Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back

Liste des GroupesRevenir à ol advocacy 
Sujet : Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back
De : joelcrump (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Joel)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date : 28. Jun 2024, 01:48:01
Autres entêtes
Message-ID : <h3ur7j5r2r0v4v6t0oal6tceie4k3is24g@4ax.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
User-Agent : ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
On 6/27/2024 5:33 PM, Joel wrote:
DFS <nospam@dfs.com> wrote:
On 6/26/2024 3:23 PM, Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
Think about what a sick monster he [Richard Stallman] really is.  He would rather videos
of your child being raped remain available on the Internet because in
his warped brain it's 'censorship' to destroy them.
>
I understand his position though I disagree with it.
>
You "disagree" with it?
>
Something's really, really wrong with you if you have anything but a
visceral, almost violent response to a demon like Stallman.
>
Grow a pair and condemn the foul creature in the strongest terms.  If
Biden said something like that you'd call for him to be jailed.
 
I'm not certain Stallman implied that such a video should not be
removed.  Do you have a cite on that?
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
13 January 2011 (Censorship in Vietnam)
Vietnam has imposed stiff censorship on the Internet, following the
example of China.
[Reference updated on 2018-02-15 because the old link was broken.]
>
The EU could be next. There is an EU proposal to require filtering of
the Internet to block "child pornography". ISPs are fighting against it.
>
The article surrenders the first battle for freedom of expression by
granting that "child pornography" ought to be censored somehow. It
raises only the question of what method will really work and avoid
collateral damage.
>
When making pornography involves real abuse of real children, those who
distribute it under a business relationship with the abusers arguably
participate in the abuse. They could be prosecuted for doing so.
However, that does not excuse censorship. No matter how disgusting
published works might be, censorship is more disgusting.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
https://stallman.org/archives/2011-jan-apr.html
>
>
>
I just wrote him asking for some clarification about this issue.


It appears that he's talking about forcing ISPs to filter this
content, as if they have the ability to police it.  Not about removing
specific offending material, on a case by case basis.  He says that
producers could be prosecuted.  I agree with him, if someone has the
gall to expose this material online, nail them.  But he's not wrong if
I'm correctly interpreting his point, that we shouldn't mandate
comprehensive censorship of network traffic, as Vietnam and China did.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent.  States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Date Sujet#  Auteur
26 Jun 24 * Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back13DFS
26 Jun 24 `* Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back12DFS
27 Jun21:06  `* Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back11DFS
27 Jun23:29   +* Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back7Joel
28 Jun01:35   i+* Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back3Joel
28 Jun02:13   ii`* Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back2DFS
28 Jun02:22   ii `- Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back1Joel
28 Jun03:26   i+* Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back2DFS
28 Jun06:11   ii`- Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back1rbowman
1 Jul20:32   i`- Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back1DFS
28 Jun00:53   +* Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back2DFS
28 Jun01:48   i`- Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back1Joel
28 Jun05:56   `- Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back1rbowman

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal