PICS is not censorship

[Timothy C. May]

At 8:43 AM -0600 12/10/96, Mike McNally wrote:
>jbaber at mi.leeds.ac.uk wrote:
>>
>> Not having a detailed knowledge of the American right to free
>> speach I can only go on my opinions, but lieing with the intent
>> to defraud would almost certainly be illegal over here.
>
>So where lies intent to defraud in the act of deliberately
>mislabeling a web page?  Why is that any different from me
>standing on the street corner (or at Hyde Park Corner) announcing
>that I'm the Messiah?

This was, of course, my point about there being no universally valid truth,
and what such anti-fraud statutes must mean about religions.

Basically, "free speech" entails a kind of anarchy (= no law) with regard
to truths and falsehoods. As I like to say, "at most, one religion is
correct" (with the other 783 major sects clearly spouting falsehoods...and
probably _all_ 784 major sects doing so).

If PICS codes are ever mandated, this will be placing the legal system and
governments in the business of deciding truth.

The meta-point I am making is not about truth and religion, but about this
business of insisting that people label their words by some criteria.
Speech should not require prior approval by a standards body, or
self-labelling.

(And, to repeat, any such labelling implies standards of truth that simply
don't exist.)

--Tim May

Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside"
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay at got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."