Blown To Bits

Another “How We Could Know Less”: South Africa Wants to Ban Internet Porn

Saturday, May 29th, 2010 by Harry Lewis
If find cost the immune system recognizes soy proteins as a foreign substance, buying cheap betnovate alternatives professional it may produce antibodies called immunoglobulin E (IgE). This release ventolin for order of chemicals results in the symptoms that people experience during buy price an allergic reaction. If a person suspects they have a lumigan for sale food allergy, it is important to consult an allergist, who order buy overnight delivery can perform tests to determine whether a person has an order amoxicillin allergy. According to the Food Allergen Labeling & Consumer Protection discount amoxicillin Act, food labels must declare allergens in an ingredient list clomid no prescription or in a separate statement. A dairy allergy, or milk canadian internet allergy, occurs when the immune system overreacts to the presence no rx buy of proteins in milk. These reactions do not appear as buy cheapest price quickly as IgE-mediated reactions and usually cause gastrointestinal symptoms such buy from canada as vomiting, bloating, and diarrhea. An immune reaction causes dairy allergy,.

Democracies are remarkably ready to adopt the censorship technologies of nations they claim to loathe. Our example du jour is the government of South Africa, which proposes to ban Internet pornography. All of it — not just bad stuff like child pornography.

And why not, say the social arbiters within the government? A deputy Home Minister says, “Cars are already provided with brakes and seatbelts… There is no reason why the internet should be provided without the necessary restrictive mechanisms built into it.”

There are a few problems with this idea, to say the least. First is that it won’t work. Any filter will fail to detect encrypted images — though of course you could outlaw encryption. Problem is, you probably want your banking transactions encrypted.

So any porn detector is going to have lots of false negatives.

But there are the false positives too. This is the old problem of figuring out what the government censors will consider pornographic. Perhaps South Africa has figured out how to define it, but I doubt it. Will anatomical atlases be banned? Breastfeeding guides? Sex manuals, for that matter? What about The Ecstasy of St Teresa? Somebody has to decide, and where there is legal liability for guessing wrong, a great deal of worthwhile material will be redacted. Self-censorship works rather well, actually.

Comments are closed.