1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Net censorship?

Discussion in 'Serious' started by cpemma, 13 Mar 2008.

  1. cpemma

    cpemma Ecky thump

    Joined:
    27 Nov 2001
    Posts:
    12,328
    Likes Received:
    55
    It all seems so petty and vindictive. Trade with China, Russia, and Vietnam is fine, holidays in Cuba must not be publicised. :nono:
     
  2. Spaceraver

    Spaceraver Ultralurker

    Joined:
    19 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    1,363
    Likes Received:
    5
    Bah, just re-host them in sweden or here and be done with it..
     
  3. steveo_mcg

    steveo_mcg What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    26 May 2005
    Posts:
    5,841
    Likes Received:
    80
    Just more fuel for the calls to move IANA/ICANN out of control of the US government and into the control of the UN. I personally don't think its warranted given the fact that the UN takes so long to get anything done however if the US continues to abuse its power/position then it would be untenable to leave such an imported role with them.
     
  4. Khensu

    Khensu likes to touch your special places

    Joined:
    22 Feb 2007
    Posts:
    474
    Likes Received:
    0
    UN = suck. The UN are fairly handy when it comes to a barnload of different nations governing "peace" (in a military way) in certain areas, it really should not concern itself with the interwebs. In fact, it's fairly useless apart from getting killed because of botched rules of engagement (cfr. Rwanda, 1992/3, Belgian paratroopers being blown to bits thanks to politics). To me this is the same as saying NATO should control the interwebs - seriously... if they handle the internet as good as they handles ex-Yugoslavia, we're all pretty ****ing ****ed. Moral highground is only a perception depending on which party you support, remember?

    Laws controlling internet usage should be governed by international law, much like the Geneva Convention (you signed it = you abide by it). Either that or "the server in which the country is = that country's laws apply". Leaves enough choice for both user and governing bodies, and nobody gets to write a whiney blog about how they (well, their servers) were mistreated in this or that country. Choose your servers, choose your laws.
     
  5. steveo_mcg

    steveo_mcg What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    26 May 2005
    Posts:
    5,841
    Likes Received:
    80
    I agree the UN is not the best body to deal with it but the US (at this rate) isn't either. International isn't really any better countires ignore it at will, Iraq invasion git-mo etc, local laws are also difficult for example you sign a five year contract with a supplier a year later the administration changes and new laws are introduced meaning you have to share your customers ips with the local government you either comply or it costs you money to get out of your contract, at least the UN are fairly consisted by virtue of being very very slow to enact anything.
     
  6. Jipa

    Jipa Avoiding the "I guess.." since 2004

    Joined:
    5 Feb 2004
    Posts:
    6,363
    Likes Received:
    125
    If the great firewall of China doesn't work then I'd say no censorship works. Sure you can cut the wires leaving the country, but I don't think that will be done... It's nothing new that USA bosses around other countries and people that don't even live on the same continent, but sure it still pisses me off.

    Recently a sort of censorship was started in Finland. They said to have "blocked sites that contain childporn". Sure this will sound good to the large public that mostly consists of lambs that don't even think themselves when it comes to computers (not like they did anyway), but to me that effectively sounds like they collected a list of /interesting/ sites, that people can just find out and see for themselves. FAIL.
     
  7. Regidet

    Regidet Awesomenesstrocity

    Joined:
    8 May 2008
    Posts:
    50
    Likes Received:
    0
    wow they ended his hosting. so the ALLMIGHTY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA!!! is threatened by a british travel agent. what are we back to the days of stalinist soviet russia.
     
  8. walle

    walle Minimodder

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,777
    Likes Received:
    59
    The irony is killing me here.

    :rolleyes:
     
  9. Firehed

    Firehed Why not? I own a domain to match.

    Joined:
    15 Feb 2004
    Posts:
    12,574
    Likes Received:
    16
    What on earth is ironic about that? That's just a statement of the obvious.
     
  10. freedom810

    freedom810 Minimodder

    Joined:
    3 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    592
    Likes Received:
    2
    Or even Hitlers Germany perhaps?
    This is crazy.
     
  11. walle

    walle Minimodder

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,777
    Likes Received:
    59
    That which to some has been obvious for years has not been obvious to others whereas to some it still remains…unobvious.


    "those who dance are often thought crazy by those who cant hear the music"
     

Share This Page