I fully support his right to make such choices. Plenty of people prefer to have no chance of encountering porn and if they have this control, perhaps they'll be less interested in controlling what the rest of us watch.
It bothers me when people equate private choices like Mister Jobs with government censorship. Its not. Censorship is using force to interfere with the speech and choices of others. All Apple is doing is offering one of those choices.
"There is also a suspicion that Jobs is simply acting out of self-interest, calculating that pitching Apple as the Disney of computing will be a smart branding move that will earn him enough market share to offset the considerable loss of interest from those who want to see porn on Apple's amazing machines."
There are so many things wrong with that paragraph I'm not sure where to start.
1. Jobs isn't losing customers because of the no porn policy. Show me data to the contrary.
2. Digital porn is most frequently consumed in the browser. Uhm, remember that most lewd of all apps?
3. There is no suspicion that Jobs is acting out of self-interest (ie in Apple's best interest). He's required to do that by law.
It bothers me when people equate private choices like Mister Jobs with government censorship. Its not. Censorship is using force to interfere with the speech and choices of others. All Apple is doing is offering one of those choices.