[sllug-members]: Re: Deseret News Article

[Adam Barrett]

Amazing arguments.

Before I read your response to Sen Daw I also did a quick find in each
of the articles for the words that are key to the bill.

Furthermore, I find that it is silly to think that limiting wireless
internet access in public places would ever begin to stop anyone from
looking at pornagraphic material.

Simply they would get internet access in their own home. Not allowed,
ordered by law? Fine! They could scam a signal from a neighbor, as
there is now effect from HB139 on the home network.

I love this line too:

"The problem of theft?

 It hasn't been fixed through technology yet, and nobody should expect
that it will be. "

I think that could hold up to ANY crime, or problem on the internet.
For crying out loud, it hasn't even fixed the problems that came from
technology (viruses, spam, phishing) it has only helped to stem the
tide.


On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:38 PM, Justin Findlay <justin at jfindlay.us> wrote:
> Wow.  These are both excellent and well thought out responses.  If only
>  you could have presented them during the committee. :)
>
>
>  Justin
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
>  See http://www.sllug.org/ for latest SLLUG news, information, links.
>  Join SLLUG and other UT LUG members on irc.FreeNode.net channel #Utah
>  sllug-members at sllug.org
>  http://www.sllug.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sllug-members
>



-- 
Adam Barrett
dragen at gmail.com