Netnanny is mostly sold for parents to put on their children's access. You're not thinking this through. Promote third-party curation, those who never want to see content they find disturbing can PURCHASE* that service rather than bugging their congressperson to demand that ISPs provide this for everyone for free by law. * No reason it couldn't be ad-supported but I hope you get my point. On August 7, 2019 at 16:34 kmedcalf@dessus.com (Keith Medcalf) wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 August, 2019 13:38, bzs@theworld.com wrote:
I propose that the RIGHT THING TO DO would be to seek out, promote (to >both customers and the public), and support various curation services like netnanny.
IANAP (I Am Not A Psychiatrist) however, persons who, when reading or hearing the words of others cannot control the images which leap, unbidden, into their minds causing them to offend themselves or otherwise instill in themselves a self-created state of distress, should, IMHO, seek professional help from a trained and certified mental health professional who may be able to help them overcome their mental disability either through psychotherapy or the administration of psychoactive drugs.
I do not think NetNanny is a certified mental health professional in any jurisdication -- at least not those within the NANOG region.
-- The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
-- -Barry Shein Software Tool & Die | bzs@TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*