re: #273 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

I am advising caution against going down a road where a company that is not accountable to the people can control what sorts of information the people have access to. Maybe we’ve already started down that road, maybe we’re at a point where we can decide to go another way.

It’s a worthy and noble goal, to protect people from harm. But that’s how the Patriot Act came about, isn’t it? Undoubtedly, such controls would curb some amount of the child abuse trade. I don’t think anyone has anything better than a guess as to how much. That evil existed long before the internet, and it will exist even after such controls are implemented. Is that a good enough reason to outright say “No, let’s no do this”? Perhaps not. I’m saying that it’s worth more consideration than an automatic thumbs-up simply based on the intended effects.

The first post in this thread could have been stated better, and I’ve attempted to do so. When that poster said “No matter how disgusting”, I assume that to mean that they also find the abuse of children abhorrent, and something that should be stopped — but perhaps not at the expense of giving companies the power to restrict our access to information on a whim. Again, poorly worded, but the sentiment was there.

That poster was then accused of “supporting” CP. That’s the sort of thing I’m talking about. “With us or against us” mentality, “Either you support these restrictions, or you support the abuse of children”. I get it, people want to protect children, and they SHOULD want to protect children.

But is the price worth it? Maybe that’s worth a bit more examination.