Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd)
Forwarded message:
Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 03:28:53 -0800 From: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com> Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd)
At 12:11 AM 1/22/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote:
Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it?
'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any
Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" -
The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody else is along for the ride. If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't understand what is going on. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage@ssz.com ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university web site on French soil to use French.
Jim Choate wrote:
From: Bill Stewart <stewarts@ix.netcom.com>
Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" -
The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. I have the right to do whatever I want to anything that comes through my part of the net, including censoring or editing any mail that comes through it, so that it reflects a point of view consistent with mine, since I am the one paying for it.
The net is a bunch of computers, running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody else is along for the ride. Those who pay the money, like myself and others who have bought the right to control the net, are justified in acting without outside interference on anything that passes through our part of the net.
If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. The net belongs to those with the money to control it, and people who do not have money have no rights on the net.
If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't understand what is going on. For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, anything that passes through his part of the net. Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it.
Jim Choate CyberTects ravage@ssz.com
Jim, Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over the part of the net that I have paid for. I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose they choose. As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was set up to espouse. Toto
participants (2)
-
Jim Choate -
Toto