I have to confess, I honestly believe that the idea behind CyberPatrol and similar systems is fundamentally sound, however inconvenient they may sometimes be.
The situation on the internet is not, as a few people have posted here, analogous to a bookstore or a library. Libraries and bookstores are organized in such a way that people (such as myself) who want to avoid material that they consider offensive can easily and effectively do so. I do not support censoring offensive material from said institutions-- to do so would be a major infraction of freedom of speech.
On the internet, however, there exists no similarly effective mechanism for avoiding offensive material. Rather often as I am searching through the internet, I come across material that I consider highly offensive. Now, my point here is not that offensive material should be censored from the internet. Again, that would be an infraction of freedom of speech.
However, in the absence of an effective mechanism for sorting through the information on the internet, relying on services such as CyberPatrol, however flawed their implementation might be, is entirely justified.
I also acknowledge CyberPatrol's right to block out entire domains, if necessary. It is certainly inconvenient when other files become inaccessible, but it is an important distinction to realize that freedom of speech is in no way the same as the freedom to be heard. If people decide for themselves that it is important to them to avoid offensive material at all costs, then losing access to an entire domain with a few questionable sites is a reasonable expense to pay.
Certainly it would be better if CyberPatrol were equipped to use a finer-toothed comb in sweeping the internet for offensive material. If I were to subscribe to such a service, I would certainly be willing to pay more for one that blocked as few innocent sites as possible. Unfortunately, for obvious reasons this is far from a simple task.
So basically what I'm saying is this: Services such as CyberPatrol are not at all wrong in blocking their subscribers' access to entire domains, if necessary.
Slashdot Mirror
I have to confess, I honestly believe that the idea behind CyberPatrol and similar systems is fundamentally sound, however inconvenient they may sometimes be.
The situation on the internet is not, as a few people have posted here, analogous to a bookstore or a library. Libraries and bookstores are organized in such a way that people (such as myself) who want to avoid material that they consider offensive can easily and effectively do so. I do not support censoring offensive material from said institutions-- to do so would be a major infraction of freedom of speech.
On the internet, however, there exists no similarly effective mechanism for avoiding offensive material. Rather often as I am searching through the internet, I come across material that I consider highly offensive. Now, my point here is not that offensive material should be censored from the internet. Again, that would be an infraction of freedom of speech.
However, in the absence of an effective mechanism for sorting through the information on the internet, relying on services such as CyberPatrol, however flawed their implementation might be, is entirely justified.
I also acknowledge CyberPatrol's right to block out entire domains, if necessary. It is certainly inconvenient when other files become inaccessible, but it is an important distinction to realize that freedom of speech is in no way the same as the freedom to be heard. If people decide for themselves that it is important to them to avoid offensive material at all costs, then losing access to an entire domain with a few questionable sites is a reasonable expense to pay.
Certainly it would be better if CyberPatrol were equipped to use a finer-toothed comb in sweeping the internet for offensive material. If I were to subscribe to such a service, I would certainly be willing to pay more for one that blocked as few innocent sites as possible. Unfortunately, for obvious reasons this is far from a simple task.
So basically what I'm saying is this: Services such as CyberPatrol are not at all wrong in blocking their subscribers' access to entire domains, if necessary.
-- Mark Lewis lewis@byu.edu