On 23/01/2009, at 6:12 AM, Noah Slater wrote:
If you want to use CouchDB to build your porn empire, all power to
you -- but
I think that expecting a link from our wiki is a little too much to
ask.
Why? It's a page about apps using CouchDB, not a moral statement by a
group of developers. I'm particularly concerned with comments that say
that pornography is obviously unacceptable in the same sense that hate-
sites are unacceptable. What about sites promoting FPS games that tout
the realistic nature of their ultra-violent gruesomeness? Is sex
really worse than the increasingly realistic depiction of such violence?
* Gambling
Gambling is legal in many jurisdictions. The issue of the illegality
of certain online gambling sites has more to do with issues of
government control of revenue and taxation than any moral concern.
* Pornography
It's highly likely that a porn site linked from the couch site is
actually legal in many jurisdictions. And while I'm personally
concerned about the explicit misogyny of much porn, what about a gay
porn site?
* Untrusted sites for professional services, legal advice, online
pharmacies, &c
What is untrusted? In any case, an online pharmacy may be the only/
best source of pharmaceutical product in some places.
* Political or religious extremism, racial hatred, &c
What qualifies as 'extreme' in a political sense is difficult to
objectively determine. IMO you can't use the 'promotes hate' line
because much of the mainstream political discourse I saw in the recent
US election implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) promoted hatred.
Racial vilification is a clearer issue, but what about homosexual
vilification? And what is religious extremism? Is your definition of
'extreme' determined by a western christian viewpoint?
* Sites related to illegal activities, drug taking, copyright
infringement, &c
Some drug taking that is illegal in the US isn't illegal in some
jurisdictions (and in any case it's hypocritical considering the
revenue raised from tobacco and alcohol, both of which are more
dangerous than many illegal drugs). Still, IMO illegality is the only
benchmark you can use for any of these issues.
Personally I feel sites whose primary purpose is copyright
infringement should be banned, but I'm in a minority in the connected
community wrt copyright.
------------------------------------------
I vote to allow anything that is legal in your hosting environment
that meets the uses-couch requirement. Don't make ANY moral judgement,
because you cannot objectively support such decisions, and it's only
by making no judgement that you are insulated from the effects of
making or not making a particular judgement.
Alternatively, if you avoid anything that could offend anyone, then
you can't link to anything political, or religious. Or any sites that
promotes reproductive freedom or argues for abortion rights, or that
has anything to do with alcohol, or has pictures of people drinking
alcohol (those last two are offensive to muslims) etc etc. I've worked
tangentially in internationalization and come across some of these
issues. It's a nightmare. Don't go there.
Antony Blakey
--------------------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787
Reflecting on W.H. Auden's contemplation of 'necessary murders' in the
Spanish Civil War, George Orwell wrote that such amorality was only
really possible, 'if you are the kind of person who is always
somewhere else when the trigger is pulled'.
-- John Birmingham, "Appeasing Jakarta"
