Re: blocking software & brock meeks

[declan@well.com (Declan McCullagh)]

Since I wrote most of the dispatch M. Nuri is talking about, I'll take a
moment to respond to his points below.

First, neither Brock nor I intends to "harass" the blocking software companies.

Seocnd, I wouldn't be nearly as skeptical of their efforts if they'd
honestly admit what they block. Right now, parents don't _know_ the extent
to which Junior is kept from educational and political sites.

This was the point of the article; I fear you missed it entirely.

-Declan



>sent this to Brock Meeks re: his latest column
>I also ask cpunks not to harass these companies or their users--
>it's a solution that's working.
>
>------- Forwarded Message
>
>To: brock@well.com
>Subject: cyber blocking software
>Date: Wed, 03 Jul 96 12:48:49 -0700
>From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
>
>
>I read your columns regularly. outstanding work.
>
>regarding your recent dispatch: please do not harass the
>blocking software companies too much. they are simply based
>on a different premise than the regular net. the internet
>starts out with, "everybody can access everything". they
>start out with, "only stuff we approve of can be accessed".
>
>what their system shows is that you will always have disagreement
>and controversy whenever this software is employed, whereever
>subjectivity is involved. it is a very legitimate and worthwhile
>service for parents who would rather "err on the side of caution".
>
>but far
>better to have these organizations arguing & bickering with who they
>censor than to have the people who are censored suing the
>government. the people who want free net access have it, and
>are unbothered by these controversies.  in other words,
>by moving the controversies to places where they are locally
>contained (i.e. among the blockers and blockees) the rest
>of the surfing public is unaffected and perhaps even protected
>from harassment.
>
>so you see? there is all kinds of ranting about censorship going
>on, but it has nothing to do with the way the vast majority uses
>the internet. it's completely voluntary. it's the perfect solution.
>so far, nothing the blocking companies do can affect the net as
>a whole. they are largely predicated on that function.
>
>in a real sense they are providing very general services of
>"rating web sites our customers will be most interested in".
>and you realize, even the Point Communications awards are the
>exact same thing.
>
>so again, please do not harass the companies. it's a solution
>that does work. the existence of controversy does not prove
>it doesn't work. it in fact proves that it does work.
>
>
>
>------- End of Forwarded Message