On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 20:00, Chris Gravell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't have a problem with any technology that blocks objectionable > material that is non-consensual to the overriding majority. It serves no > useful purpose and does not infringe my right to be.
First, there's a right to free speech (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html, Nr. 19). Because the block list is not public, it impossible to identify whether the problem is a server that is down and/or misconfigured, or if there is censorship going on. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, and this is one of them. Another part is that they aren't solving the problem, much less even trying to do so. Why block access to child porn sites? You can just take them down, have the people responsible arrested and there's no need for complicated technical solutions to a social problem. Of course that'd probably mean that they'd actually have to do some work, instead of giving the work to someone else. Of course, people like you really like to focus on the child porn aspect, mostly because it marks everyone who disagrees with you as a potential rapist. Fact is that this technical solution can't even begin to fix that problem, but creates many others - like the oppression of opinions not liked by the Internet Watch Foundation or similar organizations. -- Read my blog at http://projectdream.org _______________________________________________ swinog mailing list [email protected] http://lists.swinog.ch/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/swinog
