Matt Marooney wrote:
{snip}
> I'll disregard the troll comment as this
is the first time I've NEEDED to post anything to this list. I've been
reading it for years now. Thanks.
Aww then, you really have no excuse for this post Matt. It's off-topic
and the scope of your "problem" covers too much ground. :)
That said: I think you need get off a mailing list, throw down some hard
cash, hire a EET and someone that can /really/ write code for an OS,
*PROM chips, embedded systems, etc. But I think this is a rather
involved scenario that is gonna take a lot to provide a real working
solution, so I hope you have some funding and patients. Just go hit up a
hungry DeVry/ITT grad or something if you need a shoe-string budget.
While you do sound sincere Matt -- though a bit naive, if you don't mind
me saying -- I think the business model for this device is morally &
socially bankrupt and sets a bad precedent all around. I don't care if
other people have done it already, it doesn't make it right (see precedent).
I question any ethics of monitoring a person, even with their leave &
even if it is for an *evil* addiction. They obviously don't have good
judgment about the consequence of their actions to begin with, no? Why
do we assume that they are of sound mind about the choice of giving this
type of consent?
In a light hearted tone:
This sounds much like all the variety of exercise equipment that is
pandered out to Fat Americans who just want a quick fix to their
problem. A but later the expensive machine ends up sitting in a garage,
unused, until it's thrown away & the person remains fat.
In a heavier tone:
I ask you to please, _please_ question who you are working for and how
else they could use this after you are gone. Swords cuts both ways Matt,
as I'm sure you know. Would you like this used against you to stop you
from practicing religion online? Politics? What if the technology gets
exported and helps a regime to monitor it's citizens to maintain control?
Anyway. I think this is the wrong solution to the actual problem. I
would much rather these clients spend money on a good psychoanalyst than
some half-baked technological chastity-belt solution. Especially if this
money is derived from Tax's. The problem lies WITHIN THE PERSON, not
within the device delivering the porn. Do you have hard stats that this
approach really works for the client and community? Or do you just want
to profit off of their problems while believing you are helping?
It smacks of like letting a recovering Alcoholic keep beer in his/her
house, but with some $3000 filter on the lid to only provide H20 when
drank? AA would be cheaper and more effective.
--
dk
_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
