Internet at Risk

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Why don't we regulate you off the internet, see how you like it :P

 

.

Why should I? :P

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Comparing the 'Net to whathappenes when you break the regulations in traffic is, quite frankly, utterly idiotic. As someone else mentioned, you don't end up in the hospital because you suddenly come across porn, bullying or violence on the 'Net. Or because your browser suddenly spits out an error-message.

 

To be honest, Hajduk, you haven't got the slightest shred of an idea on just how big the 'Net is, how much information it contains, how it works and how mankind has come to depend on it for damn near everything. Just like the majority of the politicians around the world that say that it must be regulated.

 

The countries that do try to regulate things are usually crystal-clear on the fact that you cannot stop those dedicated enough to circumvent the blocks, nor the ones that have the technical skills to work around the inhibitors. It happens in China despite the amount of work they've put into their Great Firewall of China, it happens here despite the child-porn filter they have in place for all ISP's operating in Norway.

 

So once again, for the N'th time: You cannot stop the signal.

 

You know young man, I do not appreciate your language. Your above post is reported to moderators.

[EtherealN]

You know young man, I do not appreciate your language. Your above post is reported to moderators.

 

In future, if you find a post objectionable, let it stay at issuing the report.

[Wolf Rider]

You know young man, I do not appreciate your language. Your above post is reported to moderators.

 

 

and that, my friends is the crux of the problem with 'net filtering.... a person in control of the list doesn't like what someone else is saying, and whammo, the site it was said on is gone

[Fjordmonkey]

and that, my friends is the crux of the problem with 'net filtering.... a person in control of the list doesn't like what someone else is saying, and whammo, the site it was said on is gone

 

 

In some cases, it's a good thing. Like for instance with sites that promotes and distributes childpornography.

 

The main problem, as I've stated before, is that regulation of the 'Net on the scale that Hajduk seemingly wants is impossible, as there's both major cultural/political problems with it in terms of censorship in a democratic country/society, as well as damn near insurmountable technical issues in trying to do so.

[danilop]

Internet is going to become heavily censored, like it or not.

 

Why?

 

Simple, it's extremely powerful communication and propaganda tool (as we have seen in Arabic Spring) to be ignored in the future by governments all around the planet. It's a weapon! Think gun laws and how heavily gun ownership is regulated since early 20th century.

 

I don't think that aforementioned criminal activities (childporn, hacking, fraud, etc ...) are the main driving force behind increased voices for internet regulation. Governments are afraid of uncensored social networking of their subjects, simple as that.

 

Oh, and internet usage can create addiction like alcohol, drugs, gambling, so it's perfect ground for some extra taxing :smilewink:

 

At the moment all secret services (yes, the "democratic" ones, too) in the world are heavily involved in internet monitoring ...

 

Be afraid, be very afraid ... :alien:

Edited December 14, 2012 by danilop

[Pyroflash]

Oh, and internet usage can create addiction like alcohol, drugs, gambling, so it's perfect ground for some extra taxing :smilewink:

 

The taxes aren't because the things you mentioned are addicting (well, yes, it is part of it). The real reason is because the demand for alcohol/tobacco products is extremely inelastic. Internet is also relatively inelastic, however I do not think that levying taxes would provide such an income boost like with alcohol or tobacco because the elasticity of demand is closer to being unit elastic than other taxable material.

Edited December 14, 2012 by Pyroflash

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

Well ... I was driving back home today, and while driving, phoned my wife. She was crying, watching the TV and in disbelief telling me about the tragedy that just occurred in Newtown, Connecticut! I am at home now and am watching the TV and can not believe my eyes ...

 

Don't get me wrong I am not blaming internet unlimited "freedom" for this tragedy. But, there is a lots of lost souls out there ... There is a lot of confused young people not knowing right from wrong. Family, as a basic cell of a society, is collapsing big time, and not only in USA but in all developed countries. Specially Europe. People, specially young, don't know what to believe any more, and often have skewed views because there is so much of propaganda, lies, money making schemes, with complete disregard to humanity ... And I could go, on and on ...

 

Internet is essential for modern life. But is also, grossly abused by money making schemes, terrorists recruiting schemes, political propaganda, international politics propaganda/lies ...

 

Therefore, Internet needs to be regulated. Each country should have full control over internet content within its own border. I salute China for banning Youtube. However, Youtube cold get few hundred employes to filter the content and have it acceptable for Chinese community.

 

BTW, just like internet, guns are NOT (or very loosely) regulated in USA!

[BIGNEWY]

bad people do bad things, it has nothing to do with the net or tv or stuff they see in films

 

The trouble with people supporting regulation is they don't realise when their freedoms are being taken from them until it is to late.

[26-J39]

I think there are more serious problems to deal with. We need to regulate screw driver purchases as they are a popular stabbing weapon.

 

At the end of the day regulation and banning increase the black market side.

 

Gun regulation -> Crime Increases.

Mary Jane - > Supply Increases.

[Pyroflash]

Don't get me wrong I am not blaming internet unlimited "freedom" for this tragedy. But, there is a lots of lost souls out there ... There is a lot of confused young people not knowing right from wrong.

 

It is up to parents to guide their children early on, it is not anyone else's responsibility, and certainly not the governments'.

 

Family, as a basic cell of a society, is collapsing big time, and not only in USA but in all developed countries.

 

If family is collapsing as a unit, it is not because of the internet. It is because of the values people instill upon themselves. I certainly don't want the government forcing me to spend time with my family (I do, quite often, but I find it ridiculous to assert that someone other than me should stick their nose in my personal business).

 

Specially Europe. People, specially young, don't know what to believe any more, and often have skewed views because there is so much of propaganda, lies, money making schemes, with complete disregard to humanity ... And I could go, on and on ...

 

Who do you really want to blame? The internet and what people choose to expose themselves to? Or perhaps you should be attributing this extreme dislike to its source; the groups and organizations who create these lies and propaganda.

 

Would you shoot the mailman for delivering to you a letter about the benefits of radical Islam? No, that would be insane, you would just shake your head in disgust at the group disseminating the mail. It is the same concept with any other information distribution network.

 

Internet is essential for modern life. But is also, grossly abused by money making schemes, terrorists recruiting schemes, political propaganda, international politics propaganda/lies ...

 

Yes, but who, exactly is choosing to buy into these lies, propaganda, and money making schemes? Isn't it the user, who, by completely free choice, is choosing to partake in these activities?

 

Therefore, Internet needs to be regulated. Each country should have full control over internet content within its own border. I salute China for banning Youtube. However, Youtube cold get few hundred employes to filter the content and have it acceptable for Chinese community.

 

Yes, countries should be able to make whatever laws are required to ensure that their people are free, safe, and able to live a prosperous life if they so choose. However where my views differ from those of nations like China is that I believe freedom means that people should be free to access whatever publicly available information they desire without it being arbitrarily restricted by a third party.

 

BTW, just like internet, guns are NOT (or very loosely) regulated in USA!

 

This is a discussion for another thread and most certainly does not belong here.

[Speed]

Well ... I was driving back home today, and while driving, phoned my wife. She was crying, watching the TV and in disbelief telling me about the tragedy that just occurred in Newtown, Connecticut! I am at home now and am watching the TV and can not believe my eyes ...

 

Don't get me wrong I am not blaming internet unlimited "freedom" for this tragedy. But, there is a lots of lost souls out there ... There is a lot of confused young people not knowing right from wrong. Family, as a basic cell of a society, is collapsing big time, and not only in USA but in all developed countries. Specially Europe. People, specially young, don't know what to believe any more, and often have skewed views because there is so much of propaganda, lies, money making schemes, with complete disregard to humanity ... And I could go, on and on ...

 

Internet is essential for modern life. But is also, grossly abused by money making schemes, terrorists recruiting schemes, political propaganda, international politics propaganda/lies ...

 

Therefore, Internet needs to be regulated. Each country should have full control over internet content within its own border. I salute China for banning Youtube. However, Youtube cold get few hundred employes to filter the content and have it acceptable for Chinese community.

 

BTW, just like internet, guns are NOT (or very loosely) regulated in USA!

 

So basically, you want significantly fewer personal liberties and to give the government a lot more power to regulate and control, in exchange for a little bit of safety, right?

 

Such attitudes are how many of the most oppressive and brutal regimes in history climbed to power, and you're promoting of this attitude is a lost cause. The majority of people in the USA (and hell, the Western world, too) will vehemently disagree with you.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Speed

[danilop]

Such attitudes are very common in EU and the rest of the world.

 

For example, what about ongoing anti-gun hysteria in EU (part of Western World, isn't it)? From american point of view, that's a typical usurpation of personal liberties.

 

People in most of European (Western) countries already gave right to their government to take away almost all liberties involving gun ownership. And the main reason is alleged public safety.

 

Next in the line is internet as a global and very powerful anti-government tool (weapon).

 

:smilewink:

 

BTW, I'm not pro-censorship!

Edited December 15, 2012 by danilop

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

So basically, you want significantly fewer personal liberties and to give the government a lot more power to regulate and control, in exchange for a little bit of safety, right?

WRONG! I want intelligent and effective regulations so that I can enjoy my freedom.

[Wolf Rider]

 

~

 

Internet is essential for modern life. But is also, grossly abused by money making schemes, terrorists recruiting schemes, political propaganda, international politics propaganda/lies ...

 

Therefore, Internet needs to be regulated. Each country should have full control over internet content within its own border. I salute China for banning Youtube. However, Youtube cold get few hundred employes to filter the content and have it acceptable for Chinese community.

 

BTW, just like internet, guns are NOT (or very loosely) regulated in USA!

 

I'd hate to go and rain on your parade there, but... did you read of a similar incident occuring in (heavily regulated) China just a few days ago? It wasn't a gun used there, it was something much more horrorfying and sharp.

Edited December 15, 2012 by Wolf Rider

[Speed]

WRONG! I want intelligent and effective regulations so that I can enjoy my freedom.

 

So did the people who elected Hitler.

 

The fact of the matter is, this is what you want, in your eyes. In your point of view, you are correct. However, in the eyes of many people, you are espousing extreme limits on personal liberties- applauding China and wanting to ban youtube?!

[EtherealN]

Regarding this whole idea that society is falling apart yadda yadda and using these shootings etcetera as an example, I invite you to do a little statistical exercise where you will find that:

 

1) Never, in the history of humanity, has the risk of being victimised by violent crime been as low as today.

2) Never, in the history of humanity, has the risk of being murdered been as low as today.

(The same goes for fatalities and injuries without a perpetrator, starvation, victimization to war etcetera etcetera.)

 

This is the same thing as earthquakes; we hear about it more precisely due to the internet existing. Thus we get the impression that it's on the rise when, in actual fact, it's not.

[EtherealN]

Btw, School Shootings is an interesting subject and most definitely not a new phenomenon. If you long for some time where that stuff just didn't happen... well, you'll actually have to go all the way back to before there were schools.

 

Known school shootings in the united states:

 

Nov 2, 1853, Lousiville Kentucky, 1 fatality

June 8, 1567, New York City, 1 injured

Dec 22, 1868, Chattanooga Tennessee, 3 fatalities

March 9, 1873, Salisbury Maryland, 1 fatality

May 24, 1879, Lancaster New York, 1 injured

July 4, 1886, Charleston South Carolina, 1 fatality

June 12 1887, Cleveleand Tennessee, 1 fatality

 

First mass shooting in April 9, 1891, Newburgh New York. Injuries only.

 

This can continue, there's a LOT of them, especially if we include arsonists and the use of explosives towards the same purpose. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/School_shootings_in_the_United_States

 

The only thing that has changed here is:

1) There's more people now. Thus more violence.

2) Communications are such that we can instantly hear about it.

[26-J39]

1) Never, in the history of humanity, has the risk of being victimised by violent crime been as low as today.

2) Never, in the history of humanity, has the risk of being murdered been as low as today.

 

 

3/ Never in the history of humanity has there been so few people in control of monetary, military & world media to Manipulate public consciences. :music_whistling:

[Speed]

3/ Never in the history of humanity has there been so few people in control of monetary, military & world media to Manipulate public consciences. :music_whistling:

 

Back when all of Asia was in control of the Ghangis Khan, or all of the Roman empire was controlled by the Emperor, or every country/empire was a monarchy/dictatorship and constitutional monarchies did not even exist yet, or back in the time of the Egyptian pharaohs... and of course, freedom of the press/speech wasn't even a concept in those times- none of those count? :huh:

Edited December 15, 2012 by Speed

[26-J39]

Back when all of Asia was in control of the Ghangis Khan, or all of the Roman empire was controlled by the Emperor, or every country/empire was a monarchy/dictatorship and constitutional monarchies did not even exist yet, or back in the time of the Egyptian pharaohs... and of course, freedom of the press/speech wasn't even a concept in those times- none of those count? :huh:

 

Yes your right, my main point being world media to Manipulate public consciences. That is the game changer and completely relevant to "internet wars" .

 

Edit: World-wide media in the hands of a few to manipulate world-wide public consciences... Not good :cry:

Edited December 15, 2012 by 26-J39

[EtherealN]

This thread is heading waaay too far into tin foil land... :P

[26-J39]

Why are facts these days tin foil hats??? :doh:

 

I give up and leave u with this quote, peace all.. :D

 

"In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." – George Orwell

[Pyroflash]

Why are facts these days tin foil hats??? :doh:

 

I give up and leave u with this quote, peace all.. :D

 

"In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." – George Orwell

 

If they are facts, then where is your numerical, unquestionable proof? Should we also degrade science to mere hypothesis because it sounds about right? No, TLAR is for flying planes, not determining policy :P

 

In fact, I could easily make a counter argument that the number of largely popular, independent blogs allows for more, less influential people to take advantage of the system instead of going back to the days of yellow journalism where no one could confirm or deny the events without physically traveling somewhere. W.R. Hearst would turn over in his grave if he knew the state of online journalism today :D

Edited December 15, 2012 by Pyroflash

[EtherealN]

Why are facts these days tin foil hats??? :doh:

 

I give up and leave u with this quote, peace all.. :D

 

"In a world of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." – George Orwell

 

And how many claim to be telling said truth in mutually exclusive manners? ;)