You guys can never accept that restrictions on certain messages in certain venues is not the same thing as censorship, can you?
No, because even by degrees, it is still censorship and necessarily so. The quibble here is merely when it becomes (and oh how this word make me laugh) "offensive".
Tis so much easier to determine via the measure of Objective as opposed to subjective, too – with the added bonus of the cross over point being quite fixed with the former and quite meaningless with the latter.
When the Government steps in and says there is no venue appropriate for your message, that's censorship.
No, that is just a particular level of censorship that you may or may not support according to personal preference probably decided/influenced by subjectivity.
Just like when WP mods step in and say these forums are not an appropriate vehicle for one's message, or your workplace steps in and says their network isn't appropriate vehicle for your message.
Once a community decide that something is not appropriate for the well being and progess of said community, censorship is a necessary and justifiable follow on from that decision, and there is nothing evil or unreasonably oppressive about implementing such needful censorship once that decision has been made – unless that which is being shutdown is actually the way of righteousness that is ... but then we are back to Subjective Morality vs Objective Morality again, hmmm ?
regarDS
Friday, November 07, 2008
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
I for one will not be censored.
Oh ? Trying leaving that kind of comment at my blog !
If you honestly look at things, you are already being censored in many many ways and many of those ways you implicitly agree with and actively support.
regarDS
Oh ? Trying leaving that kind of comment at my blog !
If you honestly look at things, you are already being censored in many many ways and many of those ways you implicitly agree with and actively support.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
seems like he is only concerned for his own needs...not the wider community
Read back through the whole 8 threads and you will soon see that I've been trying to promote the taking of the current version of McWeb/McNet/internut beyond the control of any government or special interest group for all time ... whilst also supporting the reasonable and required and necessary attempts of our elected government to try and control the online world in similar fashion to the offline world while they still can.
I think you'll find that I am quite the pragmatist ... as well as Realist.
Oh, and Deconstructionist.
regarDS
Read back through the whole 8 threads and you will soon see that I've been trying to promote the taking of the current version of McWeb/McNet/internut beyond the control of any government or special interest group for all time ... whilst also supporting the reasonable and required and necessary attempts of our elected government to try and control the online world in similar fashion to the offline world while they still can.
I think you'll find that I am quite the pragmatist ... as well as Realist.
Oh, and Deconstructionist.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
Clinton tried to censor the Internet,
Clinton the democrat who endorsed the Obama nation ?
When Obama finishes nominating left-leaning justices to the bench, how would you rate the probability of any future administration having any more luck than Clinton had?
Considerable, especially considering the kind of world the left leaning want to build and the kind of power they long to wield.
I'm kinda enjoying the deMarkation that is being established at long last, along with seeing who is on which side of it.
At last, more a case of "black and white" instead of nebulous shades of grey.
I'm on the team which comes out as ultimate winner regardless of what I might suffer along the way, BTW. :)
Obama WILL censor that which he does not want regardless of constitution. In fact, he'll use constitution in order to justify censor.
You won't mind though, coz the kinds of things he'll be seeking to suppress will be that which you rather didn't exist too.
regarDS
Clinton the democrat who endorsed the Obama nation ?
When Obama finishes nominating left-leaning justices to the bench, how would you rate the probability of any future administration having any more luck than Clinton had?
Considerable, especially considering the kind of world the left leaning want to build and the kind of power they long to wield.
I'm kinda enjoying the deMarkation that is being established at long last, along with seeing who is on which side of it.
At last, more a case of "black and white" instead of nebulous shades of grey.
I'm on the team which comes out as ultimate winner regardless of what I might suffer along the way, BTW. :)
Obama WILL censor that which he does not want regardless of constitution. In fact, he'll use constitution in order to justify censor.
You won't mind though, coz the kinds of things he'll be seeking to suppress will be that which you rather didn't exist too.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
When was the last time you saw someone under the age of 30 terrified about the Internet?
Straw. No one is terrified and the governments are merely using a certain aspect of it as a means to an ends that suits only what the wise and sensible of us know only too well.
regarDS
Straw. No one is terrified and the governments are merely using a certain aspect of it as a means to an ends that suits only what the wise and sensible of us know only too well.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
I don't have access to this "internut", but as luck would have it, I can get Google News on my internet though, so can you point me to the page where you read it?
The reaction you show to a word I cooked up and began using long before coming to these forums only helps show how seriously/less than healthily you take this communicative medium. The internut is a tool and a means to an ends, not something to be worshipped, for crying out loud !
regarDS
The reaction you show to a word I cooked up and began using long before coming to these forums only helps show how seriously/less than healthily you take this communicative medium. The internut is a tool and a means to an ends, not something to be worshipped, for crying out loud !
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
derspatz writes...And you don't see this as the "thin end of the wedge" ?
lol, oh bloody hell, your just as bad as [deleted].
Aside from watching the American who addressed the Press Club about the future of the internet, as shown on ABC TV this week, I've actually spent time in the USofA.
The aforementioned American asserted that when it comes to the USofA, they would rather lose their cell phone access, then their internet, then their TV, whereas here in Oz, we would rather lose our TV, then our internet, then our mobile phone access.
I was particularly amazed at this proven/polled/researched opinion because having spent time in the USofA, I have seen their TV.
It is the most (happily I might add) censored medium you could hope to see in comparison to what we get here in Oz. In fact, shows they make there that they sell to us here, look/sound quite differently to the product we get to see here. Yup, we get the UNCENSORED versions in many cases !
So, with that in mind, in a country that cares more about its TV (and TV which they are already quite happy/used to being censored to pieces) than internet, do you think Obama is going to have much trouble establishing filtering systems that suit his aims, hmmm ?
Get Real.
regarDS
lol, oh bloody hell, your just as bad as [deleted].
Aside from watching the American who addressed the Press Club about the future of the internet, as shown on ABC TV this week, I've actually spent time in the USofA.
The aforementioned American asserted that when it comes to the USofA, they would rather lose their cell phone access, then their internet, then their TV, whereas here in Oz, we would rather lose our TV, then our internet, then our mobile phone access.
I was particularly amazed at this proven/polled/researched opinion because having spent time in the USofA, I have seen their TV.
It is the most (happily I might add) censored medium you could hope to see in comparison to what we get here in Oz. In fact, shows they make there that they sell to us here, look/sound quite differently to the product we get to see here. Yup, we get the UNCENSORED versions in many cases !
So, with that in mind, in a country that cares more about its TV (and TV which they are already quite happy/used to being censored to pieces) than internet, do you think Obama is going to have much trouble establishing filtering systems that suit his aims, hmmm ?
Get Real.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
Another core Obama policy is to protect children online "while protecting the First Amendment" through delivery of tools and information to help parents control what their children see.
And you don't see this as the "thin end of the wedge" ?
Astounding !
regarDS
And you don't see this as the "thin end of the wedge" ?
Astounding !
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
derspatz writes...
Where did you hear that?
He won't last long if he tries that.derspatz writes...Even Obama wants to do it to the USofA.
Where did you hear that?
Ironically enough, the internut. :)
Compliments to links via Google News.
regarDS
Where did you hear that?
He won't last long if he tries that.derspatz writes...Even Obama wants to do it to the USofA.
Where did you hear that?
Ironically enough, the internut. :)
Compliments to links via Google News.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
I think wholesale ADSL and ADSL2+ ports are a) only available when purchased in bulk, and b) still need a backbone provider and other network links and hardware in order to actually get access to the internet.
So form a co-op with other like minded in here.
ISP-level filtering is a bad idea, and a problem. Scrap the flawed idea, and the problem goes away.
It isn't ever going to go away. It's going to keep coming back over and over again until it is in, and not only in Oz, but a whole load of other countries as well.
Even Obama wants to do it to the USofA.
So like I said, time folk started thinking outside the filter.
regarDS
So form a co-op with other like minded in here.
ISP-level filtering is a bad idea, and a problem. Scrap the flawed idea, and the problem goes away.
It isn't ever going to go away. It's going to keep coming back over and over again until it is in, and not only in Oz, but a whole load of other countries as well.
Even Obama wants to do it to the USofA.
So like I said, time folk started thinking outside the filter.
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
$125 million over 400 ISP's is not going to go very far.
... and in a few month's time I reckon we could end up turning 400 ISPs into 4000 or even 10x that.
If the filtering has to go in at ISP level, then it only stands to reason that the ISP has opportunity to have an UNcleanfeed before cleanfeed.
So, like I suggested not too long ago, merely get yourself an ABN and a business name and then buy your ADSL internut feed at wholsesale prices as an ISP intending to supply other users for profit.
Just because you might not actually end up signing up any customers at whatever unreasonable price you might choose to advertise on a business web page won't mean that you aren't in the business, and in the meantime you can browse to your hearts content on the unfiltered side of the feed.
Win win for those interested, as you not only get your feed at wholesale prices, but you get to claim everything from your phone line to equipment to your "office", etc, etc, etc, as a tax deduction.
Time to think outside the filter, don't you reckon ?
regarDS
... and in a few month's time I reckon we could end up turning 400 ISPs into 4000 or even 10x that.
If the filtering has to go in at ISP level, then it only stands to reason that the ISP has opportunity to have an UNcleanfeed before cleanfeed.
So, like I suggested not too long ago, merely get yourself an ABN and a business name and then buy your ADSL internut feed at wholsesale prices as an ISP intending to supply other users for profit.
Just because you might not actually end up signing up any customers at whatever unreasonable price you might choose to advertise on a business web page won't mean that you aren't in the business, and in the meantime you can browse to your hearts content on the unfiltered side of the feed.
Win win for those interested, as you not only get your feed at wholesale prices, but you get to claim everything from your phone line to equipment to your "office", etc, etc, etc, as a tax deduction.
Time to think outside the filter, don't you reckon ?
regarDS
Posted @ whirlpool - ILCF pt8
it's not going to achieve a single thing in hell except feed Conroy's ego.
What sort of firewalling is used there I wonder. :)
BTW, I've been reading more on the topic of filtering from the USofA "obama is not our saviour, he's just a naughty boy" POV and have discovered that a lot of folk (particularly the kinds of xtoids who did NOT help vote him in) are of the view that once the prez elect gets sworn in, he'll be pushing for mandatory filtering to not only stem the flow of all the usual suspects (pr0n et al), but also the kind of web pages published by their kind of xtianity as opposed to the liberal kind that helped get him where he is.
Sure, he's said that he wants a method of filtering used that does not do violence to the constitution etc ... but how close to the cliff-edge do think that might be ?
Nothing is more scary than a socialistic minded left-wing type when they are given power, and I wouldn't be too surprised that if a year or so down the track, Oz, the EU and the USofA actually do some collaboration into common filtering and common laws in relation to it.
I don't think it is unreasonable to think that, regardless of how much a "Obama nation of desolation" (say 3 times quickly and then wonder where you might have heard that before) some might think it to be.
I also think the Governments of the EU (et al) will be looking on with great interest to how the Oz government gets this up – we make an interesting test bed considering the extremes of distance in our land vs the actual number of folk we have living here.
In short, I don't think this ISP Level Content Filtering thing is just about the future of the internut here in Oz, but rather ALL governments would love to find/have a way to better control it.
regarDS
What sort of firewalling is used there I wonder. :)
BTW, I've been reading more on the topic of filtering from the USofA "obama is not our saviour, he's just a naughty boy" POV and have discovered that a lot of folk (particularly the kinds of xtoids who did NOT help vote him in) are of the view that once the prez elect gets sworn in, he'll be pushing for mandatory filtering to not only stem the flow of all the usual suspects (pr0n et al), but also the kind of web pages published by their kind of xtianity as opposed to the liberal kind that helped get him where he is.
Sure, he's said that he wants a method of filtering used that does not do violence to the constitution etc ... but how close to the cliff-edge do think that might be ?
Nothing is more scary than a socialistic minded left-wing type when they are given power, and I wouldn't be too surprised that if a year or so down the track, Oz, the EU and the USofA actually do some collaboration into common filtering and common laws in relation to it.
I don't think it is unreasonable to think that, regardless of how much a "Obama nation of desolation" (say 3 times quickly and then wonder where you might have heard that before) some might think it to be.
I also think the Governments of the EU (et al) will be looking on with great interest to how the Oz government gets this up – we make an interesting test bed considering the extremes of distance in our land vs the actual number of folk we have living here.
In short, I don't think this ISP Level Content Filtering thing is just about the future of the internut here in Oz, but rather ALL governments would love to find/have a way to better control it.
regarDS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
