[Foundation-l] 86% of german users disagree with the introduction of the personal image filter

[David Levy]

André Engels wrote:

> As said before, just get different categories, and let people choose among
> them. The priest could then choose to block "full nudity", "female
> toplessness", "people in underwear" and "people in swimwear", but not
> "images containing naked bellies" or "unveiled women", whereas the atheist
> could for example choose to only block "photographs of sexual organs" and
> watch the rest.

As Tobias Oelgarte noted, it simply isn't feasible to categorize
images in this manner (keeping in mind that those are merely examples
of the countless categories that we would need to apply to millions of
images, with thousands more uploaded every day), let alone to present
such a large quantity of filter options to readers.

> I find it strange that you consider this an objection to a filter. Surely,
> giving someone an imperfect choice of what they consider objectionable is
> _less_ making a decision for them than judging in advance that nothing is
> objectionable?

You're mischaracterizing the status quo.  We haven't determined that
"nothing is objectionable" to anyone;  we rightly assume that
_everything_ is potentially objectionable to someone (and refrain from
favoring certain objections over others).

> What is POV about labelling something as being an image containing a nude
> human or an illustration supposed to represent a religious figure?

Tobias Oelgarte described one key problem.  Another lies in the
labeling of some things and not others.  Unless we were to create and
apply a label for literally everything that someone finds
objectionable, we'd be taking the non-neutral position that only
certain objections (the ones for which filters exist) are reasonable.

You mentioned a hypothetical "unveiled women" category.  Do you
honestly believe that the idea of tagging images in this manner is
remotely realistic?

What about images depicting miscegenation (another concept to which
many people strongly object)?  Are we to have such a category?

David Levy