> The free service is provided by the Airport (be it government or
> private, doesn't matter).  If you wish to use it, you abide by the
> rules and restrictions that they put in place for [its] use.  In this
> case, it's no porn.

Actually, no, it's "nothing our censorware considers dodgy", which is a
whole lot broader brush than "no porn" (poster child, boingboing).

> I'm also a BIG fan of arresting anyone that is viewing porn in a
> public area where anyone can walk by and see material that is
> objectionable to them.

Whose idea of "objectionable" controls, though?  I certainly know there
are a whole lot of things _I_ find more objectionable than overt sex
(which is what most uses of "porn" really mean).  Start down the
"`protect' the public from `objectionable' material" road and you will
rapidly either take down the wifi entirely or wind up turning it into
"`protect' the public from anything our censor doesn't like".  (The
latter, of course, is exactly where we started, with a particular
automated value of "our censor".)

/~\ The ASCII                           der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML               [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
_______________________________________________
Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts.
https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec
Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.

Reply via email to