"Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
news:49f1ed0e@news.povray.org...
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2009 02:39:32 -0600, somebody wrote:
>
> > I didn't mean to imply it was an easy problem. It's a cat and mouse
> > game, much the same as the malware problem where the malware authors
> > will always be one step ahead of anti-malware software. That doesn't
> > mean there is not a definite benefit, even if one cannot eradicate the
> > problem utterly and completely. In your case, you don't give up, do you?
>
> For years, yeah, they did.  Because of the costs of constantly swinging
> the hammer on the mole's head.  But I feel we have to make an effort, and
> my management supports this now.
>
> > Using a similar mix of blacklisting and heuristics employed by
> > anti-virus programs, players like Google who both have the technology
> > and the power can make a huge dent in the problem. The locks on our
> > doors won't stop all thieves either, but they will discourage casual
> > ones.

> When Google starts doing that, and they start censoring legitimate
> content, then that also becomes bad.
>
> The MIT Guide to Lockpicking teaches you how to open most locks very
> simply.  That is protected free speech.  The use of that material,
> though, can lead people to illegal activities.
>
> So should the guide be blocked from public access?

Is it a legal and freely distributable publication? If so, no.

Post a reply to this message