-
Welcome to Smogon! Take a moment to read the Introduction to Smogon for a run-down on everything Smogon, and make sure you take some time to read the global rules.
-
Congrats to the winners of the 2023 Smog Awards!
Wikileaks
- Thread starter Toothache
- Start date
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/242051,un-mulls-internet-regulation-options.aspx
On the upside, the slow release of the current round of cables are a good way for the media to report on more of them, the last couple of huge dumps on Iran and Afghanistan only encouraged the media to report on a few of the more important documents, there was too many at once.
Do we really need this sort of regulation, especially from the UN? Current conspiracy theories point to the leaks being deliberate so as to have an excuse to clamp down on free speech on the internet. Whether this is true or not, increased security is a temporary measure at best, there are some talented hackers out there, so no security is infallible. This is a move to close the door after the horse has bolted anyway, the leaks are out there, although in a slow drip-drip and being carefully vetted this time.
On the upside, the slow release of the current round of cables are a good way for the media to report on more of them, the last couple of huge dumps on Iran and Afghanistan only encouraged the media to report on a few of the more important documents, there was too many at once.
Oh yeah? Give me examples, and censoring programs dont count. I want to see one example of the internet being controlled without doing what China did, which is censor everything. I cant see any example that the internet has been controlled at all. Even if they managed to, people would change the forwarding ports on their routers and effectively make a new internet that isn't regulated. Iirc it would work anyway.
You talk like mass censorship of the internet is nothing lol
Small list of places that successfully control the internet:
* China
* Iran
* North Korea
* Cuba
* Saudi Arabia
* Syria
You can add Australia to the list at any point, because it's trivial for them the last time I checked (one entry/exit point from the country).
Saying you could beat it by "changing the forwarding ports on your routers" displays an astounding ignorance.
* China
* Iran
* North Korea
* Cuba
* Saudi Arabia
* Syria
You can add Australia to the list at any point, because it's trivial for them the last time I checked (one entry/exit point from the country).
Saying you could beat it by "changing the forwarding ports on your routers" displays an astounding ignorance.
i would expect that the UK might join that list in the near future.
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/all-internet-porn-will-be-blocked-to-protect-children-under-uk-government-plan/story-e6frfkui-1225973481287
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/world/all-internet-porn-will-be-blocked-to-protect-children-under-uk-government-plan/story-e6frfkui-1225973481287
Correct, and Australia's government has been trying to censor the internet country-wide for some years now, though they've been met with a lot of objections. Granted, it'd be opt-out, but even that is too much. I am also very suspicious of any attempt to parent the population's children by blocking 'inappropriate' sites... and what else? Also I read about that yesterday, Dan, and was literally nauseated by the comments made by some people quoted in the article. It is true that in some countries like Australia, efforts to control the internet will be fought by some people, but that does not negate the threat it poses. Look at the state of internet censorship (and media censorship in general) in Surgo's list of countries. Getting around the internet blocks is in some cases possible, but it is also dangerous. Any attempt by the authorities to control the internet should be met with resistance, because while they think they can get away with it, it is absolutely a danger to your freedom.
Good comic above, by the way. Depressingly true.
It's important to define what "control" actually means. Does it mean it's hard for the average user to get content the government doesn't want you to see? Or does it mean that the government can completely restrict access to anything it doesn't want you to see, for any person not within the governmental apparatus?
Note that most of those states Surgo mentioned are authoritarian/totalitarian states. While I believe that all states have an inherent tendency towards authoritarianism, the USA or UK (even as they continue to adopt elements of soft fascism) are still a far cry from Cuba or Iran.
With that said, i agree with jumpluff that internet freedom must be defended to the last - internet censorship is the modern equivalent of burning the Alexandria Library.
Note that most of those states Surgo mentioned are authoritarian/totalitarian states. While I believe that all states have an inherent tendency towards authoritarianism, the USA or UK (even as they continue to adopt elements of soft fascism) are still a far cry from Cuba or Iran.
With that said, i agree with jumpluff that internet freedom must be defended to the last - internet censorship is the modern equivalent of burning the Alexandria Library.
I'm now conspiracy theorist but I'm always amazed by the way every bad thing that happens to America results in our government getting new toys and justification for something they've wanted to do for ages. Like 9/11 and the PATRIOT ACT and the War on Terror.
So, now the US DoJ decides to poke its nose into the personal lives of other countries' politicians. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12141530
it means he's just some "lame white dude who got bored," not a wild-eyed american-hating arab, or someone equally easy to turn into a "villain."
Right, and he wasn't a mexican or black from the slums or whatever. He was just a suburban middle-class white guy serving his country who did something because he could.
I lol'd.