Dan says that "blocking our children's access to certain portions of the internet falls within our responsibilities as parents," something we find no fault with, but he is apparently willing to let the government saddle your ISP with the extra burden of assuming this parental role. The bill just passed by the U.S. Senate puts the responsibility for providing the ability to filter Internet content squarely on the ISP. (Higher access fees, anyone?)

We just think it's sad that in one area of life after another, the ancient model of a mother and father raising a child just isn't considered good enough anymore, and that most of the world now expects institutions outside of the home to take over various parenting responsibilities. [Your editor's curmudgeonly response is: "For pity's sake, they're your kids, God bless 'em, now go do your duty!" Unfortunately all too many parents interpret that duty as a license to dumb down the world for the rest of us. It ain't fair! -- JHF]

While we have the greatest respect for Dan and all the good work he's done for the Macintosh community in general and education in particular, we have to respectfully disagree with most of his conclusions. The more this filtering technology proliferates and is enhanced, the more temptation there will be for it to be used (like insecticides!). It seems to us that erecting barriers to information, no matter how compassionately inspired, will only push kids to find other ways to find the "bad" sites and make life more difficult for the rest of us.

(Note: the use of the editorial "we" does not imply agreement on anyone else's part, and the views expressed in this article are those of Senior Editor John H. Farr alone.)

.

November 21, 2008