Re: Bug#283578: ITP: hot-babe -- erotic graphical system activity monitor
> "Oh no, there's the possibility that somebody else might look at some
> low quality porn" versus "Other people are actively forcing their
> beliefs onto us". Isn't it obvious?
> That's what "censorship" means in every context, under any practical
> definition. It's impossible to deny access altogether to anything.
Hmm? I didn't think people were trying to restrict access -- at least I
presume nobody is under the delusion that keeping hot-babe out of debian
would make it any more difficult to access such material. There are
other reasons for choosing not to ship a package with a distribution.
> > > It has been proven endless times that once you start doing this, you
> > > can't stop. For any package, there is going to be some minority group
> > > that is offended by it.
> > Sounds to me like your problem is not so much with the objection, but with
> > its expected implementation.
> There's only one way this ever goes. Any student of history should be
> familiar with how this plays out.
shrug. At least in .au we have some legislation to protect minority
groups but we're not living in a totalitarian PC clampdown.