Here they come...

In today's New York Times: "Anarchy, a Threat on the Electronic
Frontier," by Peter H. Lewis.  It's kind of a scare piece on how
flame wars, abuse, and out-of-control sociopaths are destroying the
self-regulating Eden of the net.  The piece itself is more or less
"neutral," in classic NYT style, but it can also be seen as the first
rumblings of a call for some kind of "responsible regulation" of the
net.

The pedophiles we all run into by the thousands every day are
mentioned in the piece, as are the "pornographic pictures [...] traded
in great volume."  Also, "virtually every network, large and small,
has crackpots and sociopaths who seek to bully others with obscenities
and threats."  Other quotes:

"In recent months, it has become difficult for even network libertarians
to argue that the network community can resolve its problems through
peer pressure alone."

and

"[...] 'What people will probably do is invent "site kill files,"' wrote
David Hayes, a Usenet regular who works for the National Aeronautics
and Space Admistration's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif.
[...] 'My fear is that this will be a cyber-revisiting of the blacklisting
that was prevalent in the 50's,' Mr. Hayes wrote.  'Eventually, I predict
that such site kill files will be used to censor politically unpopular
views (like mine, for example).'"

Think about that next time you put someone in your killfile.

   --Dave.

David Mandl says:
> In today's New York Times: "Anarchy, a Threat on the Electronic
> Frontier," by Peter H. Lewis.  It's kind of a scare piece on how
> flame wars, abuse, and out-of-control sociopaths are destroying the
> self-regulating Eden of the net.  The piece itself is more or less
> "neutral," in classic NYT style, but it can also be seen as the first
> rumblings of a call for some kind of "responsible regulation" of the
> net.

The Times has two beat reporters for cyberspace. They are Peter Lewis
and John Markoff.

Markoff's pieces in the times show remarkable understanding of the
issues, but Lewis's make it seem like he's never even logged in. I
suspect he has, but he shows no signs of actually "living" in our
world. I really find it horrifying that in three articles on the
subject he has yet to explain the fundamental problem with the jerks
at Canter&Segal, and even whitewashed their disbarrment in Florida in
today's piece.

There is a difference between "neutral" reporting and uninformed
reporting.  Peter Lewis hasn't really shown much of a comprehension of
what the fundamental issues he is supposed to be reporting are.

I encourage people to feed Markoff their interesting scoops and tips,
and for people being interviewed by Lewis to ask why Markoff isn't
covering a piece. I haven't anything against Mr. Lewis personally, but
he seems more interested in finding juicy stories than in producing
good stories. Maybe he'll change as he learns more about the beat he's
covering.

Perry

Does anyone have Lewis' and Markoff's email address(es)?

...dtw

/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
|           I'll do whatever my Rice Krispies tell me to do...           |
|                                                                        |
|    *******     Notice of impending email address change:   *******     |
|             New interim address: dwitkow@eis.calstate.edu              |
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\

The Times has two beat reporters for cyberspace. They are Peter Lewis
   and John Markoff.

Not quite.  I met Peter Lewis at CFP-94.  He has the official
cyberspace beat, which was just created this year.  Markoff reports on
the same issues, but is not assigned to that beat.

   Markoff's pieces in the times show remarkable understanding of the
   issues, but Lewis's make it seem like he's never even logged in.

   I encourage people to feed Markoff their interesting scoops and tips,
   and for people being interviewed by Lewis to ask why Markoff isn't
   covering a piece. 

I would suggest it would be more profitable to educate Mr. Lewis
rather than to hold another's reputation over his head.

Eric

Eric Hughes says:
> I would suggest it would be more profitable to educate Mr. Lewis
> rather than to hold another's reputation over his head.

Probably a better idea than the one I listed.

Perry

<In mail David Mandl said:>
> 
> flame wars, abuse, and out-of-control sociopaths are destroying the
> self-regulating Eden of the net.  

  Unfortunately I agree with this statement for the most part.

> rumblings of a call for some kind of "responsible regulation" of the
> net.

  This one I do not agree with though.  Who can regulate it, what are
  the penalties for violation, how can you prove I typed this, etc.

> The pedophiles we all run into by the thousands every day are
> mentioned in the piece, as are the "pornographic pictures [...] traded
> in great volume."  Also, "virtually every network, large and small,

  Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture
  groups make this point hard to defend against.

> [...] 'My fear is that this will be a cyber-revisiting of the blacklisting
> that was prevalent in the 50's,' Mr. Hayes wrote.  'Eventually, I predict
> that such site kill files will be used to censor politically unpopular
> views (like mine, for example).'"
> 
> Think about that next time you put someone in your killfile.

  There is a difference between a site kill file that blocks everyone
  who works at AT&T from conversing with people that work at MCI, and
  my personal kill file that says I don't want to hear from Jim Nalbandian
  or Detweiler.  

  With personal kill files they have the right to speak and I have the
  right not to listen. ;)

  Jim
-- 
 Tantalus Inc.          Jim Sewell      Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ
 P.O. Box 2310          Programmer           Internet: jims@mpgn.com
 Key West, FL 33045     C-Unix-PC          Compu$erve: 71061,1027
 (305)293-8100                            PGP via email on request. 
 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3  C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73

"Jim Sewell" says:
>   Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture
>   groups make this point hard to defend against.

Alt.sex.bestiality is full of jokes about bestiality, not real
suggestions about it. There are no newsgroups devoted to pedophillia,
nor are pedophiles a visible presense in the erotic pictures newsgroups.

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@snark.imsi.com>

   "Jim Sewell" says:
   >   Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture
   >   groups make this point hard to defend against.

   Alt.sex.bestiality is full of jokes about bestiality, not real
   suggestions about it. There are no newsgroups devoted to pedophillia,
   nor are pedophiles a visible presense in the erotic pictures newsgroups.

I used to systematically read the pictures groups, including
alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children, and never once was an actual
picture of a child posted. In fact, there was only one picture in
a.b.p.e.c during the first several months of its existence, of an adult.

The discussion in a.b.p.e.c was almost entirely about how horrible any
group with that name must be, a self-fulfilling prophecy if I ever saw
one... :-)

-- 
dat@ebt.com (David Taffs)

<In mail David Taffs said:>
>    From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@snark.imsi.com>
>    "Jim Sewell" says:
>    >   Unfortunately, newsgroups like alt.sex.bestiality and erotica picture
>    >   groups make this point hard to defend against.
>    Alt.sex.bestiality is full of jokes about bestiality, not real
>    suggestions about it. There are no newsgroups devoted to pedophillia,
>    nor are pedophiles a visible presense in the erotic pictures newsgroups.
>
> I used to systematically read the pictures groups, including
> alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.children, and never once was an actual
> picture of a child posted. In fact, there was only one picture in

   Can't you hear "them" saying, "Well, those heathen pagan computer
   worshiping nerds are looking at pictures of women defiling themselves
   with carnal relations with animals.  Can't you just imagine what they
   do in private with their little computer thingeys."

   It, in a typical person's mind, is a trivial line between child porn
   and animal porn.  To be identified as part of a group of people that
   routinely pass pictures of women having sex with animals makes us 
   so much more easily identified as part of a group of people that 
   secretly pass kiddie porn... why else would we be so involved in
   encryption... just look what we send back and forth in public!

   Guilt by association is unfair, but very prevalent especially with
   the news media's influence.

   Jim

-- 
 Tantalus Inc.          Jim Sewell      Amateur Radio: KD4CKQ
 P.O. Box 2310          Programmer           Internet: jims@mpgn.com
 Key West, FL 33045     C-Unix-PC          Compu$erve: 71061,1027
 (305)293-8100                            PGP via email on request. 
 1K-bit Fingerprint: 8E 14 68 90 37 87 EF B3  C4 CF CD 9A 3E F9 4A 73