Re: Why Net Censorship Doesn't Work

[cman@communities.com (Douglas Barnes)]

I think that there is still a substantial possibility that many kinds
of expression will be marginalized and hard to access for a great many
users.

One of my co-workers has pointed out that the need for something as
simple as a helper application for Netscape loses about 90% of his
audience. By simply making it rather more difficult for people to
chat about some things, governments can effectively push such things
out of the way of all but the most determined readers.

This is actually one of those odd Laffer-curve-like phenomena, where
as long as the expression isn't too inherently desirable, government
restrictions can be somewhat effective, but the more tightly they try to
control things, the more likely the are to lose, as there will be more
and more desirable content outside the sanctioned sphere of activity.
Consequently, I was much happier to see the "indecency" standard get
passed instead of the "harmful" standard, as the former will push far
more content into the "gray" area of the net, which will encourage
development and adoption of appropriate tools.

A quote from Star Wars (which I'm just now incorporating into my .sig)
was just echoed back to me in a letter from a chap I spoke with from
the Australian Office of Strategic Crime Assessment, as encapsulating
what he got out of a rather long chat we had when he was passing through
the Bay Area last month. Here it is:

------                                                           , ------
Douglas Barnes         "The tighter you close your fist, Governor Tarkin,
cman@communities.com    the more systems will slip through your fingers."
cman@best.com                                             --Princess Leia