(I'm taking out the attribution here, because the debate is about the
ideas, not who said them)
> > > > > What I do in private cannot reasonably be held as harassment by anyone: by
> > > >definition, they aren't involved. If anyone is offended by the contents of
> > > >my PC, the only person liable for anything is that person: they are
> > > >criminally liable for unauthorised access to my data.
> > >
> > > I don't agree with this. When there is a problem with a computer, it is my
> > > job to fix it. Which means finding out what the problem is. If, at that
> > > time, i get exposed to porn-related material this offends me. It is
> > > belittleing (right word?) to me as a woman, it is rude and is it obscene.
> > > But my access is not unauthorised.
> >
> > Or if I'm working in the same office and offensive material is on display
> > on someone else's PC, I'm not involved in any "unauthorised access" but I
> > could be the object of harassment dur to the display of such material.
>
> If it's on display (i.e. visible to others), that's another matter; I was
> meaning the contents of the user's home directory or whatever, which is
> private to that individual. Obviously, the level of privacy of each user's
> PC will vary from place to place: I tend to think in terms of individual
> offices/cubicles, where what the user does on the PC is private unless
> they have a visitor.
I don't think that the person who pays the rent on the office space,
financed the PCs and pays for the bandwidth every month would feel
the same way.
_______________________________________________
techtalk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
