Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version VT1.00C 11/1/84; site vortex.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!unc!mcnc!decvax!vortex!lauren From: lauren@vortex.UUCP (Lauren Weinstein) Newsgroups: net.news,net.ai,net.legal Subject: Re: Software to screen future net news. Message-ID: <499@vortex.UUCP> Date: Tue, 8-Jan-85 23:22:44 EST Article-I.D.: vortex.499 Posted: Tue Jan 8 23:22:44 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 11-Jan-85 23:23:10 EST References: <1326@eosp1.UUCP> Organization: Vortex Technology, Los Angeles Lines: 46 Xref: watmath net.news:2941 net.ai:2459 net.legal:1266 I don't have any intention of letting software take the place of human screeners in any system that I have anything to do with. All it takes is one slip and problems could result. If people are doing the screening, you can at least show that you made reasonable attempts to provide protection. If you rely on software, you are just asking to be laughed out of court. I'd be amused if someone could find a SINGLE national publication or news organization that would be willing to put material on a national network, when it was submitted anonymously by the public and only screened by software. GOOD LUCK. The whole concept of having AI software try to detect things like even OBVIOUS libel is ridiculous in any case. I'd sure like to see the software that could detect the potential trouble in the following... "Yes, the diode ratios are indeed negatively biased, but remember that flow control can be inactive in areas of high gain. By the way, does everyone out there know about the guy who runs the computer over at the big diode company on the net? Yeah, you know the one, the one that posted that message about skinning chipmunks to the net last week. Well, I hope you all realize that he does terrible things to young people. Yes, he has a long record of acts that would certainly make him unsuitable for employment by any company with any sense. He doesn't even really deserve to be alive. I hope his boss fires him, and nobody else will hire him. Anyway, the diode matrices can be best determined by..." ---- Now, if this had been a real message, enough was said that could result in the person being spoken about (who even though not named, was clearly indicated in a manner that most net people could understand) getting VERY upset, especially if he lost his job as a result of the message. This is only a trivial example. I submit that designing messages that could bypass automatic non-human screening would be exceedingly trivial in nearly all cases, given the current state of the art. However, this discussion is purely an academic exercise in AI as far as I am concerned. So dream on... --Lauren--