Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Tokyo Joe's Cafe / Societe Anonyme/No Pennies -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (77829)	6/3/1999 10:14:00 PM
From: C B P	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 119973

,,,,about Internet Demographics -for those upbeat megalomaniac modelling geniouses,,, how would nationwide proxys affect the time spent on the Internet distribution???? <>A few weeks ago I wrote about the .SEX solution. The .SEX solution, for >those that did not read it, would give porn sites their own extension, >like a .COM, except in this case it would be .SEX. The idea was to place >the sites in one spot so that parents can more easily block the sites >then the current method, which is hope that you child doesn't find a >porn site when looking for information on the book "Little Women". >Australia, however, has their own "solution". Recently, the Australian >Senate voted to ban porn sites from all servers located in Australia. >The idea is to protect kids from seeing the porn by removing it altogether. >They are not the first nation to do this. China and Iran, among others, >have done this as well. >This law does not stop there. The Australian Broadcasting Authority has >been given the authority to block access to overseas sites that show >questionable material. >Is the next step a nation-wide proxy? Before you think I am being silly >or taking things to their extreme, consider that China already has one >in place. This is a possibility. >Another question is, where does this stop? Australia is merely the >latest to pass such a law. The United States is always looking at ways >to stop porn and, lately, gambling, on the Web. >All of these laws are meaningless unless a national proxy is put in >place. The United States, after all, can not shut down a porn site in >Germany just because someone in the United States is viewing it. The >same applies in Australia. Each nation will have to set up a proxy. >It is the next logical step. >This will take the World Wide right out of the Web if this should >happen. Who knows what standards will apply under each new law in each >nation? What will happen to the true global community that has been >created on the World Wide Web? >Rather then trying to come up with a real solution, it seems that >various governments around the world are trying to take the easy way >out, censorship.<>