So far, all I've seen here is comments and restatements but no proof to back up these statements, so I made one. Although it is geared toward the illegality of censorware in schools, it also applies to public libraries as well (esp. the last paragraph).
During some recent research, I came across an intriguing idea: Schools cannot use censorware on their Internet connections. After further research, I have found this to be supported by current United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions. The following, using said decisions, will show that censorware on Internet connections used in public schools is illegal.
First, according the 1997 USSC decision, Reno v. ACLU, the Internet is covered in full by the First Ammendment. However, many people believe that the 1988 USSC decision, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, gives the schools the right to censor the Intenet as the see fit because that decision stated that schools can censor publications with the schools name on it. This is completely untrue. Here's why:
The Internet contains many sites which promote one religion over another. If schools associate themselves with the Internet, they inherently associate themselves with all of the Internet's content and, therefore, the affore-mentioned religious sites. This is illegal due to the 1971 USSC decision, Lemon v. Kurtzman, which requires that all government and, therefore, school, actions not end up promoting one religion over another. By associating one's self with a religious site, you are inherently promoting that religion. Therefore, the government and all of it's entities must disassociate themselves from the Internet. Also, because the schools will be supplying information from many independant sources, and because said sources retian the right to disallow the schools association, the schools are required to disassociate themselves from the Internet. Without association with a given medium, schools loose the Hazelwood right to censor it.
The ability to censor, therefore, falls to the 1969 USSC decision, Tinker v. Des Moines, which grants the ability only in cases of obscenity or where material and substantial detriment to the learning process would result. Blocking even one page that is not obscene and does not materially and substantially interfere with the learning process is, therefore, illegal. Censorware blocks many pages which do not fall into the category of legally censorable.
Furthermore, being considered printed material by Reno v. ALCU, the internet collectively counts as one gigantic library. By having connections to the internet, you inherently have the entire internet's book collection (that is, every page as one book) in your library (every computer, in this case). The 1943 USSC decision, West Virginia State Board Of Education v. Barnette, says that once admitted into a library run by the state or entities thereof it cannot be removed. Since the internet constitutes a library of books, no one book may be removed, with sole exception of pornography and other materials which are detrimental to the school environment. Censorware will always block some material which does not fall into the latter category. This is a trait which cannot be removed with any ease nor reasonable amount of time and, since even one instance of illegal censoring is illegal, censorware cannot legally be used by any entity of the state including schools.
The last time I checked, the Hazelwood decision from the Supreme Court, in reaffirming the Tinker decision, practically outlawed school censorware. In order for a school to censor, according to the decision, it must either be obscene (porn, fuck, nigger, etc.) or not pertaining to the curriculum. I can think of no sites not containing porn that could then be censored as they could somehow be used by the cirriculum.
Case in point: Recently while doing a research paper on the leadership qualities of Anton Szandor LaVey (creator of the Church Of Satan) and many sites were blocked by the schools censorware. Furthermore, I was required to use the school's connection. The blocked sites did contain relevent information and the leader was OKd by the teacher. As far as I can tell, the material could not legally be blocked, and I am now in the process of taking action toward the removing of the censorware.
Yo fool, SBL does not work with Linux. CL did not release the necessary info for driver writing. I suggest the original SB16, AWE[32/64] or a PCI[64/128/512]. They are great and work just as well.
According to the Linux IP Masquerade mini HOWTO, for battle.net you must forward UDP port 6112 and TCP ports 116 and 118. For StarCraft and newer versions of Diablo you must also forward TCP port 6112.
To do this forwarding use IPPORTFW. For more info check out the IP Masquerade mini and standard howtos.
You're right, current technology is beyond the percieved norm of society but I see this as an ancient taboo which we are beginning to get over. Most of these average peaple just think they can't use it because it's technical but most consumer computers are ready to go and somewhat easy to use, once things are explained properly. The problem really is people thinking they're dumb and others preying on this with Dummys books that don't help. These true newbies shound get an original 1984 Mac, learn on it and graduate to a modern PC. Those older computers are easier. Or better yet, get someone to explain everything to them properly and they will be just fine.
Twenty-four hours is a long time. One hour might be better with out swamping them and would help to better achive our point. Recieving one hundred sixity-eight protests representing thirty thousand people in a week is a lot better than thirty thousand protests but still gets a big point across.
Another interesting Slashdot feature concerning this would be to have an option in your preferences to automatically protest everyone in a database of misusers managed by Slashdot itself. Of course all submitions would have to be verified but how hard can that be?
The term geek is still taken to be a demeaning term for intelligent outcast (nerd has worse connotations but that doesn't matter) . This is bad. I, although a general social outcast, do not get beaten up or anything jocks are seen to do geeks (these are the first images people think of). I am accepted. Why should I demean myself by referring to my self as a geek when I am really a hacker(more of a script kiddie but that term just plain sounds dumb.)
Ah yes, lawyers do cost money but if you can get the ACLU on your side they're a lot cheaper. So make sure the laws violate some form of free expression and fight away!!!
I think it would be kind of neat to live on a large rotating civilization traveling at 1.3 million mph. I only wonder if we could advance technology during the trip.
Slashdot Mirror
So far, all I've seen here is comments and restatements but no proof to back up these statements, so I made one. Although it is geared toward the illegality of censorware in schools, it also applies to public libraries as well (esp. the last paragraph).
During some recent research, I came across an intriguing idea: Schools cannot use censorware on their Internet connections. After further research, I have found this to be supported by current United States Supreme Court (USSC) decisions. The following, using said decisions, will show that censorware on Internet connections used in public schools is illegal.
First, according the 1997 USSC decision, Reno v. ACLU, the Internet is covered in full by the First Ammendment. However, many people believe that the 1988 USSC decision, Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, gives the schools the right to censor the Intenet as the see fit because that decision stated that schools can censor publications with the schools name on it. This is completely untrue. Here's why:
The Internet contains many sites which promote one religion over another. If schools associate themselves with the Internet, they inherently associate themselves with all of the Internet's content and, therefore, the affore-mentioned religious sites. This is illegal due to the 1971 USSC decision, Lemon v. Kurtzman, which requires that all government and, therefore, school, actions not end up promoting one religion over another. By associating one's self with a religious site, you are inherently promoting that religion. Therefore, the government and all of it's entities must disassociate themselves from the Internet. Also, because the schools will be supplying information from many independant sources, and because said sources retian the right to disallow the schools association, the schools are required to disassociate themselves from the Internet. Without association with a given medium, schools loose the Hazelwood right to censor it.
The ability to censor, therefore, falls to the 1969 USSC decision, Tinker v. Des Moines, which grants the ability only in cases of obscenity or where material and substantial detriment to the learning process would result. Blocking even one page that is not obscene and does not materially and substantially interfere with the learning process is, therefore, illegal. Censorware blocks many pages which do not fall into the category of legally censorable.
Furthermore, being considered printed material by Reno v. ALCU, the internet collectively counts as one gigantic library. By having connections to the internet, you inherently have the entire internet's book collection (that is, every page as one book) in your library (every computer, in this case). The 1943 USSC decision, West Virginia State Board Of Education v. Barnette, says that once admitted into a library run by the state or entities thereof it cannot be removed. Since the internet constitutes a library of books, no one book may be removed, with sole exception of pornography and other materials which are detrimental to the school environment. Censorware will always block some material which does not fall into the latter category. This is a trait which cannot be removed with any ease nor reasonable amount of time and, since even one instance of illegal censoring is illegal, censorware cannot legally be used by any entity of the state including schools.
BTW, IANAL.
The last time I checked, the Hazelwood decision from the Supreme Court, in reaffirming the Tinker decision, practically outlawed school censorware. In order for a school to censor, according to the decision, it must either be obscene (porn, fuck, nigger, etc.) or not pertaining to the curriculum. I can think of no sites not containing porn that could then be censored as they could somehow be used by the cirriculum.
Case in point: Recently while doing a research paper on the leadership qualities of Anton Szandor LaVey (creator of the Church Of Satan) and many sites were blocked by the schools censorware. Furthermore, I was required to use the school's connection. The blocked sites did contain relevent information and the leader was OKd by the teacher. As far as I can tell, the material could not legally be blocked, and I am now in the process of taking action toward the removing of the censorware.
Yo fool, SBL does not work with Linux. CL did not release the necessary info for driver writing. I suggest the original SB16, AWE[32/64] or a PCI[64/128/512]. They are great and work just as well.
According to the Linux IP Masquerade mini HOWTO, for battle.net you must forward UDP port 6112 and TCP ports 116 and 118. For StarCraft and newer versions of Diablo you must also forward TCP port 6112.
To do this forwarding use IPPORTFW. For more info check out the IP Masquerade mini and standard howtos.
You're right, current technology is beyond the percieved norm of society but I see this as an ancient taboo which we are beginning to get over. Most of these average peaple just think they can't use it because it's technical but most consumer computers are ready to go and somewhat easy to use, once things are explained properly. The problem really is people thinking they're dumb and others preying on this with Dummys books that don't help. These true newbies shound get an original 1984 Mac, learn on it and graduate to a modern PC. Those older computers are easier. Or better yet, get someone to explain everything to them properly and they will be just fine.
Twenty-four hours is a long time. One hour might be better with out swamping them and would help to better achive our point. Recieving one hundred sixity-eight protests representing thirty thousand people in a week is a lot better than thirty thousand protests but still gets a big point across.
Another interesting Slashdot feature concerning this would be to have an option in your preferences to automatically protest everyone in a database of misusers managed by Slashdot itself. Of course all submitions would have to be verified but how hard can that be?
The term geek is still taken to be a demeaning term for intelligent outcast (nerd has worse connotations but that doesn't matter) . This is bad. I, although a general social outcast, do not get beaten up or anything jocks are seen to do geeks (these are the first images people think of). I am accepted. Why should I demean myself by referring to my self as a geek when I am really a hacker(more of a script kiddie but that term just plain sounds dumb.)
Ah yes, lawyers do cost money but if you can get the ACLU on your side they're a lot cheaper. So make sure the laws violate some form of free expression and fight away!!!
I think it would be kind of neat to live on a large rotating civilization traveling at 1.3 million mph. I only wonder if we could advance technology during the trip.