Your last paragraph is a little too complicated for me Jim, I'm interested in what you have to say but please break it down for me. Jim Choate <ravage@ssz.com> wrote:

On 27 Feb 2001, LUIS VILDOSOLA wrote:

...

Relating how code can infringe on someone else's rights will be an abstract argument.

Not at all, code itself can NEVER infringe anothers right, UNLESS it's executed (acted upon).

Speech in and of itself is powerful because of its two characteristics,

- It's harmless and does nothing in and of itself.

- It motivates peoples imagination to act.

It is the second point that ALL regulation of speech, expression, press, distribution, etc. exists for.

Fundamentaly all government regulation of speech is nothing more than a covert attempt to manage your consequent behaviour. It is not the speech but what others may do with it. It is clear the person emitting the speech has no control over the person receiving the speech. But we can't control the second party until it's too late. So we try to control the first party. Further, if we accept the premise that the first party is responsible for the acts of the second party, then what of the unmentioned parties acting on the first party? And if we claim the first party is acting of their own free will then what character of the second party is our litmus test? What aspect of the relationship between the first and

second

parties is missing in the relationship between the first and unnamed parties that relieves the unnamed parties of responsibility for the acts of the first party? And isn't the regulation of PREVIOUS speech by such a unnamed party also proof that the first party isn't acting of their own free will? Isn't the fact that this unnamed party removed the potential good from banned speech from the situation and thus itself participated in the affront? And because they did so with forethought doesnt' this compound their part?

____________________________________________________________________

Before a larger group can see the virtue of an idea, a smaller group must first understand it.

"Stranger Suns" George Zebrowski

The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1