Re: New Internet Draft on protecting children AND free speech

Excerpts from mail: 6-Jun-95 Re: New Internet Draft on p.. Duncan
White@surrey.ac.u (5046)

> So I suggest that the work should be
> done at the existing server end, within the framework of HTML rather than as
> separate GETs or new http commands.

Bear in mind a couple of prices paid for doing it in those ways:  

Doing it at the HTML level is wasteful of bandwidth *and* is
Web-specific and doesn't permit kid-protecting firewalls.

Doing it at the HTTP level isn't as bad regarding bandwidth, but it is
still Web-specific and still doesn't facilitate kid-protecting
firewalls, unless they're much more stateful than firewalls generally
are.

The KidCode proposal has the best possible implications for net
bandwidth, works for ftp & news, and is specifically designed to permit
the construction of kid-friendly subnets protected by kidcode-smart
firewalls.

> Of course, the biggest issue here is the whole subjective/objective indexing
> problem, where one culture's "suitable for all" may offend a particular
> cultural or religious belief elsewhere.  I would strongly discourage any
> "moral majority" approach to ratings where a single faction within the US
> tries to impose its moral code on the rest of the world.

Exactly.  This is why we need multiple rating/certification authorities.

> Instead, I would argue that we must restrict ourselves to factual indexing,
> using an agreed set of cataloguing keywords in a consistent way.  As some
> sensible people once said "implement mechanism, not policy" :-)

This sounds nice, but the facts just aren't remotely codifiable here. 
In some Islamic countries, a picture that shows a woman's calf might be
considered nudity.  In New York, pictures of a topless dancer might be
rated PG.  What key words could possibly suffice to describe things in
such a way as to meet all those different sets of standards and
worldviews?  I think the only hope is rating/certification authorities,
which will lead to Baptist-approved web browsers, sites approved by a
particular Ayatollah, and so on.

In any event, I think the need for a short term solution here is really
urgent.  If some kind of kid protection for the web doesn't come soon,
the drumbeats for censorship will only get louder.  I think the
general-purpose indexing idea is great, but it's also a can of worms
that won't be dealt with in the short term.

> Now, how would this link up with Acrobat and PDF which presumably don't have
> HTML headers :-)

With this question, you get close to the core of the KidCode proposal. 
There's only one thing that remotely resembles a universal handle on
data on the Internet -- the URL.  That's why we made it the focus of the
KidCode proposal.  -- Nathaniel
--------
Nathaniel S. Borenstein <nsb@fv.com>    |           When privacy is outlawed,
Chief Scientist, First Virtual Holdings |     only outlaws will have privacy!
FAQ & PGP key: nsb+faq@nsb.fv.com       | SUPPORT THE ZIMMERMAN DEFENSE FUND!

---VIRTUAL YELLOW RIBBON-->> zldf@clark.net (http://www.netresponse.com/zldf)

Received on Wednesday, 7 June 1995 18:46:12 UTC