Re: Protocols at the Point of a Gun

[tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)]

At 3:46 PM 4/17/96, Henry Huang wrote:

>Well good.  Better nonstandardized chaos than a single, arbitrarily
>defined and applied system.  (Ref: "Parental Advisory" stickers, which
>were IMHO totally useless, and a doomed concept from the start.)

These stickers on CDs were actually very useful. Kids could spot more
quickly the juicy stuff. The taste of forbidden fruit is so much better.

Likewise, the "age bit" that some are talking about will be similarly
useful. Minors will be unambiguously identified--no more "is she or isn't
she?"--and actions taken accordingly.

(Several years from now, I see a great hue and cry over the fact that the
"age bit" mandated by "The Children's Internet Protection Act of 1997" will
be used to deny the protection of adult-seeming personnas to children.
Pedophiles and the like will find their tasks easier, and the Act's
supporters will say "But that's not what we intended!!")

I saw a reference to this in the archives of the Cyberia list, though I am
no longer subscribed to it. Not sure who first pointed it out, but it's a
valid point.

--Tim May

THE X-ON CONGRESS:  INDECENT COMMENT ON AN INDECENT SUBJECT, by Steve
Russell, American Reporter Correspondent....You motherfuckers in Congress
have dropped over the edge of the earth this time... "the sorriest bunch
of cocksuckers ever to sell out the First Amendment" or suggesting that
"the only reason to run for Congress these days is to suck the lobbyists'
dicks and fuck the people who sent you there," ....any more than I care
for the language you shitheads have forced me to use in this
essay...Let's talk about this fucking indecent language bullshit.