RIFA wrote:

chee wrote:You don't mess around with my internet. It's the only public space, aside from real life, where I can say what I want and post what I want.

Not really. Some people said "snob" and got burned. I think Internet is already censored by the same people who claim it's freedom of speech.

Following privately owned and operated forum rules and internet censorship are two different things entirely. When you enter a privately owned forum, you have to obey the owners/operators rules or live with the consequences.

Crazy Eight wrote:Following privately owned and operated forum rules and internet censorship are two different things entirely. When you enter a privately owned forum, you have to obey the owners/operators rules or live with the consequences.

It was a joke Mr. Eight. I don't wanna go further into the discussion with the "snob" thing because it's old. But so do you know, 99% of the internet is owned by someone. 99% of the forums are privately owned. Therefore, 99% of the internet is censorshiped because of these private owners.

Now... which is the badder thing? Being censored by private owners for the most ridiculous things? Or being censored by the government in CERTAIN valid aspects?...

I do think the second part sounds better. I'll accept nazi websites being forbidden and censored but I won't accept someone using a word like "apple" as, a somewhat satire, to be punished harshly because somebody, more or less in charge, decided that that specific word is an insult for him and that he can apply the law however he sees fit because he's the "private censorer".

So at the end of the day, it's really a choice between state censorship and private censorship. State censorship being more out and in the open while private censorship being different from case to case and having no rules or parameteres.

People who think the internet isn't censored yet don't know what they say. Just because I can type here "gov can suck it" or "let's occupy sesame st today" doesn't mean that I'm free. I can say that out in the public too and nobody would give 2 cents. Matter of fact, Internet is the most CONTROLLED form communication in the world. Why? Because it's so EASY to be controlled. Get the private owners and just add more to your large database if you're the NSA.

Real life is the closest place to freedom as in it's pure form. Internet is far from what people think of it.

I can't believe that is the same Uncle Sam who routinely criticises China for restricting the Internet.

The Tories had proposed a similar plan after the riots in London, but shelved it later after universal outrage.

What exactly will be censored on the internet? Because I have nothing to say, except for perhaps 'I prefer Mann to Kubrick', that needs to be censored.

christophmac wrote:What exactly will be censored on the internet? Because I have nothing to say, except for perhaps 'I prefer Mann to Kubrick', that needs to be censored.

Some sites probably that support ideas or concepts that are forbidden in the day-to-day society. Torrent sites and so on. Nudity pics on social platforms etc.

So... at the end, like I said, this ain't much of a big deal since the internet is already censored.

RIFA wrote:

christophmac wrote:What exactly will be censored on the internet? Because I have nothing to say, except for perhaps 'I prefer Mann to Kubrick', that needs to be censored.

Some sites probably that support ideas or concepts that are forbidden in the day-to-day society. Torrent sites and so on. Nudity pics on social platforms etc.

So... at the end, like I said, this ain't much of a big deal since the internet is already censored.

Not much if you know where to look for whatever you are looking for.

Pratham wrote:

RIFA wrote:
Some sites probably that support ideas or concepts that are forbidden in the day-to-day society. Torrent sites and so on. Nudity pics on social platforms etc.

So... at the end, like I said, this ain't much of a big deal since the internet is already censored.

Not much if you know where to look for whatever you are looking for.

Fair enough. I can't think of any good reason to censor the internet.

Apparently they are having hearings about the bill, but are not hearing from any opposing sides. Just the corporations that support the bill. I dunno if its true or not, but if it is....UGH.

Those in support of SOPA? One representative wanted to pass the bill because she was getting bored. Others openly admitted to not knowing how to use the internet. The consensus among them was merely “piracy sounds bad, therefore we should pass this anti-piracy bill” without any further investigation into its deeper implications. Implications that would in effect, destroy the entire idea behind the internet.

^ This is why I would love to be in a room alone with a lot of these "representatives"



The markup was postponed until Dec 21st so they can try and pass this bill quietly.

Fucking scumbag pieces of fucking shit!

CaliKid329 wrote:

Those in support of SOPA? One representative wanted to pass the bill because she was getting bored. Others openly admitted to not knowing how to use the internet. The consensus among them was merely “piracy sounds bad, therefore we should pass this anti-piracy bill” without any further investigation into its deeper implications. Implications that would in effect, destroy the entire idea behind the internet.

^ This is why I would love to be in a room alone with a lot of these "representatives"



The markup was postponed until Dec 21st so they can try and pass this bill quietly.

Fucking scumbag pieces of fucking shit!

Our damn representatives don't represent us, and its pissing me off.