Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back

On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 19:43:11 -0400, RabidPedagog wrote:

He did, but there is context there. He's not saying that child
pronography should be produced, but he is against censoring whatever has
already been produced. It's a very difficult position to take because he
believes censorship in general is bad, even when the content is
objectively terrible, simply because the terribleness of content is
always subjective. In other words, a lawmaker will today decide that the
sight of a naked 12-year-old is abhorrent, but he can tomorrow decide
that the sight of a female in general is too.

It is a tough call. My wife was a librarian. iirc the state of
Massachusetts, home of the Puritans, passed a law declaring the female
nipple obscene. Quick, lock up the art books!

Then there was that Blind Faith album cover with the topless 11 year old.
Is possession of the album child pornography? Wikipedia provides a photo
of the cover; are they liable?

I have made no secret of my dislike for Stallamn but he is being
consistent. Well, not really consistent; afaik he is not calling for child
pornography to be GPL v3.