Perry E. Metzger <perry@imsi.com> writes:
Mike Duvos says:
Just what the world needs. Another reporter who spends a short time on Usenet and emerges to proclaim to the clueless masses that the Internet is bursting at the seams with child porn GIFs and that the pedophiles are frolicking uncontrollably.
I must disagree. His analysis that discussion by pedophiles on alt.sex.intergen is likely 100% covered by the first amendment was a statment we would all agree with.
Mr. Bates lukewarm acknowlegement that the First Ammendment protects such discussions hardly mitigates his other inaccuracies and in any case, is not at odds with my statement above.
I'd say his article was more on the lines of "here are problems" not "here are problems -- lets regulate the net". He didn't appear to be advocating any new laws or law enforcement activities.
No. He was just attempting to convince the numerous readers of the Wall Street Journal that Usenet has a "child porn newsgroup" filled with the stuff and accessible to everyone on the net. Once this incorrect notion is sold to the American public, new laws will follow of their own accord, without need of any further help from Mr. Bates.
I thought that the article was a bit of a downer, but it was hardly horrifying. Indeed, I'd say it was quite well written.
Only in the sense of being grammatically correct. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd@netcom.com $ via Finger. $