At 11:17 PM -0700 8/29/97, Tim May wrote:
At 12:54 PM -0700 8/29/97, Ulf Möller wrote:
"SUBSCRIBER PROTECTION: In this scenario [...] it would be necessary for access providers to use firewall and PICS technology (in some instances implemented with in proxy applications) ["protection of society" yadda yadda]
Well, so much for PICS being "voluntary." It seems the Euro-fascists are already planning to incorporate it as a control mechanism.
(But, then, only fools thought PICS would be a "voluntary" self-ratings system.
You forgot firewalls, Tim. Only fools thought firewalls would be voluntary. Also, proxy servers. So much for proxy-server technology being "voluntary"; pity the poor fools who claimed it had legitimate applications and should not be banned because of the probability that it would also be used for immoral purposes such as censorship. (Not that I disagree with you about the Europeans, or at least those who wrote this document. This paragraph was particularly interesting: "The principal social objection to this policy scenario [i.e. people deciding for themselves what they want to see and read] is that it does not in any way act to reduce abuse [by which the authors appear to mean 'publication of content they consider offensive'] either on the Internet or in the 'real' world." Seldom does one see so clearly laid out the reasons for opposition to personal freedom: letting people make their own choices Doesn't Punish Those with Bad Ideas.) -- "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help you recover your keys."