On Tue, 16 Jan 2001, Kathryn Hogg wrote:
> > My point is that censorship already exists in schools and libraries,
> > with the proper technology, filtering will not make that any different
>
> But does that make it right?
If censorship exists with or without internet filtering, does that make
filtering wrong? What is the issues that everyone has objections
with? Filtering or Censorship? I have a problem with censorship, not
filtering.
> > A person searching for gay and lesbian resources is a great
> > example. However, if the library of a small town (or any size for that
> > matter) has stocked the shelves with gay and lesbian resources, why
> > would they block any sites that provide those as well?
>
> Because they contain "naughty" content as determined by their web
> filtering software.
This assumes the web filtering software determines what content is
'naughty' and what is not. The filtering services I am talking about leave
the choice to the librarian or teacher, who is exactly the person who
controls that decision right now.
> > If they do choose to block those sites, then chances are they do not
> > have anything in print related to that topic anyway, and then it's not
> > the filtering that
> > is the problem, but the person choosing to deny those resources.
>
> It could be that they don't have any books because no one has asked for
> them.
Maybe they live in a small town where some topics are looked down upon,
such as the earlier example of someone looking for lesbian resources. If
the librarian has determined not to stock books related to gay and lesbian
issues, the librarian is the problem.
> Everything that is not allowed is by definition blocked. You can't have
> one without the other. How are you assuming that web pages are
> initially assumed to be allowed or not? By existence of
> "naughty" words? By human moderation?
The initial list of what is allowed and what is blocked is determined by
the person who buys the filtering at the time of install,
and can be changed at any time by anyone who has authorized
access to that system.
> My whole point is that there are a multitude of valid reasons that
> someone may need anonymous access to information.
As there are a multitude of reasons to filter information that is
non-relevant to a school or education atmosphere.
> If a student is mature enough to do research on on the pornography
> industry then I would presume that she is a better filter of what she
> needs than any piece of software.
This is assuming all 'children' are mature enough to make their own
decisions. If they were mature enough to do so, they would not be called
'children'. The United States determined that someone is no longer a child
at the age of 18. This is when they should (according to the US
government, which is a whole different discussion) be allowed to make
their own decisions about what to view on the internet. I am not convinced
that every child is _mature_ considering the types of tragedies that take place in
schools
by 'children' under the age of 18.
> A search engine is completely different from serving up pages that have
> been requested by the user.
I disagree. How better does that user determine what pages to
request? A search engine is the starting point of most research.
Jen
> Jen Hamilton said:
> > My point is that censorship already exists in schools and libraries, and
> > with the proper technology, filtering will not make that any different.
>
> But does that make it right?
>
> > A person searching for gay and lesbian resources is a great
> > example. However, if the library of a small town (or any size for that
> > matter) has stocked the shelves with gay and lesbian resources, why would
> > they block any sites that provide those as well?
>
> Because they contain "naughty" content as determined by their web filtering
> software.
>
> > If they do choose to block those sites, then chances are they do not have
> > anything in
> > print related to that topic anyway, and then it's not the filtering that
> > is the problem, but the person choosing to deny those resources.
>
> It could be that they don't have any books because no one has asked for them.
> A smaller library is also most likely to be the one that will install the
> cheapest software they can find that requires the least amount of maintenance.
> They didn't necessarily want to do this, they are being told to. And when people
> are told to do something, they don't necessarily put their whole heart
> into it.
>
> > Try to take a different view and look at filtering as a tool that 'allows'
> > sites instead of 'blocks'.
>
> Everything that is not allowed is by definition blocked. You can't have one
> without the other. How are you assuming that web pages are initially assumed
> to be allowed or not? By existence of "naughty" words? By human moderation?
> My whole point is that there are a multitude of valid reasons that someone
> may need anonymous access to information.
>
>
> > A search on google for 'lesbian movies' lists
> > 8 out of 10 porn sites. How does this help the lesbian who is looking for
> > resources about her sexuality? Now apply a 'filter' where only
> > resource-driven non-porn sites are listed, and the user sees 10 out
> > of 10, or 100 out of 100 sites with relevant non-pornographic lesbian
> > movies.
>
> A search engine is completely different from serving up pages that have been
> requested by the user.
>
> > Apply that also to a student who is searching for
> > information for a report about the pornography industry. There's no
> > way viable information can be found on the web about this subject without
> > filtering at some level. Proper 'Filtering' can find the best possible
> > sites, as well as the worst possible sites, and in that way can also be
> > used as a tool to improve the quality of what resources are available for
> > students.
>
> If a student is mature enough to do research on on the pornography industry
> then I would presume that she is a better filter of what she needs than
> any piece of software.
>
> > That's simply not true. I would like to think that any teacher or
> > librarian would do everything they can to provide the best possible
> > resources for all of their students.
>
> You're forgetting about their most valuable resource - their time. I still
> contend that a lack of time and other resources will put the human moderation
> into the "later" pile and they will effectively depend on the capabilities
> of software.
>
> --
> Kathryn Hogg
>
_______________________________________________
issues mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
