Re: NRC asks for reviewers for forthcoming Internet pornreport
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, James B. DiGriz wrote: On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: - Forwarded message from Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] - From: Declan McCullagh [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: FC: NRC asks for reviewers for forthcoming Internet porn report To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:37:21 -0400 X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 X-URL: Politech is at http://www.politechbot.com/ Background from Politech archives: Net-sex NRC panel asks for testimony, will hold regional mtgs http://www.politechbot.com/p-01852.html Patricia Nell Warren's comments to NAS porn panel http://www.politechbot.com/p-01615.html National Academy of Sciences panel hears about porn kids http://www.politechbot.com/p-01571.html Free speech advocates fret about NAS Net-porn commission http://www.politechbot.com/p-01567.html This is science??? What I want to know is: what color should the pantaloons on the piano legs be? jbdigriz Let me elaborate: Panels, meetings, testimony...where's the research? What is even being studied here? This sounds like a problem fumbling around until it reaches a critical consensus of definition. The opportunities for shenanigans, for good or ill, should be evident. Personally, I was a horny little fucker as a kid. I won't say when exactly, but the the lurid pulp covers at my eye level at the time tended to focus on Ilsa the she-bitch of the SS SM type themes. I DID find this somewhat disturbing, if fascinating. It was not till sometime later that a friend and I discovered his father's Playboy collection (my old man kept his stash a lot better hidden) and I was exposed to more gratifyingly wholesome images. I can't say that any of it did me any harm, though. Anecdotal, to be sure, but it tallies with my observations of children in recent years, whether watching cable, surfing, or whatever. I know there are folks who won't abide it, but they will be better served by Consumer Reports. And so I've said my say, jbdigriz
Re: NRC asks for reviewers for forthcoming Internet pornreport
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Tim May wrote: On Tuesday, August 14, 2001, at 01:22 PM, James B. DiGriz wrote: On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, James B. DiGriz wrote: And so I've said my say, jbdigriz Uh, ya'll don't all respond at once now. Seriously, I know I'm not a regular poster, but don't leave me twisting in the wind here. I haven't heard this kind of deafening silence since the time I told my lawyer the church job was a frame up and who did the framing. He didn't believe me, but he found out I was right. (I think his point then was yeah, so?, but he got us off without a trial. Damn sharp attorney, that one.) First, people are less likely to respond to whimsical nyms, even a stainless steel rat. Ouch, whimsical. Let's just say that keeping the character in mind tempers my comments. Believe it or not. Second, you comment on Declan's forwarding of a forwarding of a Herb Lin call for reviewers for some study his group is doing. Ho hum. Be nice if it actually said what it was about, rather than eliciting projections and interpretations on the part of the reader. But, as you say, ho hum. Presumably it is to give scientific backing to whatever position Congress wants to take on upcoming issues and legislation, and to couch various, no doubt conflicting, agendas in scientific doublespeak. Excuse my cynicism, but that's the way it looks to me. Third, the issue of online porn, the CDA, the Amateur Action case, etc. have been discussed many times here. No doubt everyone is tired of it, then. No problem. Fourth, Cypherpunks are probably more interested in making sure Big Bro can't block porn, via technical means, than in advising Herb Lin on yet another study. Or blocking anything else in particular. I concur. Fifth, you expressed your view of Herb's study. Absent some point, what is there is to discuss? Mainly I was wondering if others were as dubious as I am at moment about the apparent level of integrity of the NAS. I should research this matter more myself, I admit. If I'm not giving Herb proper credit, even if I remain skeptical of the institution, I'll be the first to say so. Sixth, you're always welcome to post more. Some things generate interest, some don't. Don't sweat the posts that don't. I don't. Point taken. Thanks for the response. jbdigriz
Re: NRC asks for reviewers for forthcoming Internet pornreport
On Tue, 14 Aug 2001, Declan McCullagh wrote: On Tue, Aug 14, 2001 at 01:53:58PM -0700, Tim May wrote: Third, the issue of online porn, the CDA, the Amateur Action case, etc. have been discussed many times here. The NRC study will be very important in Washington DC circles (less important than the Meese commission, more important than the COPA Commission). While it may be of passing interest to cypherpunks, many of these topics have been discussed before, as Tim says, which explains why there's little reaction. -Declan Gotcha. jbdigriz
