Let’s play we’ll-happily-endure-it-anyway-because-totalitarian-control-powers-are-only-for-our-own-good Bingo.
Which part of the Internet gets clusterfucked next?
I’m having some trouble understanding the story, as it contains a number of vague statements, and the author damages his credibility when he says “the cult of Wikipedia.”
I guess that depends on whether Kevin “Crippling Internet Censorship” Rudd gets it through his thick head that his plan won’t bloody work.
In other “The British are proper fucked” news, has anyone else heard about the British police hacking people’s computers without a warrant?
It’s “El Reg”. Expect bitter sarcasm. Slant and lingo should be taken with a grain of salt. As for the facts, what’s so hard to understand?
The UK is building an infrastructure like the Great Firewall of China. And fucks it up. Again. People’s access to an entire website. Innocent communication gets restricted because fascist dickheads grab for power to control what you are allowed to see and what not. But that’s fine. Think of the children.
The technology is already there. The power to control you is there. Just waiting for someone to use it. How long until content other than alleged child pornography gets blocked? Will those bastards at least fix the collateral damage issue and get their censorship done properly?
As Wiltshire says, The Register is sort of known for that style of writing.
Also, they do have a bit of a hard-on for Wikipedia, most specifically the way that any negative information about founder Jimmy Wales and the history of Wikipedia is instantly removed from the site, and also regarding the tendency of some Wiki moderators and senior editor types to arbitrarily ban people who make edits they don’t like on certain topics, even when the edits are accurate.
If you go to The Register’s website and search for Wikipedia, you can easily find some of those articles.
As for the OP, this is another example of stupid policy regarding the internet. As Grumman says, watch for Australia to fuck things up next. Here’s a recent article about how awful the Australian government’s plan is.
Australia’s government is trying to pull the same shit: http://nocleanfeed.com/
Funny how people always like to talk about how backwards America is compared to Europe, often referring with admiration to Europe’s socialism as a virtue. I think this kind of shit is a great reminder of what happens when you decide to invite the government to take control of your life.
I don’t have any dog in this fight - Norway not being EU - but aren’t you lot having trouble with net neutrality, yourself?
So, a non-governmental body, the IWF, adds certain pages to a blacklist, as they contain indecent images of children. Certain ISP’s (not all of them) within the UK are too zealous with the banning, based on IWF data, and this is somehow like the Great Firewall of China? There is no “censorship” here, nor totalitarianism; get some perspective.
That’s a somewhat different topic related to bandwidth more than anything else, unless you’re thinking of, well, something different.
What? This is a company providing a service to another company that provides a service to customers. Yes, it’s a stupid service, badly implemented, but customers are free to find an ISP that doesn’t implement a stupid filtering policy. What has this got to do with the UK as a whole? Nothing.
Oh, Capt. Ridley has beaten me to it. Still, it bears repeating.
Anyway, I’m on Be internet and can access the wayback machine perfectly fine. I’m a mite peeved that they’ve implemented a silent proxy that’s feeding spoofed 404 errors for blocked sites, however, and will seriously consider switching providers.
Really? Instantly?
‘Accurate’ and ‘cited’ are two different things. ‘Accurate’ and ‘likely to get them sued’ are, unfortunately, sometimes the same thing.
“Perspective” is just a different type of (geometrical) distortion… The filter routers through which your traffic gets hijacked should be the same technology that they have installed in China. Not somehow like. The same. It’s just a different group of people who gets the power to control what you see, though it’s not necessarily used, yet.
Now it’s “indecency”. (Why did you call it “indecent images”? Aren’t we talking about “illegal child porn” anymore? So we’re already at “indecency” as a criterion for blocking? No? That’s not what you meant? Ah. You don’t support the blocking of websites with “indecent images” of children, then? You’re a fucking pervert. How can you defend people’s access to “indecent images”! See how easy this slippery slope is going?) What next?
Sites with defamatory content? Pages from countries where assisted suicide is legal? Forums that describe drug use? Wikipedia’s articles on these drugs? Wikipedia’s articles on explosives? Unlicensed gambling sites? Copyright-infringing sites? Blocks of softporn depending on the local time of day? Stories about skeletons, demons, and evil spirits, because these are “harmful to the psychological health of adolescents”? Political speech that disturbs “public peace and harmony”? These things have all been suggested and/or implemented for blacklisting and regulation of their online accessibility. Lobby groups will happily suggest them again and again, to any blacklist administrators who listen. If the providers have their filter centrals already paid and installed, we may as well make the most of them. Think of the children. Where’s your threshold when you say NO?
You want to switch to an ISP that may not be filtering indecent images of children!? You’re a fucking pervert too. Anyway, you can’t switch if access blocking becomes compulsory. It’s already the case in China. It’s going to be the case in Germany, Australia, and who knows elsewhere. These “customers” won’t get this sort of “service option”. Nah. Can’t see the beginning of total control. Oookay…
Measures like this only foil the newest of the new to the net, so just look at it as incentive for the youth of tomorrow to learn l33t 5k!llz.
Look, take a deep breath, have a nice sleep, maybe a cup of tea, and come back when you’re not acting like a fruitcake. Deep breaths.
Give me a fucking break. It was a term of art, a figure of speech. If you couldn’t work that out, you’re not as smart as i thought.
According to The Register, some of the stuff they delete is both accurate and cited.
And, in the United States at least, accuracy is an absolute defense to a defamation charge.
Look, i have no particular hatred for Wikipedia, and while i read The Reg on occasion, i’m not looking to be their prime defender, so if you’re going to take offense at their position, do it with them, not with me.
Okay, I slept. Had a nice big cup of green tea. I’m still breathing.
And your arguments about “customer service” and “free choice” are still bullshit. Or you’re still a fucking pervert. Your “choice”.
Nope, still distinctly fruity, with a hint of false dilemma on the side.
Maybe switch to Bovril.
Not an ISP that doesn’t block those, but one which says “Page blocked” when it’s blocked and “Page not found” when it’s not found. Doesn’t seem like so much to ask, really.
Cute.
Ah, I was thinking you were going for something more metaphorical than a strict comparison of what hardware was being used to implement the website blocking. Obviously British police forces, because they carry prisoners off to jail, in vans powered by petrol engines, are just like the Stasi!
It’s a term of art, in the legal profession, in the UK. (See here.)
Stop babbling.
Doesn’t seem like so much to ask either, really, not to screw up entire websites when they’re… um, “enhancing your browsing experience”. You think you’ll find an ISP that guarantees proper working error pages when they can’t get even this little detail right? Good luck with that. Aren’t you running out of ISP choices already?
You’re actively seeking an ISP with the potential to accidentally corrupt your service instead of simply leaving your traffic alone. Probably you’d even pay extra. (Well someone has to pay for this stuff. Guess who.) Because they have prettier block notification pages. Like this. And here they call me fruitcake…
Thank you.
A country where the law enforcement creates DNA databases of innocent children, can hack into your computer without a warrant, uses surveillance on suspected litterers and justifies it with laws against terrorists… No, the comparison never suggested itself. Won’t ever, no matter what happens next. You’re right, it’s silly. - Well, suppose a free country was gradually turning into an intimidated surveillance society where people become controllable through Stasi-like police powers. If this was happening, in what ways would it become apparent?