Here they come...
In today's New York Times: "Anarchy, a Threat on the Electronic Frontier," by Peter H. Lewis. It's kind of a scare piece on how flame wars, abuse, and out-of-control sociopaths are destroying the self-regulating Eden of the net. The piece itself is more or less "neutral," in classic NYT style, but it can also be seen as the first rumblings of a call for some kind of "responsible regulation" of the net. The pedophiles we all run into by the thousands every day are mentioned in the piece, as are the "pornographic pictures [...] traded in great volume." Also, "virtually every network, large and small, has crackpots and sociopaths who seek to bully others with obscenities and threats." Other quotes: "In recent months, it has become difficult for even network libertarians to argue that the network community can resolve its problems through peer pressure alone." and "[...] 'What people will probably do is invent "site kill files,"' wrote David Hayes, a Usenet regular who works for the National Aeronautics and Space Admistration's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif. [...] 'My fear is that this will be a cyber-revisiting of the blacklisting that was prevalent in the 50's,' Mr. Hayes wrote. 'Eventually, I predict that such site kill files will be used to censor politically unpopular views (like mine, for example).'" Think about that next time you put someone in your killfile. --Dave.
<In mail David Mandl said:>
flame wars, abuse, and out-of-control sociopaths are destroying the self-regulating Eden of the net.
Unfortunately I agree with this statement for the most part.
rumblings of a call for some kind of "responsible regulation" of the net.
This one I do not agree with though. Who can regulate it, what are the penalties for violation, how can you prove I typed this, etc.
The pedophiles we all run into by the thousands every day are mentioned in the piece, as are the "pornographic pictures [...] traded in great volume." Also, "virtually every network, large and small,
Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture groups make this point hard to defend against.
[...] 'My fear is that this will be a cyber-revisiting of the blacklisting that was prevalent in the 50's,' Mr. Hayes wrote. 'Eventually, I predict that such site kill files will be used to censor politically unpopular views (like mine, for example).'"
Think about that next time you put someone in your killfile.
There is a difference between a site kill file that blocks everyone who works at AT&T from conversing with people that work at MCI, and my personal kill file that says I don't want to hear from Jim Nalbandian or Detweiler. With personal kill files they have the right to speak and I have the right not to listen. ;) Jim -- Tantalus Inc. Jim Sewell Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ P.O. Box 2310 Programmer Internet: jims@mpgn.com Key West, FL 33045 C-Unix-PC Compu$erve: 71061,1027 (305)293-8100 PGP via email on request. 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3 C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73
"Jim Sewell" says:
Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture groups make this point hard to defend against.
Alt.sex.bestiality is full of jokes about bestiality, not real suggestions about it. There are no newsgroups devoted to pedophillia, nor are pedophiles a visible presense in the erotic pictures newsgroups.
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@snark.imsi.com> "Jim Sewell" says:
Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture groups make this point hard to defend against.
Alt.sex.bestiality is full of jokes about bestiality, not real suggestions about it. There are no newsgroups devoted to pedophillia, nor are pedophiles a visible presense in the erotic pictures newsgroups. I used to systematically read the pictures groups, including alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children, and never once was an actual picture of a child posted. In fact, there was only one picture in a.b.p.e.c during the first several months of its existence, of an adult. The discussion in a.b.p.e.c was almost entirely about how horrible any group with that name must be, a self-fulfilling prophecy if I ever saw one... :-) -- dat@ebt.com (David Taffs)
<In mail David Taffs said:>
From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@snark.imsi.com> "Jim Sewell" says:
Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture groups make this point hard to defend against. Alt.sex.bestiality is full of jokes about bestiality, not real suggestions about it. There are no newsgroups devoted to pedophillia, nor are pedophiles a visible presense in the erotic pictures newsgroups.
I used to systematically read the pictures groups, including alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children, and never once was an actual picture of a child posted. In fact, there was only one picture in
Can't you hear "them" saying, "Well, those heathen pagan computer worshiping nerds are looking at pictures of women defiling themselves with carnal relations with animals. Can't you just imagine what they do in private with their little computer thingeys." It, in a typical person's mind, is a trivial line between child porn and animal porn. To be identified as part of a group of people that routinely pass pictures of women having sex with animals makes us so much more easily identified as part of a group of people that secretly pass kiddie porn... why else would we be so involved in encryption... just look what we send back and forth in public! Guilt by association is unfair, but very prevalent especially with the news media's influence. Jim -- Tantalus Inc. Jim Sewell Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ P.O. Box 2310 Programmer Internet: jims@mpgn.com Key West, FL 33045 C-Unix-PC Compu$erve: 71061,1027 (305)293-8100 PGP via email on request. 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3 C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73
David Mandl says:
In today's New York Times: "Anarchy, a Threat on the Electronic Frontier," by Peter H. Lewis. It's kind of a scare piece on how flame wars, abuse, and out-of-control sociopaths are destroying the self-regulating Eden of the net. The piece itself is more or less "neutral," in classic NYT style, but it can also be seen as the first rumblings of a call for some kind of "responsible regulation" of the net.
The Times has two beat reporters for cyberspace. They are Peter Lewis and John Markoff. Markoff's pieces in the times show remarkable understanding of the issues, but Lewis's make it seem like he's never even logged in. I suspect he has, but he shows no signs of actually "living" in our world. I really find it horrifying that in three articles on the subject he has yet to explain the fundamental problem with the jerks at Canter&Segal, and even whitewashed their disbarrment in Florida in today's piece. There is a difference between "neutral" reporting and uninformed reporting. Peter Lewis hasn't really shown much of a comprehension of what the fundamental issues he is supposed to be reporting are. I encourage people to feed Markoff their interesting scoops and tips, and for people being interviewed by Lewis to ask why Markoff isn't covering a piece. I haven't anything against Mr. Lewis personally, but he seems more interested in finding juicy stories than in producing good stories. Maybe he'll change as he learns more about the beat he's covering. Perry
Does anyone have Lewis' and Markoff's email address(es)? ...dtw /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ | I'll do whatever my Rice Krispies tell me to do... | | | | ******* Notice of impending email address change: ******* | | New interim address: dwitkow@eis.calstate.edu | /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
The Times has two beat reporters for cyberspace. They are Peter Lewis and John Markoff. Not quite. I met Peter Lewis at CFP-94. He has the official cyberspace beat, which was just created this year. Markoff reports on the same issues, but is not assigned to that beat. Markoff's pieces in the times show remarkable understanding of the issues, but Lewis's make it seem like he's never even logged in. I encourage people to feed Markoff their interesting scoops and tips, and for people being interviewed by Lewis to ask why Markoff isn't covering a piece. I would suggest it would be more profitable to educate Mr. Lewis rather than to hold another's reputation over his head. Eric
participants (6)
-
dat＠ebt.com -
David T. Witkowski -
dmandl＠lehman.com -
hughes＠ah.com -
Jim Sewell -
Perry E. Metzger