Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!pasteur!ucbvax!agate!eos!eugene
From: eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya)
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
Subject: Re: Computer graphic porn
Keywords: rude censorship
Message-ID: <3656@eos.UUCP>
Date: 17 May 89 17:35:33 GMT
References: <6138@ux.cs.man.ac.uk> <283@indri.primate.wisc.edu> <10707@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Reply-To: eugene@eos.UUCP (Eugene Miya)
Distribution: na
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Calif.
Lines: 62

> puritans? .. inquisition?

No one expects the Spanish Inquisition. ..... 8)

Well, this topic has appeared in the National media twice.  The first
was the introduction of the video game Custer's Last Stand.  The second
was the introduction of various MacStacks which allowed image "interaction
[stripping]."

The topic has interested us (Bay Area ACM/SIGGRAPH) enough to discuss
the merits of having a meeting on the subject OF (not ON) computer porn
We have thus far decided NOT to have a meeting because there is the
"graphic" element without much "computer" [i.e., you can just go buy porn,
cheper right?].  The SF area is obviously one of the capitals.
Our core group has gone as far to actually obtain some of the aforementioned
stacks, the current VP and past program chair, a mother with a pre-teen
son, reported such stacks (as an example) offer options like race, gender,
sexual preference (straight or gay), and various levels of "excitment," etc.
Her option, BTW: "Well, dull, .....naw"

It is a topic which must be openly discussed (I s/usa/na/ so Kelly
might see this).  I don't think we can bury our heads in the sand on this one.
We tend to think of the high positive aspects of computer graphics:
cute animation, flight simulation or analytic graphics, but we also have this
seedier side.  Just like Hollywood.

I for one do not think the technology is just made for any application.
I would tend to prefer the technology be used for global rather than
"individual" benefit.

Personal opinion follows hit 'n' now








Before you send me mail asking for my opinion, I'll tell you I am a bit more
of a modern prude (I admit really dull).  I tend to side with that faction of
NOW which finds most porn degrading of women, but NOW is divided into
pro and con and has never come out with anything more than an over
general statement.  But, I do strongly defend the rights of the press and
personal freedom short of physical harm.  This will irk strong feminists.
I think it is better to interact positively with humans than the icons.
Before you said,
"Well in some cases it benefits," remember you are talking exception
to a generalization.  I do not see the benefit the majority gets. The
case is something of a weak one.
I do not think it leads to simply harmless diversions.  I will equate
it a tad less than but aligned with some types of military technology.
And this is a weak case, too.  It's my opinion.  Post yours.

Another generalization from

--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov
  resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
  "You trust the `reply' command with all those different mailers out there?"
  "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
  {ncar,decwrl,hplabs,uunet}!ames!eugene
  				Live free or die.