Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

On 04/03/07, Shlomo Solomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who knows what el

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Quoting Shachar Shemesh, from the post of Fri, 02 Mar: > > The real reason you are confused, however, is because the question is > not whether "kids should have access to pornography". The real question > is "whether all internet users in Israel be forced to identify > themselves via biometrics in

Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

I agree, and that's exactly why I was he first one to menton the possible LINUX implicatons. But as I already wrote, only 2 other people referred to that aspect of the problem. All the other posts were about censorship, porn etc - and those subjects, as interesting as they may be, ARE off topic.

Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

> This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or > three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this > completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who > knows what else. I disagree. If an MS-based solution is manda

Re: enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

On Sun, 4 Mar 2007, Shlomo Solomon wrote: This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who knows what else. ENOUGH

enough (was Re: the great jerusalem firewall)

This completely off-topic thread has gone on far too long. Aside from two or three posts about possible LINUX issues, I fail to see why we are having this completely irrelevant discussion about porn, censorship, religion and who knows what else. ENOUGH -- Shlomo Solomon http://the-solomons.n

RE: the great jerusalem firewall

_ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ori Idan Sent: Saturday, March 03, 2007 8:33 PM To: Yonah Russ Cc: Shachar Shemesh; Peter; IGLU Subject: Re: the great jerusalem firewall The problem is not porn or not. The problem is letting other people decide what you can s

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > Since the law is targeted at people under the age of eighteen, I > assume the commission will ask the question: Would I choose to show > that to a 17 year old? I am assuming you are right, which is exactly the reason I'm so worried. This is, precisely, the wrong question to ask

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: You are confusing a one to one relationship (surfer to voting center) with a one to many one (surfer vs. potentially an infinity or URLs). No- I 'm suggesting a 1-1 relationship of surfer to ISP proxy. Try to think this through please. You go to an inte

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Actually- I know one of the developers of the Estonian online voting > technology which identifies each voter based on a physical smart card and a > password. whi

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > adults. If a parent really want's they're kids looking at porn sites, > they'll give them their password. Correct. And since they should have their own passwords and emai

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yonah Russ wrote: > This law isn't stopping anyone who already legally has the right to > look at porn from looking at porn. Sure it does! For one thing, porn is not illegal today. I find it hard to believe that an adult is allowed to legally

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

that can actually be a good a argument for a bagatz in the unlikely event that this idiotic proposal will pass, that can hold off the implementation of this potential law for a few good months. On 3/2/07, Shlomo Solomon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I don't want to get into a debate about porn. Th

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > adults. If a parent really want's they're kids looking at porn sites, > they'll give them their password. Correct. And since they should have their own passwords and email why not buy them an internet account f

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: Are you over 18? Type in your password and see whatever you want. Type your password WHERE in an Internet cafe ? And even if, what stops one to use https://www.the-cloak.com after that for free ? And one day after that is blocked https://some.where.els

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: No, they represent a fraction of the ruling coalition, which has passed hairier laws in the past, using the well-known quid pro quo arrangements with other coalition members from other parties. In this country the words 'don't worry only a few MKs voted for

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > This law isn't stopping anyone who already legally has the right to > look at porn from looking at porn. Sure it does! For one thing, porn is not illegal today. > It just requires them to prove that they have the right. Which is a way of stopping. Saying "you can't do X unless y

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: adults. If a parent really want's they're kids looking at porn sites, they'll give them their password. Correct. And since they should have their own passwords and email why not buy them an internet account from an ISP that provides filtered service. I

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Are you over 18? Type in your password and see whatever you want. -Yonah On 3/3/07, Ori Idan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The problem is not porn or not. The problem is letting other people decide what you can see and what you can't see. The government should not decide for me what I can see or n

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Peleg Wasserman wrote: > The law was passed by 25 members of parliament, most of which come from > religious factions. These people do not represent the majority of the > people. No, they represent a fraction of the ruling coalit

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

The problem is not porn or not. The problem is letting other people decide what you can see and what you can't see. The government should not decide for me what I can see or not. -- Ori Idan On 3/3/07, Yonah Russ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 3/3/07, Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/3/07, Shachar Shemesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Yonah Russ wrote: > I don't think so at all- I just think that the laws in a democracy are > usually reasonably in line with the majority of the constituents. While "Majority rules" is a very important basis of democracy, it is very far from

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Peleg Wasserman wrote: The law was passed by 25 members of parliament, most of which come from religious factions. These people do not represent the majority of the people. No, they represent a fraction of the ruling coalition, which has passed hairier laws in the past, u

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

The law was passed by 25 members of parliament, most of which come from religious factions. These people do not represent the majority of the people. Second, while I do not agree with the way they decide speed limits (and I do enforce them every day), I see why a commission of experts can decide o

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > I don't think so at all- I just think that the laws in a democracy are > usually reasonably in line with the majority of the constituents. While "Majority rules" is a very important basis of democracy, it is very far from being the only one. Two others that come to mind are "Min

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: On 3/2/07, *Peter* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: You are of course assuming that the laws are perfect and consistent, and constant. The laws are made by a few people who think that they are in a position to judge for many, and who strongly

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: On 3/2/07, Peleg Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: First of all what do you consider pornography? What does that matter? There is a building full of elected officials and appointed commisions who will decide what is considered pornography after which

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/2/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You are of course assuming that the laws are perfect and consistent, and constant. The laws are made by a few people who think that they are in a position to judge for many, and who strongly believe that they can foretell what the others will or might

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/2/07, Peleg Wasserman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: First of all what do you consider pornography? What does that matter? There is a building full of elected officials and appointed commisions who will decide what is considered pornography after which an entire system of judges will interpr

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Friday 02 March 2007, Shlomo Solomon wrote: > I don't want to get into a debate about porn. That's for each person to > decide. > > BUT, I do think that there are LINUX issues here too. What happens if the > law says you have to have a specific type of content filter and/or a > specific way of i

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > their afraid that someone could find out what they're doing, maybe they > shouldn't be doing it? Besides, I don't see any reason why the resulting > identification system has to be personally traceable. The MI will strongly disagree. They are oh so near

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

First of all what do you consider pornography? Second, why is it the job of the government to tell it's citizens what is ok for them to access, and let their children see, and what isn't? While any parent who wants to limit his children's access to the Internet can do it quite easily, as can be do

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/2/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: >> I am confused... is there any adult in this country who wants to be >> fingerprinted to be able to check his email or chat in an adult chat >> group (perhaps looking for a mate, perhaps not using very academic

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: I am confused... is there any adult in this country who wants to be fingerprinted to be able to check his email or chat in an adult chat group (perhaps looking for a mate, perhaps not using very academic language all the time - i.e. without resorting to Vic

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On 3/2/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and > easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they > treat nuclear weapons. I am confused... is there any adul

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

I don't want to get into a debate about porn. That's for each person to decide. BUT, I do think that there are LINUX issues here too. What happens if the law says you have to have a specific type of content filter and/or a specific way of identification for those who DO want porn to be availabl

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

Yonah Russ wrote: > I'm confused... Yes, and you are confused because the people behind the law are inducing their own confusion on you. > is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and easily access > pornography? First of all, yes. Personally, I see nothing wrong with a teenager knowing

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

* Yonah Russ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070302 12:54]: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and > easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they > treat nuclear weapons. I'd rather take care of it myself and let the companies offer such a ser

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, Mar 02, 2007 at 12:44:32PM +0200, Yonah Russ wrote: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and > easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they > treat nuclear weapons. Pornography is not the issue. My 8 year old son likes to go

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

El vie, 02-03-2007 a las 12:44 +0200, Yonah Russ escribió: > I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely > and easily access pornography? What about if they are?... > Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they treat nuclear > weapons. > -Yonah > > On 3/2/07, Peter <

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Yonah Russ wrote: I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they treat nuclear weapons. I am confused... is there any adult in this country who wants to be fingerprinted t

Re: the great jerusalem firewall

I'm confused... is there any parent that wants their kids to freely and easily access pornography? Halevai the UN would treat pornography like they treat nuclear weapons. -Yonah On 3/2/07, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: We (more exactly *you*) are about to join Iran, China and North Korea. A