I am very interested in the data haven issue now that I have my site up. The aspect of pornography is a problem that has to be faced. To this end, I would like to ask that we look at how pornography is defined.
What you define as pornography doesn't mean shit, it's what the media and jornalists and fundies etc.. decide is pornographic that you gotta watch out for. This means just about anythign that isn't vanilla After School Special material is suspect.
I am well aware that what I personaly consider pornography carries little weight. But it does carry some since I do vote. There is the whole issue of community standard that has been left out of this discussion so far and that means that I as a taxed land owner (5 acres in Lockhard, TX) get to sit on juries now and again. In that sense what I believe can carry a lot of weight. Even to the point of refusing to convict somebody because I personaly feel a law or precedence is incorrect. But when you consider states like Oregon where the whole concept of pornography has been removed from the books it makes me have a little hope for sanity. My personal contention is that pornography does not exist any more than good or evil do, these concepts are based on our personal ethos not anything absolute.
I too mayt have a site int eh near future, so I am interested int eh project also, as I have always been really into the idea of data-havens. I think that a self-sufficient data-haven is going to need alot of resources tho to continue it's operation past the pont were it is known to exist.
As to data havens being dangerous to run...I don't know. At the recent HoHoCon there was a long discussion 'bout networks hidden within networks that was very intriguing. If Doug Barnes is reading this he may be willing to reiterate some of the talk. I do know that at the moment my partners and myself are looking at remailer software running under Linux and data havens are something that we have discussed. I personaly see data havens as a repository for information that is beyond the keen of governments to regulate. This is the key point to me. Not whether it is industrial secrets, military secrets, or .gif's that jr. can get his rocks off over. I see the whole pornography issue as a red herring that keeps the dim-witted and ignorant busy on while everyone else with a clue gets on with their own personal agenda. I do not mean this to imply a conspiracy, simply that most DA's have something they want (ie political clout) and they will in general do whatever it takes to get. In a sense one could consider such regulatory agencies as mercenaries for personal gain.
i want to know everything http://www.mcs.com/~nesta/home.html i want to be everywhere Nesta's Home Page i want to fuck everyone in the world & i want to do something that matters /-/ a s t e zine