Re: Porn Lists (Maybe Off Topic)

On Jul 24, 1:16am, Alex Rousskov (possibly) wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Jul 1999, Allen Smith wrote:
>
> > P.S. Given that nlanr is using government funds, a lawsuit to stop
> > incorporating any block-useful features into squid would be quite
> > possible...
>
> For better or worse, Squid (as any Web proxy) is a "block-useful feature"
> by itself, don't you think?

Not if you don't include any easy way to block sites (just to block
hierarchial requests (useful for privacy - that's why I was looking at
the regexp code), block doing caching, etcetera is useful)... sure,
somebody could put it back in with a patch, but they'd have to keep up
the patch. That NLANR caches peer with (and thus assist) caches in
countries that do blocking is another problem. So far as I can tell,
given the telecommunication rates in other areas, we're helping those
caches more than vice-versa - US goals for caching emphasize speed, for
others it's reducing cost by reducing bandwidth.

I'm now considering approaching Peacefire (http://www.peacefire.org)
and see if they'd like to approach the ACLU on this subject.

        -Allen

-- 
Allen Smith				easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu