Re: Surf-filter lists

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

At 4:06 PM 7/16/96, David Sternlight wrote:

>YOU and I may find it so, but you simply don't understand the mentality of
>those who will buy such filters without question. Vast numbers of people
>take the word of their minister, government, morality "guide", guru, or
>teacher without question. Why do you think Scientology has gone as far as
>it has?

Furthermore, I saw absolutely nothing "surprising" in the topics filtered
by the NetNinny and similar filters. That is, it is not surprising to me
that G-rated filters would filter all mentions of homosexuality, "safe
sex," condoms, anal sex, sex in general, etc.

There may be those who think that children need to be exposed to proper
condom use in the third grade (California's public schools think this, for
example), and those that think abortion information should not be blocked,
but there are clearly many parents who are happy to have little Johnny not
exposed to any of the above and similar topics. If this means little Johnny
is denied access to the NOW web page, or the NAMBLA safe sex page, so be
it.

If enough people want detailed explanations of what is being blocked, and
will vote with their dollars, then probably some filter vendors will choose
to make this information available. Sounds fair to me.

--Tim May

Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software!
We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed.
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Licensed Ontologist         | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."