Re: [IFWP] Privacy Concern for IPv6? AP Article

[Jeff Williams]

Arnold and all,

A. Gehring wrote:

Jeff

Read that one in the Oregonian today.  No details to it though.

  Yes details are a bit sparse, but you should understand that
the author is only a writer and could not get into to allot of
details on that article.  But the basic information was in the
article.

 

Do you know of a link with more details.  Please, pick one that is not too
big for me.  Still your student.

  No I don't presently.  The one I posted in it's entirety was from
www.ap.org.

 

Also.  I've begun to think about pornography.  Even got the courage up to
venture way out beyond the safe and narrow pages of  playboy.com
69% of the net???  Substantive.

My leading thought at present is that Adult Content Providers, possessing
both interest and finance to fight aggressively for certain values, (like
Sen's Mafia in Development as Freedom) are filling a vacuum  in the struggle
to preserve freedoms of speech.

  Well freedom of speech and privacy are important stalwarts that
must be maintained regardless of the media in which they may
be under attack.  The Internet should be no acceptation.

 

My 1st question is:  Can the struggle to preserve communication rights and
freedoms on the broader array of universal issues succeed without their
help?

  No I don't think they can.

 

My 2nd question is:  What's happening with the girls? Does the internet and
it's pervasive dissemination of Adult Content advance the agency of women,
or does it retard the agency of women?

  Neither in my opinion.  Balance is the key here.

 

My 3rd question is:  Will regulatory policy adopted presently and in the
future by ICANN and other governing bodies improve the agency of women?

  I doubt that ICANN is going to improve anything.  Thus far they have
done allot of harm, and are seemingly bent on continuing to do so.

 

My preference is for all policy wonks involved in this specific arena to
carefully consider consequences, both intended and unintended, inherent to
their own positions, whatever they may be, and as to their universal impact
on freedom and agency.

  Agreed.  But this is easier said than done.

 

In my opinion, a work in progress; policy that results in raised barriers to
entry and/or decreased privacy protections may unintentionally compromise
the agency of  women.  If willing  individuals become unable to compete
effectively as  free agents against organizational economies, innocent
individuals will more likely find the agency of their own person compromised
as a result.

  How very true.  ANd we are seeing that now form ICANN and the DNSO.

 

Arnold Gehring
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
good governance:  a complex objective.
had god wanted me to govern alone,
he would have given me
all your brains.
A statement for democracy.
                             The Naiive One

> All,
>
>   The following just came out that may be of some interest.
>
http://wire.ap.org/APnews/center_story.html?FRONTID=TECHNOLOGY&STORYID=APIS7
01DBSO0
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Contact Number:  972-447-1894
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
>
>
>
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208