From: root <root@einstein.ssz.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 95 04:07:20 PST
To: mccoy@io.com (Jim McCoy)
Subject: Re: Pornography, What is it?
In-Reply-To: <199501100754.BAA23939@pentagon.io.com>
Message-ID: <199501101202.GAA00328@einstein.ssz.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


> [...]
> > > What you define as pornography doesn't mean shit, it's what the media and 
> > > jornalists and fundies etc.. decide is pornographic that you gotta watch 
> > > out for. [...]
> > >
> > I am well aware that what I personaly consider pornography carries little
> > weight.
> 
> One minor nit.  Pronography is not illegal, obscenity is what is regulated.
> The difference between the two the fine line upon which we tread.
>
If this is so then everything I have read or seen misses this minor point
completely. Every press release, speech, etc. that I see uses the term
pornography, not obscenity. TV preachers, news anchors, newspapers, DA's,
etc. consistently use the term pornography. The state of Oregon specificaly
legalized pornography, not osbcenity. 

I think from a legal standpoint there is little difference between the two.
 
> > As to data havens being dangerous to run...I don't know. At the recent
> > HoHoCon there was a long discussion 'bout networks hidden within networks
> > that was very intriguing. If Doug Barnes is reading this he may be
> > willing to reiterate some of the talk. I do know that at the moment my
> 
> That was my talk, and if I ever get around to it I will be putting my notes
> and design details for underground internetworking up on the web.  These
> notes include the slides from the talk and the technical notes relating to
> this issue...
>
Sorry, for the slip.