From: "Travis Watkins" <[email protected]>
As far as not making a profit, might I point out how many radio stations there are, but how few of them are non-profit or listener supported? How many stations do you have on TV and how many of them are PBS? How much time do most people spend watching PBS as opposed to CBS/NBC/ABC/Fox/CNN/HBO? If you remove the opportunity to make a decent profit, you remove the incentive to get into that market, thus reducing the number of choices available and that in turn reduces the need to compete.
I'm not saying that profit-fueled competition isn't BETTER, just that non-profit providers would work. I think the "non-profit" thing is to discourage the *greedy* companies. Like those that change their filters at the last possible second rather than optimal filter changes, and the like.
Also, when providing media, a 'minimum standard' quickly falls victim to the 'think of the children' mentality where certain people will be very loud in insisting that the radio/tv/internet needs to be sanitized so that children can not be exposed to things that those specific individuals object to(such as evolution or sex-ed in addition to porn and predators. And of those four, which ones do you think will get in anyway? Hint: it is not the first two)
Yeah, I dislike those people as well. Filter the data OUTLETS your children can use, not the data SOURCE. They just don't want to do the minimal supervision themselves. For myself, I turn off any offered filters. The only source-side filters I do like are junk mail filters(Go Gmail!), and them only because aggregating all opinions on what is spam makes them work better.
-- Troy Guffey ICQ: 1978644 AIM: Pax214 Y!: troyguffey LiveJournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/troyguffey/ PGP key ID: 0xDCCDF22D _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
