[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 05/05/12 20:04, Mark Evans wrote: > On 05/05/12 14:34, Brad Rogers wrote: > > On Sat, 05 May 2012 13:51:26 +0100 Mark Evans > > <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Hello Mark, > > >> Even if you were to stick with just "porn" can you actually have > >> an objective definition. > > > Indeed: > > > Penistone was thinking of changing its name to Pennistone to avoid > > problems with censorship, allegedly. > > This is actually known as "Scunthorpe problem". > > > > My wife's employer had a system in place whereby any profanity was > > blocked. What's wrong with that? She works in the legal > > profession, and if a witness said "~&*@!", that's what had to be > > written. > > IIRC there was a lawyer with the surname "Babcock" who was barred from > signing up to some automated service. But was allowed to use the name > "Babpenis"! > > Finally, there's the architects' firm that couldn't send out > > emails with the word erection in it. > > I'm sure there was a website of "Smut where only a computer would > look" or some such. A sultable alternative would be "How to fail > Natural Language Processing/Understanding". Arguably even worst than > machine translation systems which come up with the likes of "The vodka > is good, but the meat is rotten." or machinary operated by "wet sheep". > > There being very few words used in porn which do not have completly > unrelated meanings. Not just words there are even whole sentences > which without context you cannot tell if the subject is cooking > poultry or sexual massage. > I suppose the word Naked springs to mind in terms of safety, such as Do not use naked flames near flammable liquids, if that was blocked it would be interesting from a safety point of view > On the other hand you've had TV programmes containing profanity > brodcast in children's slots because the words in question wern't > offensive in the USA, Australia, etc. > Good examples there Mark, Within this debate no one has actually mentioned this sort of thing, may be worth writing to the local MP about it, as I am sure that while these blocks are well intentioned, there is going to be pit falls. On the subject of internet filtering i wonder if the sites for the sex pistols or bare naked ladies will be blocked by this new filtering opt in, hmm to view the websites for these groups I need to opt in to view porn. or will there be a way to un filter these sites. Of course if these sites do get blocked and this implies the groups web sites are porn related that could set up a interesting legal battle for slander and or libel. Paul -- http://www.zleap.net http://www.ubuntu.com skype : psutton111 http://www.linkedin.com/pub/paul-sutton/36/595/911 -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq