Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Web Censorship Starts in Land of the Fee ("War on Paedophiles" as Excuse)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

____/ Darth Chaos on Saturday 19 July 2008 19:24 : \____

> On Jul 19, 3:44 pm, Roy Schestowitz <newsgro...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> ____/ Rex Ballard on Saturday 19 July 2008 15:11 : \____
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 19, 5:12 pm, Linonut <lino...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >> * Roy Schestowitz peremptorily fired off this memo:
>> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> >> "Land of the Fee."  Heh heh.
>> >> --
>> >> If the human brain were so simple that we could understand it,
>> >> we would be so simple we couldn't.
>>
>> > What the new law deliberately overlooks is that adult entertainment
>> > publishers (porn) are very good about registering themselves with a
>> > service (RSAC?) that "rates" the sites so that the cannot be viewed by
>> > anyone who has requested that such content be blocked.  In some cases,
>> > they even segregate their "adult" content from their political and
>> > editorial material (since many "porn" magazines are also a vehicle for
>> > liberal editorial content that wouldn't be funded because it's to
>> > critical of the most popular advertising purchasers.
>>
>> > The weird thing is that I am currently in a COUNTRY that block ALL
>> > such sites.  Of course, it also blocks tinyurl links as well (because
>> > they might point to porn), and also religious materials.
>>
>> > One of the big concerns, which still holds, is that people would abuse
>> > the reporting mechanism and try to have sites classified as "porn" or
>> > have entire sites classified as "porn" for political, religious, or
>> > economic reasons.  There have even been cases of people trying to have
>> > a site blocked for very personal reasons (divorce, noisy neighbors,
>> > kids telling stories (young teens bragging but overheard by parents).
>>
>> > Generally, child predators don't host their own web sites, and they
>> > tend to gravitate toward "family" oriented sites.  This is very
>> > similar to the "real world" practice of getting involved as the youth
>> > group sponsor at the local church, coaching a sports team, or heading
>> > a cub/boy scount troop.  The good news is that it's easier to catch on-
>> > line predators, because once a perpetration is reported, the law
>> > enforcement can set up a sting very easily and capture the predator
>> > with a great deal of evidence to assure a conviction.  It's much
>> > harder to "prove" that the local cubmaster, soccor coach, or parish
>> > priest is or is not molesting the teenagers.  There is more social
>> > pressure to keep it quiet, more tendency to dismiss it as a
>> > fabrication, and less tendency to want to follow-up or attempt to set
>> > up a "sting".  Furthermore, it's harder to set up a sting because the
>> > players are all known, and wires or other listening and video devices
>> > are too easily detected.
>>
>> I was thinking along the lines not of 'borderline cases', but that which is
>> to do with writing new laws and bringing in filtering equipment as they
>> currently do in Australia (under the guide of "war on terror|kiddie pr0n",
>> of course. It was shown earlier that the government there had  suppressed
>> free speech on political issue.
>>
>> Wait and watch. All that stuff is an open door for further expansion later.
>> There are already some 'studies' about rise in 'unhealthy' content. Sadly,
>> this neglects to account for the /fake/ marketing blogs Microsoft sets up
>> through the agencies it hires.
> 
> I watched a program earlier today on MSNBC about the rise in "teen
> beatdown videos" on YouTube, and one of the pundits interviewed on
> there stated that the internet is to blame, when clearly it's more of
> a parental issue than an internet issue. The actions of most teens is
> a reflection on how well their parents have raised them, and it's
> clear that the teens in these videos have parents who are either too
> busy to care or have the time to care but just don't care. This is
> also typical of Bill O'Reilly's "Policing the Net" segment on his TV
> show where be basically advocates government censorship of the
> internet.

Watch the video interviews where Chomsky explains the need to brainwash people
(industry-imposed pseudo 'education') because controlling them is harder once
they find out the truth and rebel. The Internet is liberating... a
little /too/ liberating in some people's eyes.

- -- 
                ~~ Best of wishes

"One smaller motivation which, in part, stems from altruism is
Microsoft-bashing."
                --Vinod Valloppillil, Microsoft
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkiCTLwACgkQU4xAY3RXLo53MgCgs3cyaxNxApi3V6hvj4MfJQzA
xL4An3ba03q3OOTDp8GWztc8P5GyZV7c
=ALqr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index