nortons Internet Security 2004 and do not have a problem with going to gun sites.

I changed over from McAfee and am glad I did as I really did not like them. Norton has been problem free, so far.

[Pylon]

Wow thats so crap. I am never purchasing from them again. I just sent them an e-mail letting them know, and a link back to these thread.

[Standing Wolf]

I gave up on Symantec when I discovered that my freshly purchased version 7 of symantec Utilities for Macintosh was actually version 6.

I don't ever do business with thieves and shameless anti-Second Amendment bigots.

[simon]

And do these idjits think about the cost involved? Figure avg fair market value for all guns as somewhere around $400. Times 200 million guns in private hands. Equals $80,000,000,000. Oh yeah, THAT's gonna fly!

And thats just in CA! :neener:

[mbs357]

I told my uncle about this last night...then we got into another conversation, out of no where he says, "So I guess you're not using Norton any more, eh?"
I can't stand mind readers.
But yea, I doubt I'll suport Symantec anymore. Not even with my...less...than legal copy of the anti virus... >_>