From: JMKELSEY@delphi.com
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 09:18:53 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content'
Message-ID: <01I0IMFVB94Y99DH92@delphi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

[ To: cypherpunks ## Time: 01/27/96 02:19 am ##
  Subject: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content.' ]

>Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 18:04:21 -0800
>From: tcmay@got.net (Timothy C. May)
>Subject: Re: "This post is G-Rated"

>I see self-ratings of Usenet and mailing list posts as possible,
>just nearly worthless. And the reall contoversial stuff, this kind
>of goddamned fucking shit, will not get screened out. After all, I
>voluntarily rated this thread "G," and look what got through! (And
>it's only the tit of the iceberg, so to speak.)

The best solution has always seemed to me to be one of these three:

a.   Tags appended to notes/posts, from various reviewers, digitally
signed and otherwise coded to allow intelligent filtering, or

b.   Electronic distributions of reviewers' evaluations tagged to
notes in some simple way.  (I.e. give each note or post a unique ID
which appears in the message.)  Then, a smart newsreader/mail
program sorts the notes accordingly, or

c.   The reviewer reads the group/list, and rates posts according to
some useful criteria.  He then resends it out to his users, filtered
as desired.  (CP-LITE seems like a very early version of this.)

Any of these can be pretty easily ported to that magical set-top box
we hear so much about (no doubt running Windows '05).  In many ways,
(a) and (b) are easier.

>A meaningful "parental filter" cannot be done on-the-fly with
>self-ratings. Some minor steps can be taken, but not all worth the
>expense and hassle of a mandatory system.

Actually, I think in practice this will mean that programs get a
given rating, which is renewed every so often.  You don't rate
Melrose Place episode #89, you rate the entire series.

This whole idea offers two wonderful opportunities to control
content on TV.

First, get the TVs shipped with the V-chip filter turned on.  Most
people don't bother setting their VCR timers, and they also won't
bother setting this unless it denies them access to lots of shows
they like.  And, if turning the filter on and off is hard enough to
actually keep the average 12-year-old out, then it will be hard
enough that many families with kids will simply never change its
setting. They may even forget or lose the PIN that allows them to do
so. This means that you have a sizeable audience who depend on this
rating system, the only one readily available.

Second, apply pressure to television networks in whatever ways
necessary, by threatening a re-evaluation of their top-rated shows.
After all, ER really is a little gory for kids to be watching.  Oh,
you've decided to spend less time on covering the losses in the
great Bosnian Peace Initiative?  Well, I suppose a little real-life
drama won't hurt anyone.  If the V-chip is used widely at all, this
represents a really useful threat.  What happens to the network
executive who gets ER to lose half its audience, even just for a few
weeks while a review board takes up the network's appeal?

>--Tim
>Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
>tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero

Note:  Please respond via e-mail as well as or instead of posting,
as I get CP-LITE instead of the whole list.

   --John Kelsey, jmkelsey@delphi.com / kelsey@counterpane.com
 PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMQrIiUHx57Ag8goBAQGhIAQA2F3guHlTnebja5fcGwEwOKx3CwdhAs90
zn6Di+nztSoGt6JF2kIC60zsfVHgQ//RJcMtuiFzBsQoTn/E56JM2mZ4vJpsfipO
lVbKlZ1HylDyGLcF/pBllBVfvmXLjpvu0OXkFt3yqEohjaNlF7l49bOz28ngLv/A
CATYZGlDP64=
=6BO+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----