Re: CDT and the Threat of Gov't Intervention

[Jim Burnes <jim.burnes@ssds.com>]

On Wed, 3 Dec 1997, Tim May wrote:

> And made many people clamor for self-policing software.
> 
> I have always advocated filtering and self-selection of articles,
> magazines, television, movies, restaurants, etc. As such, Web filters are
> fine things. If one _only_ wants to read articles favorable to Scientology,
> or critical of Catholics, or catering to certain sexual interests, hey,
> find some filter services or program your own....
> 
> However, the drumbeat is being heard that such filter services may not be
> fully "voluntary," inasmuch as the Government is "assisting" in their
> development, as the current confab shows. (One wonders what the reaction
> would be if Bill Clinton, Ira Magaziner, and other government officials
> helped organize a conference on how *religions* can help police themselves
> and avoid incorrect thoughts? "Churches must learn to police themselves and
> avoide heresies, so that government action will not be needed.")

I believe I've been beating the drum for that one for a couple months.

Now all we need is to talk to a winsock geek and find out how we
can wedge our software into the winsock layer so that we could release
roll your own censoring software.

We then sell it to all know religious organizations (including those not
necessarily claiming to be ;-).  A small royalty from every thousand
copies sent out is then put into the retired cypherpunks relief fund. 

seriously.  rather than complaining that many people find some
material objectionable to their tastes we should take advantage 
of it...and make it widely available.

All those millions of dollars sent to churches could then be spent
on services delivered to the member families to babysit their kids.

Net effect...Clinton/Bore/Freeh/etc fascist dreams of controlling
the net go up in smoke..

worth it?

jim