[OT] Re: HB 139 Meeting Today ?
shane at hathawaymix.org
Wed Feb 6 14:50:01 MST 2008
Andrew Jorgensen wrote:
> On Feb 6, 2008 2:18 PM, Shane Hathaway <shane at hathawaymix.org> wrote:
>> I just had a thought... if a bill like this says filtering is required,
>> how accurate must the filter be? Let's say I set up a web proxy that
>> blocks URLs based on some hand crafted regular expressions. The
>> accuracy might be low, yet my proxy technically qualifies as a censoring
>> filter. Does it qualify for the requirements of the bill? Let's say I
>> put some real effort into making a good filter on my own; at what point
>> is the accuracy good enough that I am no longer liable when the filter
>> lets bad stuff through?
>> We must not have a law that mandates filtering for the public unless we
>> have a way to measure filter accuracy. Is anyone attempting to find a
>> way to measure it? If we pass a bill before there is some reliable way
>> to decide whether a filter is compliant, we'll just end up with a lot of
>> wasteful litigation.
> This bill does no such thing.
Didn't you read the Ars Technica page? Rep. Daw said he intends to pull
the age requirement and replace it with filtering. Thus filtering is
now the core issue.
More information about the PLUG