From owner-freebsd-chat Sun May 3 20:10:44 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA00956 for freebsd-chat-outgoing; Sun, 3 May 1998 20:10:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from ns1.yes.no (ns1.yes.no [195.119.24.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA00883 for ; Sun, 3 May 1998 20:10:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eivind@bitbox.follo.net) Received: from bitbox.follo.net (bitbox.follo.net [194.198.43.36]) by ns1.yes.no (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id DAA10455; Mon, 4 May 1998 03:10:20 GMT Received: (from eivind@localhost) by bitbox.follo.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) id FAA02278; Mon, 4 May 1998 05:10:20 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <19980504051020.57951@follo.net> Date: Mon, 4 May 1998 05:10:20 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund To: John Kelly Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/www/ijb - Imported sources References: <19980503230438.48318@follo.net> <19980504032939.07389@follo.net> <354d2457.225839725@mail.cetlink.net> <19980504042649.61453@follo.net> <354e28ff.227031838@mail.cetlink.net> <19980504044244.39282@follo.net> <354f2cb0.227976964@mail.cetlink.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.89.1i In-Reply-To: <354f2cb0.227976964@mail.cetlink.net>; from John Kelly on Mon, May 04, 1998 at 02:57:23AM +0000 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Mon, May 04, 1998 at 02:57:23AM +0000, John Kelly wrote: > On Mon, 4 May 1998 04:42:44 +0200, Eivind Eklund > wrote: > > >I can agree that there is an issue of being allowed to control what is going > >on in your own home (which you're not, in any country that I know of). > >However, that is _not_ the same as privacy. Please come with some form of > >argument. > > It's self evident to most people that they have the right to determine > who and what enter their home. That's not privacy. Here's a definition: >From WordNet (r) 1.6 [wn]: privacy n 1: the quality of being secluded from the presence or view of others [syn: {privateness}, {seclusion}] 2: the condition of being concealed or hidden [syn: {privateness}, {secrecy}, {concealment}] I had a a suspicion that what you were really attempting to say was something like the above, which is why I re-phrased that and included it in my reply (the one you re-replied to with "It's self evident", seemingly not having grasped any of my comments :-( > >If you can't come up with something that resemble a coherent argument, I > >will still consider you to be unable to type coherently. > > Consider anything you like. > > But I will filter what information comes into my home, whether you or > your content provider friends like it or not. And you'll go to jail if you do that to commercial software. Sure. You're not allowed to filter & modify individually each byte or DLL that goes into your home. That's the way the law is WRT commercial software - it may or may not be WRT web-pages, but with the direct word-by-word interpretation the US use on their laws, it wouldn't suprise me. > This argument is a dead horse. Please don't beat it any more. Nobody has gone for the point of the argument - "Is there any good reason for us to advertise this capability?" I still don't think there is. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message