My new DVD player with TV-Guardian!!!

[Papa Bear]

I just traded my 5 disc Magnavox DVD player with a friend for his Sanyo DVD player with TV-Guardian (TV-G). For those of you not familar with the TV-G it is a new feature tat is included on some DVD players that will mute out the volume when there are any Cuss words in the movie. It does this by reading ahead on the DVD's subtitles. I really enjoy this feature because you hear enough profanity in the world everyday with out going homeand playing it on your movies. I watched "Flight of the Navigator" on it this weekend and was surprised at how many times it had to cut out the vulgar language we become so accustomed to it that we ddon't always recognize that it is there I personally think this would be a great investment for anyone who enjoys watching a film without all the foul language in it.

If you are interested you cna get it from Wal-Mart for$59.87.

http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product. ... 2055:95987

[Disney Guru]

Hmm Interesting

Our SANYO DVD/VHS Combo. Does that on DVD but not on VHS. We got ours in 2002. That is a really neat feature I really like it because their is a movie I love to watch that I bought the DVD of that is the 1968 Classic Guess Who's Coming To Dinner. But their is a lot of bad language in it. So that came in handy when I watch that movie.

[mvealf]

I'm going to throw up. I can "kind of" understand why a parent would want it for their sensitive young kids. But an adult, to censor for themselves? I'm a big boy who doesn't need anyone to tell me what I shouldn't be hearing.

I suppose you're happy that they censored an entire segment from Make Mine Music, and the boobs from Melody Time.

[Mr. Toad]

My one year old hears her mother and father swear on a daily basis so I don't think it would do us any good.

Can you get one that edits out gratuitous violence?

[Papa Bear]

But an adult, to censor for themselves? I'm a big boy who doesn't need anyone to tell me what I shouldn't be hearing.

Just Because I am an adult that does not mean I have to enjoy and appreciate foul language nor do I have to enjoy watching other things that I find to be unappropriate such as blood anf gore as well as pornography. I prefer to watch things that I can enjoy and feel uplifted by watching. I am not telling anyone to go out and get this I was just sharing the information with you all so that if there is anyone else out there interested in this they can look into it as well.

I suppose you're happy that they censored an entire segment from Make Mine Music, and the boobs from Melody Time.

It does not upset me in any way that they cut out part of these films if they did not feel they were what they wanted to release for our children to watch after all it is there films and they can do wha they want with them. I am not familar with the scenes that they cut but yes I am glad they took out the Boobs from "Melody Time" I have watched my DVD multiple times and enjoyed it just fine with out the Boobs.

Can you get one that edits out gratuitous violence?

Yes they have also released a DVD player that will cut out violence as well as nudity, sensuality and the language.

This will be my next investment but I am waiting till it has been out for a bit longer so that they will have more movies that are compatiable with it because with this one you have to download the information for each movie to have it edit out what you want removed. I know this is not something that everyone out there will want but for me I think it is absolutely awesome that things like this are being made available. When I first read about the DVD Format when it was brand new this is one of the things that was going to be possible due to this format so I have been looking forward to when they would have it available.

More information on it can be found at:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4780312/

[Chicky Mouse]

Just Because I am an adult that does not mean I have to enjoy and appreciate foul language nor do I have to enjoy watching other things that I find to be unappropriate such as blood anf gore as well as pornography. I prefer to watch things that I can enjoy and feel uplifted by watching. I am not telling anyone to go out and get this I was just sharing the information with you all so that if there is anyone else out there interested in this they can look into it as well.

Whether or not you enjoy it is not the point. If you want only want to watch happy things, fine, that is your right. It is also my right to watch uncensored movies the way the artist originally intended. Your wish to only see happy things should not prevent me from watching Make Mine Music the way Walt intended. I realize it's not you specifically, but enough people who think like you have permanently censored movies like this and history for everyone, and that is just wrong. Censoring it for just you with your machine is one thing, censoring it for the world is another.

It does not upset me in any way that they cut out part of these films if they did not feel they were what they wanted to release for our children to watch after all it is there films and they can do wha they want with them. I am not familar with the scenes that they cut but yes I am glad they took out the Boobs from "Melody Time" I have watched my DVD multiple times and enjoyed it just fine with out the Boobs.

Again, the fact that you are not upset in any way, but actually "glad" at the censoring, is not the point at all. You have no right to censor it from me, period.

To censor things for your personal collection is definately the way to go, but unfortunately in this society of ours, the people with your attitudes have permanently censored history for all. Thanks a lot

[englishboy]

[quote="mvealf"]I'm going to throw up. I can "kind of" understand why a parent would want it for their sensitive young kids. [quote]


I'm here ready to puke with you.

I'm still waiting for the DVD-T chip, which edits out any challenging thoughts or opinions different from the viewer's own. I'm sure that's coming soon.

[Disney Guru]

I'm going to throw up. I can "kind of" understand why a parent would want it for their sensitive young kids. But an adult, to censor for themselves? I'm a big boy who doesn't need anyone to tell me what I shouldn't be hearing.

I suppose you're happy that they censored an entire segment from Make Mine Music, and the boobs from Melody Time.

You know what I agree with Papabear completely as I stated before I have a Sanyo DVD/VCR combo that does the same thing and I aprreciate it. Not everybody cares about it but Papabear and I and many others do care. Just give the guy a break. We arn't trying to control the whole world Papabear was just talking about a very good thing. I think that we all need to give him respect on this matter. You know what Papabear has always been one of the kindest members of this forum and he rarely if ever says a cross word about anybody. Can't you give him the respect that he deserves and if you don't agree with what he says just keep it to yourself ?

[mvealf]

You know what I agree with Papabear completely as I stated before I have a Sanyo DVD/VCR combo that does the same thing and I aprreciate it. Not everybody cares about it but Papabear and I and many others do care. Just give the guy a break. We arn't trying to control the whole world Papabear was just talking about a very good thing. I think that we all need to give him respect on this matter. You know what Papabear has always been one of the kindest members of this forum and he rarely if ever says a cross word about anybody. Can't you give him the respect that he deserves and if you don't agree with what he says just keep it to yourself ?

I respect you and Papabear

I have no problem with what anybody wants to (or doesn't want to) watch. But Chicky said it well. I would much rather support a machine that would let people censor the stuff themselves, than to have someone else censor it for everybody, as is the case with Make Mine Music. So if you and Papabear want to program your machines to edit out the mean old guns, great. But this logic would require Disney to release EVERYTHING uncensored, Fantasia, 3 Pigs, Aladdin, Small One, Clock Cleaners, etc.

Unfortunately it's the people who feel the same as you do, who were responsible for censoring hundreds of cartoons. That is pretty extreme, but giving each person the power to censor only their own stuff is a better solution. Personally, I'm against censoring of any kind, so this solution would please both sides, but only if everything was released uncensored.

If I don't agree with you, that's the whole purpose of forums, to discuss (respectfully of course). Otherwise, how would things ever change for the better?

[STASHONE]

I think there's a much larger issue at hand when the world has become so sheltered and safeguarded that society feels the need to conform and subject itself to the hand of "political correctnes" at the sacrifice of artistic creativity and innovation through all channels of ingenuity to the point that our free speech rights are censored, our books, movies and information edited and we're treated like delicate feeble minded children living in a saccharine world without any sense of realism as to the surrounding situations and affairs outside of our own little candy coated sphere where information is strictly misguided and suppressed until we eventually become a sterile manufactured 'protected' culture without any sense of independance or individualism, afraid to express ourselves honestly. I don't mean to sound condescending, but imagine if this became the polished standard, what else could be censored or manipulated? It's an extreme relation, but as if we don't have enough to worry about with our current deceptive political charge leading the country into unjust wars and putting us in uneasy positions with hostile nations, destroying our financial state, "defending our freedom" at the cost of civil liberties, etc. What more can be done to subject ourselves to a growing underground opinionated authoritarian regime... Now when we're not sitting at the McDonalds drive-in listening to some utter trash fed through one of Clear Channel's twelve thousand stations, we can all shop at Wal-Mart to buy our family-friendly DVD's to watch on custom censoring units while we stay glued to television screens where we're fed predisposed partisan politics on what cultures to pump our fists at and where to burn our money - but at least we won't be disposed to any harmful "foul" language... or any other inherent and individual aspects of regular everyday existence!

[Loomis]

I have to agree with the comments of Stashone, mvealf etc...

See, I was under the impression that we already had a system in place that would protect people from "cuss" words.

It is called a Ratings Classification System. If you see "Contains coarse language" on the box, and this is a problem for you, maybe you could...gee, I don't know...NOT watch it?

Is it any wonder that Disney feel the need to "PC" all their titles when there is a mind set that believes that their moral standards are higher than the rest of the world. As long as there is a vocal minority that feels that their standards are those that should be applied to all of society, regardless of the enjoyment of others, we are going to continue to see devices such as this.

Papa Bear - you speak of enjoying it just fine without the cuss words. That's great. Why did you buy a film that film in the first place? Or any film that might contain offensive language? Why don't you just buy G-rated films if you are so worried about being offended by certain words/behaviour?

It does not upset me in any way that they cut out part of these films if they did not feel they were what they wanted to release for our children to watch after all it is there films and they can do wha they want with them.

Disney made the film for children in the first place, in the 1940s, which was far more conservative than today in most other areas. I find it highly unlikely anybody could be offended by a 1940s Disney film - I mean, if they really sat down and watched it and not thought about it in terms of their own narrow view of the world. (Yes, that includes Song of the South - but I'm sure you'd like a device that blocks African American characters altogether from the film).

And then there is the question of where does it end? Are we going to update/censor these films every few years, based on moral standards? What if bunnies are offensive in the year 2025? Will we remove huge chunks of Bambi? To me, most words are just words, and some words I find completely inoffensive other may find offensive. Who is to judge who is right there? Will there be an anti-bunny device?

I find life offensive sometimes, because there are a lot of nasty chaps out there. Where is my "mute" button for them?

To me, these devices are just for people who stick their head in the sand and try to pretend that they are not living in the same world as the rest of us. I always find it ironic that most of these devices are popular in the US, a land that prides itself on diversity and freedom of speech.

[AwallaceUNC]

I'm a big boy who doesn't need anyone to tell me what I shouldn't be hearing.

But that's just the point. He didn't tell you what you shouldn't be hearing. He was sharing his excitement over a new product that allows him the freedom to not hear what he doesn't want to. And what's the harm in that? I see no cultural dogma there.

Personally, while I can sympathize with those who find coarse profanity offensive (particularly parents), I believe that profanity can (though doesn't always) serve a purpose in a film, and prefer to watch things unedited. That's a personal choice, though, and not one that I would force on anyone else.

It is called a Ratings Classification System. If you see "Contains coarse language" on the box, and this is a problem for you, maybe you could...gee, I don't know...NOT watch it?

But it's not quite that simple. PapaBear didn't say that he had previously avoided films that containted profanity. He just enjoys it better when he doesn't have to hear it. That doesn't mean he's incapable of enjoying movies with a rating higher than G. So why should he have to stick to G films, when he can watch PG to R without the profanity?

(Yes, that includes Song of the South - but I'm sure you'd like a device that blocks African American characters altogether from the film).

Loomis, I'm surprised by you. That little swipe is entirely unfounded and uncalled for. If I were PapaBear, I would be enraged at this hostile advance against his character, based solely on an unrelated difference in opinion.

As for the censoring of films like Fantasia, Make Mine Music, and Melody Time... Let's go back and look at what PapaBear actually said:

It does not upset me in any way that they cut out part of these films if they did not feel they were what they wanted to release for our children to watch after all it is there films and they can do wha they want with them.

(emphasis mine)

What he's saying here is not that he wants some censoring agency to come in and decide what the public needs to see (and what they don't need to see). Instead, he's making an argument that filmmakers can decide to edit the content of their original film. That's a legitimate argument, folks, and one that many intelligent and scholarly people embrace. I don't agree with it, but let's not make him out to be the censorship police. I see no evidence in his comments that that was his intention.

I am not familar with the scenes that they cut but yes I am glad they took out the Boobs from "Melody Time" I have watched my DVD multiple times and enjoyed it just fine with out the Boobs.

Well, I would suggest you check out these scenes first. I believe you'd find that they aren't in the least bit objectionable. Fantasia, Melody Time, and Make Mine Music never contained full-frontal nudity, topless dancers, or anything like that. At least you conceded that you aren't familiar with these scenes. And in the case of these particular films' censorship, it's not the filmmakers who made the decision.

And to address the "people like you" charges. It's not the people's fault- it's the company's fault. The PC-obsessed* CEO of the PC-obsessed* corporation chooses to act on their paranoia that a small minority of film-goers (and I see no evidence that PapaBear is among their number- we're talking the wackos here) will find something offensive.

*PC = political correctness

And finally,

I know this is not something that everyone out there will want but for me I think it is absolutely awesome that things like this are being made available.

For him- not for me, not for you. Your DVDs aren't being recalled. Your DVD players aren't being reprogrammed. You aren't even being criticized. Everything is under control- nothing to see here, folks. You may return to your homes.

-Aaron

[Papa Bear]

It is called a Ratings Classification System. If you see "Contains coarse language" on the box, and this is a problem for you, maybe you could...gee, I don't know...NOT watch it?

I am very selective about what I watch as far as the rating system goes I will not watch any films that are rated R and I am very selective about which PG-13 films I watch. I do enjoy having the oppurtunity to watch films that are G and PG rated but most of them are childrens films which I do love to watch but at times it is nice to watch a flm that has a more grown up storyline. Just becuse I enjoy these films does not mean I have to love and appreciate what is in them. I may enjoy a slice of Watermelon but that does not mean I have to eat and enjoy the seeds in the watermelon. Am I a bad person for picking the seeds out? Loomis do you eat the seeds in your Watermelon?

And what kind of world do we live in if we are all going to do everything in our life just how we are told. Just because a group of people who decide what the Ratings Classification System should be and what it should include does not mean they know what is best for me and my future children. So if I decide that I don't want to subject my self to the foul language in a movie then that is a choice I can and will make. I am makeing the choice for me and my family. You all can do the same and I will not judge you for that.

Is it any wonder that Disney feel the need to "PC" all their titles when there is a mind set that believes that their moral standards are higher than the rest of the world. As long as there is a vocal minority that feels that their standards are those that should be applied to all of society, regardless of the enjoyment of others, we are going to continue to see devices such as this.

I am not judging anybody's moral standards here all I have said was what my preferences are. If you feel that my standards are higher then yours then maybe that is something side you telling you that you need to reevaluate your standards. Because I said nothing about yours. I do have certain standards that I try to live by in everything I do but that does not mean I am telling any of you what you should live by. If Disney considers me a part of there vocal minority that appreciates good media then I am proud of that. I hope that Disney will continue to try and make good media that can be uplifting and of good report. And I hope that we continue to see these devices because they give those of that are interested in them the option to have them yet they are not forced upon anyone who does not want them.

Disney made the film for children in the first place, in the 1940s, which was far more conservative than today in most other areas. I find it highly unlikely anybody could be offended by a 1940s Disney film - I mean, if they really sat down and watched it and not thought about it in terms of their own narrow view of the world. (Yes, that includes Song of the South - but I'm sure you'd like a device that blocks African American characters altogether from the film).

I never said I was offended by any of Walt Disney's films I have enjoyed every film he has ever made and most of the ones made by the Company after his death as well. But once again just because I loved the film does not mean that I have to love everything in it. Anytime I watch a Disney film it disappoints me a little when there are words used that I don't feel are appropriate. But this does not mean I have gotten upset or ever called and complained about it. I just thought to my self that I did not appreciate that. So now that I have the option to cut some of that out I will.

As for "Song of the South" I have nothing against that whatsoever and am looking forward to the day it gets released. I have nothing against any person of any other race, religion, sex, or natonality. So I would appreciate it if you would not suggest that I do. No one should have to like anything or be any certain way in order for them to be accepted.

[/quote]And then there is the question of where does it end? Are we going to update/censor these films every few years, based on moral standards? What if bunnies are offensive in the year 2025? Will we remove huge chunks of Bambi? To me, most words are just words, and some words I find completely inoffensive other may find offensive. Who is to judge who is right there? Will there be an anti-bunny device? [/quote]

I don't think there should be a need update or censor the films every few years. Because a person's moral standards should not change to suite the times they live in. They should always uphold to their standards or what is the point. As far as Bunnies go I have never been against them but if you find them offensive I will do my best not to mention them in front of you. Because you are right I have no right to judge you and your fear of bunnies.

I find life offensive sometimes, because there are a lot of nasty chaps out there. Where is my "mute" button for them?

That would be great I would deffinatly by one but unfortnatley there are some things in Life that we can't control. But that does not mean I have to enjoy it or join in on it. I read about a rapist in the news paper today that does not mean that I have to become part of that nor do I have to go home and watch a movie that illustrates it either. Nor will I encourage others to.

To me, these devices are just for people who stick their head in the sand and try to pretend that they are not living in the same world as the rest of us. I always find it ironic that most of these devices are popular in the US, a land that prides itself on diversity and freedom of speech.

To you these devices may be just that but to me these devices help me to be who I want to be. I know that there are alot of things in life that I can not shelter myself from. But I am glad that there are some things in life that I can control, I am not trying to limit what anyone else can do but I do what I can to keep the things around me to my likeing. And yes I am glad that I have the freedom of speech and the freedom to what I want to do when I want to do it. That is part of what makes America so great it is not Ironic that such devices come from America, it is our diversity and freedom of speech that makes these devices valueable. It allows others to have their freedom of speech while still allowing others to have the freedom to choose not to listen to some speech that we do not want to.

****I would like to thank all of you for freely sharting your opinions on this matter and hope that no one has taken any offense. because I have not. But I do appreciate thse who stuck up for me on some of these matters I hope I can do the same for you in the future.****

[2099net]

I won't get into the whole censorship can of worms but one question I must know the answer to..

How does it know when to mute the sound? Surely subtitles and speech are at different rates - for example Jeff Goldblum talks a lot faster than Marlon Brando. How would it know where the offensive word was just from reading the subtitles?

I do find the whole thing facinating. Not only from a social point of view, but from a technological point of view.

[Maerj]

Does the TV Gaurdian totally mute the sound for the entire movie on Kevin Smith, Quentin Tarantino and George Carlin DVDs?

[deathie mouse]

yes i'm curious too technologically. On multichannel soundtracks, does it mute the dialogue only, or the whole soundtrack gets muted too?
(on mono or stereo it probaly mutes all)

My vote is for no censorship of any kind, and this device sounds kind of good towards that goal, cus the disc itself can be uncensored while the individual selectively chooses what he wants to watch or hear. So this might lead to less censorship? Or is it sensorchip?

At least I hope it works out that way.

Everyone is entitled to run their own life their own way while not affecting others

and that's why I
_________________
want 23:9 displays with autospellers

[Loomis]

Does the TV Gaurdian totally mute the sound for the entire movie on Kevin Smith, Quentin Tarantino and George Carlin DVDs?

See that was more my point!
There are going to be movies that quite clearly contain so-called "foul language", so instead of trying to censor them all out, just buy the ones that don't have the foulness of language. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

And what kind of world do we live in if we are all going to do everything in our life just how we are told. Just because a group of people who decide what the Ratings Classification System should be and what it should include does not mean they know what is best for me and my future children.

Yes, letting a device decide for you is much better!

I have issues with classification boards too (particualrly the Australian one), BUT my point was that a Ratings Guideline System is just that - one that lets you know what kind of activity you can expect in a film. You are quitely clearly offended by certain things, and fine, I'll respect that. But rather than try and modify the films that you DO find offensive, why don't you just use the guidelines as they were intended - to give you an indication of what offends thine ears and eyes, rather than using the device to mute them? Wouldn't it be nicer to sit and watch a movie completely free from whatever it is that you find offensive rather than:

"You dirty *MUTE* - I'm going to rip your *MUTE*ing *MUTE* off and shove in down your *MUTE*"
(so offense meant to mutes there, btw).

If you are censoring a film, are you really watching the film as intended? To use your fruit analogy, if you eat a banana skin and throw away the inside, can you truly say you are eating the banana? Or just your version of a banana? (Ok, the fruit analogies don't work...).

Further, doesn't the muting of the words bring MORE attention to them than if they were just allowed to freely carry on without interruption? By choosing to mute certain words, you are giving them more power to be offensive to you in the future. If you accept them just as words, then they cease to be offensive.

To you these devices may be just that but to me these devices help me to be who I want to be. I know that there are alot of things in life that I can not shelter myself from. But I am glad that there are some things in life that I can control, I am not trying to limit what anyone else can do but I do what I can to keep the things around me to my likeing. And yes I am glad that I have the freedom of speech and the freedom to what I want to do when I want to do it. That is part of what makes America so great it is not Ironic that such devices come from America, it is our diversity and freedom of speech that makes these devices valueable. It allows others to have their freedom of speech while still allowing others to have the freedom to choose not to listen to some speech that we do not want to.

See, I don't see it as control at all. Rather I see it as you conforming to someone else's idea of what the film should be like. You are not in control, as the words that are being muted are being selected for you by your device. You said you were surprised how many "cuss" words there were in 'Flight of the Navigator'. Now, I doubt any of the "major" words were in there, and you'd probably not have noticed the minor words in the first place, were it not for the device. What does that tell you? It tells me that you are letting another person's moral standards (whoever designed the device) dictate what you do/don't find offensive.

And as for the freedom of speech issue, this always cracks me up. Many here on this board, and I'm taking you as a cross section of America, seem to believe the freedom gives you the right to NOT listen to whatever it is you don't want to listen to. To me, the amendment was put there to open up everybody to new ideas, and have free debate without fear of oppression. Seeing it as the right to NOT hear something sort of negates that right.

I guess the device doesn't block out gunfire does it? Because the right to bear arms is constitutionally protected

[AwallaceUNC]

So even if Papa Bear is ruining the movie for himself (not saying he is)... why not let him? I don't think he was soliciting [constructive] criticism for his viewing habits. We all like to share our most recent purchases, especially when they are of electronics or media, here, and I think that's all this was.

You said you found it ironic that Americans, who celebrate freedom of speech, would consume this product. PapaBear's response was that he is using freedom, by making the choice to not listen to the profanity. The celebration of freedom, and the enactment of the 1st amendment aren't necessarily the same thing. Yes, the 1st Amendment grants freedom of speech, not freedom of listening. But the American culture, as you pointed out, champions the freedom to choose to live your life in whatever way you want, so long as it doesn't infring on the rights of others. I know I'm stating anything you don't already know, but my point is that while the 1st Amendment authorizes movies to use any profanity it wants, it is not at all contradictory to the American spirit to choose to mute the profanity.

-Aaron

[Loomis]

So even if Papa Bear is ruining the movie for himself (not saying he is)... why not let him? I don't think he was soliciting [constructive] criticism for his viewing habits. We all like to share our most recent purchases, especially when they are of electronics or media, here, and I think that's all this was.

You said you found it ironic that Americans, who celebrate freedom of speech, would consume this product. PapaBear's response was that he is using freedom, by making the choice to not listen to the profanity. The celebration of freedom, and the enactment of the 1st amendment aren't necessarily the same thing. Yes, the 1st Amendment grants freedom of speech, not freedom of listening. But the American culture, as you pointed out, champions the freedom to choose to live your life in whatever way you want, so long as it doesn't infring on the rights of others. I know I'm stating anything you don't already know, but my point is that while the 1st Amendment authorizes movies to use any profanity it wants, it is not at all contradictory to the American spirit to choose to mute the profanity.

Soliciting or not, he has got our criticism now

Again, you seem to be emphasising that diversity and freedom are the rights to NOT hear something. I disagree.

You say that Papa Bear is exercising his right to view movies the way he wants to. What about the rights of the filmmakers to have everybody who views the fillm seen in the way that they intended it? Is Papa Bear's right to not be offended stronger than the filmmaker's right to have his or her work seen in its proper context? THAT seems contrary to the concept of freedom of speech.

I also find this dubious in a legal sense, as it is modifying the original copyright work, which all authors have moral rights invested in (i.e. they have the right to have their work displayed in the way they want it to be displayed). That is INTERNATIONAL law, and domestic law. Article 6 of the Berne Convention says that: "Independently of the author's economic rights, and even after the transfer of the said rights, the author shall have the right to claim authorship of the work and to object to any distortion, mutilation or other modification of, or other derogatory action in relation to, the said work" The U.S. Congress and the Supreme Court have upheld that this is to "prevent any intentional mutilation or distortion of the work ". This would include any "edited publications" (in this case, publication would be the act of screening it).

To me, a device that modifies an author's work, no matter how slight, is contravening the author's moral rights.

This is not just about an individual's right to choose what they want to see, as it is not the individual choosing what they do/don't see. It is a machine that bases its decisions on a group of moral standards that have been decided for it. Further, it negates the original freedom of expression of the author, simply because the viewer has decided that there are bits they do not like about the work.

Freedom of expression is NOT choosing what you do/don't want to hear. It is about everyone having a right to be heard. And devices like these ensure that the Walmart buying public will never look beyond their own narrow world views.

[mvealf]

I'm a big boy who doesn't need anyone to tell me what I shouldn't be hearing.

But that's just the point. He didn't tell you what you shouldn't be hearing.

I wasn't referring to him. I was talking about how I would feel if a machine censored movies for me, makes my skin crawl.

As ridiculous as I think a self censoring machine would be, I would rather it be available for those who want to tackle the incredibly huge job of censoring their own stuff (good luck with that), than to force censorship for all, as with Make Mine Music. Do we really want a society 50 years from now to know an altered version of history? This machine is the lesser of 2 evils, but a step in a better direction for those like me who fight censorship.