Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: rbowman <bowman@montana.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft: one step forward, one step back
Date: 28 Jun 2024 03:56:32 GMT
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <le6qjgF1je8U2@mid.individual.net>
References: <667c1c47$0$1895492$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
	<_aWeO.147258$Cqra.36389@fx10.iad>
	<667c4639$0$2385550$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
	<fUXeO.12735$im%.1829@fx04.iad>
	<667c4f82$0$2385548$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
	<pUZeO.51167$J8n7.309@fx12.iad>
	<667db825$0$2363147$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
	<7hmr7j1c76dmotl3vejnp9e7s6c6c3ngge@4ax.com>
	<jOmfO.96068$G9_a.88909@fx13.iad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net Kb7DU15HHj0nLFZnbBP4LAmk5TnUFucUjp2RJDA3uYQk/ZIq24
Cancel-Lock: sha1:o3VXNBSCKaGVUdgXBHDBCHEsWBI= sha256:dclRWcW0E3UbK0O/wFPTTZlsDFQ9lkPL7NVn+93gOUw=
User-Agent: Pan/0.149 (Bellevue; 4c157ba)
Bytes: 2257

On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 19:43:11 -0400, RabidPedagog wrote:

> He did, but there is context there. He's not saying that child
> pronography should be produced, but he is against censoring whatever has
> already been produced. It's a very difficult position to take because he
> believes censorship in general is bad, even when the content is
> objectively terrible, simply because the terribleness of content is
> always subjective. In other words, a lawmaker will today decide that the
> sight of a naked 12-year-old is abhorrent, but he can tomorrow decide
> that the sight of a female in general is too.

It is a tough call. My wife was a librarian. iirc the state of 
Massachusetts, home of the Puritans, passed a law declaring the female 
nipple obscene. Quick, lock up the art books!

Then there was that Blind Faith album cover with the topless 11 year old. 
Is possession of the album child pornography? Wikipedia provides a photo 
of the cover; are they liable? 

I have made no secret of my dislike for Stallamn but he is being 
consistent. Well, not really consistent; afaik he is not calling for child 
pornography to be GPL v3.