echerlin at gmail.com
Thu May 8 19:06:03 EDT 2008
On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 1:46 PM, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger
<c-d.hailfinger.devel.2006 at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 08.05.2008 22:29, Joshua N Pritikin wrote:
>> On Thu, May 08, 2008 at 04:16:48PM -0400, Tom Hoffman wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 4:24 PM, Joshua N Pritikin <jpritikin at pobox.com> wrote:
>>>> I believe we MUST error on the conservative side, especially for
>>>> American deployments.
Up to a point. It is sufficient if we clearly obey the law, and don't
seek to go beyond it.
>>> If you're sending home user modifiable wifi-capable computers with
>>> kids, you're already a long way from the conservative side of the
>>> issue in the US. Playing it safe, in this case, means pretty much
>>> dropping the entire project.
>> All the more reason to error on the conservative side. There probably
>> will be sites which reject OLPC for precisely this reason.
> This is getting completely ridiculous. You want "to error on the
> conservative side". Fine. Simply refuse all connections to the outside
> and those conservatives you are so afraid of will be happy. Maybe you
> should disable connections inside the mesh as well. One kid could load
> an inappropriate activity via USB storage and share it. That MUST be
> prevented! While we're at it, filling the USB slots and the SD slot with
> epoxy should keep you happy and those conservatives would probably
> rejoice (at least that's the impression I get from your statements.)
Actually not. Social conservatives mostly have such narrow blinkers on
that they can't see past the legal requirement to the actual issue
they think they have a problem with.
Anyway, it is no help to be rude about it. There has never been full
freedom of speech anywhere in the human world, but some countries are
noticeably better than others. The Netherlands got quite serious about
it while engaged in the 80 years' war with Spain (which shows you how
seriously they meant it) and are still somewhat ahead of most other
>> However, we must try to get away from all-or-nothing
>> thinking with regard to censorship.
> Right. Your suggestions contradict that point, though.
Reading this post, it seems to me that you made the all-or-nothing suggestions.
> An acceptable middle ground for you would probably be software which
> mangles the US constitution like this: "Congress shall make no fnord law
> abridging the freedom of fnord sXXXch, or the fnord right of the people peaceably to
> fnord XXXemble, and to fnord peXXXion the government for a fnord redress of grievances."
> (with apologies to the EPIC)
Our target countries in Asia, Africa, and elsewhere are fairly
seriously conservative, and you can't invoke the US constitution on
them. Actually, these days you can't invoke the Constitution much on
the US, either.
> Devel mailing list
> Devel at lists.laptop.org
End Poverty at a Profit by teaching children business
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."--Alan Kay
More information about the Devel