Granted, it's just in Australia right now. http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111255-Australias-Internet-Filter-Switches-On-In-July
Hell of a precedent, though.
One company has already gotten scared; http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/111282-Hacktivists-Force-Pause-in-Australian-Net-Censorship Being the targets of internet vigilantes such as "Anonymous". A rather insidious bunch but hey, whatever gets people's attention.
I understand the original idea is to filter our Child Pornography, which is a great idea. But where will it end? Perhaps various internet companies feel porn altogether should be blocked. (And hey, even as a woman, I have needs!) Perhaps bad language next! Then all will have to suffer those annoying blocked sites when trying to do research in high school, where ever other source was pretty much blocked because it censors words, with or without context.
Censoring things on the internet is a great idea, as long as it doesn't get out of hand. Certain things should be blocked, such as child pornography like you mentioned, and things like how to make meth(which you can find very easily with a google search) and other very harmful substances. Blocking those types of things would be great, but a block on profanity or other things inappropriate for young ages would be ridiculous.
I don't think censorship is ever a good. I'm not concerned if someone wants to get off to pictures of little kids. I'm more concerned about the production of the material, which wouldn't stop just because it get's harder to obtain. People who want to get into things like making meth aren't going to be hindered by internet censorship. Having such information on had could be useful in things like story telling to get a more accurate telling. You can pretty much guarantee that so long as the censorship is being imposed externally rather then self imposed there will be things that get censored that will be completely ridiculous to censor.
Correct me if I am wrong, but hasn't China been doing censorship for years now? On as more sweeping level, such as anything that might possibly go against the beliefs that the government wants its citizens to follow?
Yea, the difference is that we're supposed to be "Free". Many other countries are not. That said, I don't really know much about Australian government but from what I hear, they're free as well.
Well, I'd definitely agree with illegalizing pornography, and perhaps harmful illegal drugs. Explosives, obscene language, etc.? That's where I get off the censor train. So, I believe censorship should be very limited.
You can already block porn. There's a program called K9 protection that does the job.
Any kid can get through that with google.com and a bit of intelligence.
I'm more concerned about the production of the material, which wouldn't stop just because it get's harder to obtain.
Yeah but, that stuff is going to end up on the internet forever. It's not like you can do anything to stop child pornography, any sick person can use a camera and upload pictures. You can't really stop it, so isn't the next best thing to do is make it harder to obtain?
I don't think censoring the Internet will work.
Well, yeah, if it is their voice and censoring stop their voice, then it would work? I'm sure we'd all just get pissed off and use our first amendment right to kill the censoring. I doubt it's happening in the USA.
As for Australia, I've heard they've got a bunch of freedoms floating around, too. This sounds a little odd
Well, I'd definitely agree with illegalizing pornography
Keep your hands off of my pr0n!
But beginning in July, internet access for many Aussies will in fact be censored, not by the government but by the voluntary actions of four of the country's ISPs.
I think it's a problem. If the government decides to take down some illegal sites, then it's okay. But private companies shouldn't have the right to decide what people can and cannot view.
What makes the Government any different from Private companies in this scenario?
The government is (or should be) controlled by the people, a private company isn't. People (should) have the power to decide what's legal and what isn't.
But, Grimml, these are internet service providers. They own the service. Isn't it within their right to restrict people from certain services they are giving them? If the people don't like it, they could pick another ISP [that is, if there is one available]. I think it's a little like biased media sites. Like if all the tv providers were owned by monkeys and the tv companies only chose to show tv shows with, like, bananas in them, then the monkey CEO's wouldn't be doing anything wrong because it's their choice as to what they put on their television service, no?
If it isn't a law in australia, and this is such a big deal, then I'm sure another ISP will advertise and say 'Alright we don't censor this stuff that these guys do! buy now!'
If the people don't like it, they could pick another ISP [that is, if there is one available].
And what if all of them decide to do the same thing or if there is only one?
I think it's a little like biased media sites. Like if all the tv providers were owned by monkeys and the tv companies only chose to show tv shows with, like, bananas in them, then the monkey CEO's wouldn't be doing anything wrong because it's their choice as to what they put on their television service, no?
Yes, but you'd still have the choice to change the site. If they censor other sites then you don't have the choice. That's the big difference.
They own the service. Isn't it within their right to restrict people from certain services they are giving them?
Do you think that they have for example the right to censor all left-winged sites? Or can they censor all sites that say evolution is a fact?
