In fairness to the original proposal, it's worth remembering that his purpose was not specifically to impose censorship on the net, but rather to protect BBS operators (and net access providers) from legal liability for providing pornographic and other questionable material to children. Granted, his method for doing so did amount to a lot of laws and censor- ship, and I can't agree with that any more than others here. But the problem isn't going to disappear under an onslaught of rhetoric. As I said, I can sympathize with concerned parents, and although my personal philosophies would not support a censorship-based solution, not everyone will feel as There is a movement afoot to hook schools up to the net, part of the general "superhighway" initiative. This is going to raise the public profile of the adult material on the net and increase pressure for ways to limit the access of youngsters to it. One response we can have is to dig in our heels against any censorship, and say, "don't put your school on the net if you don't want your kids reading about bestiality." From my experience, this would be equivalent to saying "don't put schools on the net." That will not be a politically acceptable solution. I really don't know what the ultimate resolution of this conflict will be. IMO, the Internet as it stands today is incompatible with the conventional mores of much of society. Either the Internet will be bowdlerized, or perhaps split into "X-rated" vs "G-rated" sections. Maybe a completely new internetwork is needed, one with more controls and limitations. Then perhaps the current internet could continue to exist in close to its present form. I know that some people are optimistic that the Internet will change society rather than vice versa. They hope that as more and more people join the net that they will become tolerant of the much wider range of views and practices than are common in most people's home towns. But I don't think it will come out this way. Society is a lot bigger than the net, and the character of the net will inevitably change as the membership changes. In some ways this is reminiscent of our earlier debates about whether society would be able to prevent the advent of widespread lawbreaking due to Tim's conception of "crypto anarchy." I have always been skeptical that our software and ideas can really succeed in the face of strong social opposition. For similar reasons I think that the net will be cleansed of pornography if people feel strongly enough about it. So I do see a lot of connections to crypto issues in this debate. Hal