Page 6 of 6
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 5:22 pm
There are some people who work in the IT business who are working with WANs, WAN optimization, etc., as the letter proposes already, maybe it's not open source, but Blue Coat Systems does take into account the dynamic nature of the Internet. They offer the K9 Web Filter for free, and while I would otherwise say beware of freebies, because someone at BYU said most of the time web filters offered for free don't work at all, this one does, I have not hit one bad site inadvertently because of it, it is that good. A white paper on the company website shows proof of concept on that.
So it can be done, and yes, the antipornography groups should take up the baton on this one. The Church has way too many other fish to fry to be involved with it, other than teaching that pornography is harmful and wrong. And the industry has been working with antipornography groups as well. Also, many filtering software companies are adding antispyware, antiphishing protection, etc., to their list of features.
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 10:06 am
Frankly, I think the best option would be for it to be headed by an anti-pornography group (perhaps one the church belongs to) rather then headed by the church itself.
A popular way to go is for the funding corporation to run a non-profit organization which manages the open-source project. Such as Sun Microsystem's funding and managing of the OpenOffice suite. Without a large organization to fund the project however, I highly doubt an effective project will ever be able to be implemented.
If it was headed by the Church, it would likely be shunned by non-members.
I'd have to disagree here... It would only be shunned by people with qualms against the church (or people suspicious of the church). On the contrary, I think it would be an incredible missionary tool. If the seventh day adventist church or what not ran a project like this, I would give them serious respect for their priorities and efforts, and I think most good hearted people would do the same. But there will always be nay-sayers.
In my home, ALL websites will be blocked.
This is a option in all good software filtering programs, and would certainly be an option in this comprehensive solution as well. It is a good way to go in some homes, but just inst practical in many other instances. But remember this inst a comprehensive answer either...
and yes, the antipornography groups should take up the baton on this one.
James, I've been waiting for that to happen for nearly 10 years and I'll wait for another 20... I'm afraid its not going to happen. Keep living the pipe dream. I hope it comes true. No anti-pornography group has the 10-40 million needed to create the comprehensive solution that will work. Which already is considerable cheaper than what the Catholic church has spent in law-suit against sexual misconduct allegations of their clergy. The Church has also spent several million in this category, and the problem is not going to go away as long as millions of homes have pornographic "magazines" sitting behind the monitors of their home computers.
In the end whats going to happen... is God's will. And I'm patiently waiting to see what that is.