# Wikipedia shutting down for 24 hours on January 18. **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [January 17, 2012, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765 "2012-01-17T03:29:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Ostrya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/35a633/32.png) [@Ostrya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ostrya)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/61 "2012-01-18T13:51:44Z")
While I agree with you FoieGrasIsEvil that it seems backwards in an ironic way what they’re doing, if it successfully corrals support, encourages enough people to contact their local politicians, the stunt might actually get some results. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/62 "2012-01-18T13:53:45Z")
> [@Inner\_Stickler](#): > > For the same thing most people use it for in academic settings. Getting a quick overview of a subject in order to find useful texts and sources more quickly and as a source aggregator. Oh, well, good. As long as you are teaching to intelligently evaluate sources, it would be foolish to pretend Wikipedia doesn’t _exist_, as all the kids are on it all the time, when they are not going to petting parties in their jalopies, or whatever it is kids do these days. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/63 "2012-01-18T13:55:38Z")
> [@the lone cashew](#): > > While I agree with you FoieGrasIsEvil that it seems backwards in an ironic way what they’re doing, if it successfully corrals support, encourages enough people to contact their local politicians, the stunt might actually get some results. Well yeah, I suppose. I haven’t read this proposed bill…I guess I stupidly have enough faith in the common sense of our politicos to not put something into law that’s a breach of constitutionally protected rights. But the really lame part is the fact that its so easy to work around their little attempt to block access to their site that to me it just engenders more apathy. ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/64 "2012-01-18T14:00:51Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Well yeah, I suppose. I haven’t read this proposed bill…I guess I stupidly have enough faith in the common sense of our politicos to not put something into law that’s a breach of constitutionally protected rights. I think the US Congress has amply demonstrated its willingness to violate constitutionally protected rights… > [@](#): > > But the really lame part is the fact that its so easy to work around their little attempt to block access to their site that to me it just engenders more apathy. The workaround is deliberate and even [noted on the page linked to from the blackout screen](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative/Learn_more): > [@](#): > > **Is it still possible to access Wikipedia in any way?** > > Yes. During the blackout, Wikipedia is accessible on mobile devices and smart phones. You can also view Wikipedia normally by disabling JavaScript in your browser, as explained on this Technical FAQ page. Our purpose here isn’t to make it completely impossible for people to read Wikipedia, and it’s okay for you to circumvent the blackout. We just want to make sure you see our message. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/65 "2012-01-18T14:06:03Z")
But doesn’t everyone see their messages when they are pleading for funds? Why couldn’t they have just done it like that? ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/66 "2012-01-18T14:08:50Z")
> [@Colophon](#): > > [The Oatmeal](http://theoatmeal.com/) is blacked out, though. 🙂 > > “SOPA is like dealing with a lion that’s escaped from the zoo by blasting kittens with flamethrowers.” Absolutely hilarious. Kitten BBQ = BAD. ---
**Author:** ![Moonlitherial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4bbf92/32.png) [@Moonlitherial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Moonlitherial)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/67 "2012-01-18T14:14:06Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > But doesn’t everyone see their messages when they are pleading for funds? Why couldn’t they have just done it like that? Because it’s important and it’s scary and they want people to be inconvenienced enough to take notice. Because as was mentioned earlier in this thread - people’s mothers now know what SOPA is and have a little more information about how it could affect them. The people who can’t figure out how to turn Javascript off - those are exactly the people this is targetting. Those who see an article about SOPA and think “Oh piracy is bad so this must be good” without considering the implications of HOW they’re trying to stop piracy. Also because the media will report on this and they wouldn’t on a nag screen. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/68 "2012-01-18T14:16:22Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Well yeah, I suppose. I haven’t read this proposed bill…I guess I stupidly have enough faith in the common sense of our politicos to not put something into law that’s a breach of constitutionally protected rights. Yes, blind trust in Congress _is_ stupid. 40% of them tried to get a law passed allowing them to imprison people indefinitely _after they were found innocent_. They don’t even need to be acting maliciously - the bill’s own author is not following the requirements of the bill, and according to the absolutely absurd scope of this piece of shit, that is sufficient grounds to have the entire [house.gov](http://house.gov) domain shut down. > [@](#): > > But the really lame part is the fact that its so easy to work around their little attempt to block access to their site that to me it just engenders more apathy. No, the lame part is that you’re completely missing the point. The purpose of what Wikipedia is doing _isn’t_ to block access to their site, it’s to bring SOPA to the attention of the general public. The blackout page is merely the _mechanism_. Once somebody knows to work around the blackout page, the blackout page has already achieved its purpose. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/69 "2012-01-18T14:39:56Z")
OK…I get it…but I fail to understand why politicians in the US government, when presented with a bill that they obviously know is controversial/inherently has bad elements in it/could cause unforeseen repurcussions that there isn’t more of a “hey, wait a minute” attitude about them. **Grumman** I was aware of the previous bill you mention. I did not know that 40% of them voted in favor of it. I am generally politically naive (not to mention I generally detest all things political) but damn…how could that many of them voted for it? What was their rationalization? What’s the rationale for this SOPA bill? Stamping our piracy? Great! Find a different way to do it! ---
**Author:** ![IntelliQ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e99b99/32.png) [@IntelliQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IntelliQ)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/70 "2012-01-18T14:47:44Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > OK…I get it…but I fail to understand why politicians in the US government, when presented with a bill that they obviously know is controversial/inherently has bad elements in it/could cause unforeseen repurcussions that there isn’t more of a “hey, wait a minute” attitude about them. > > **Grumman** I was aware of the previous bill you mention. I did not know that 40% of them voted in favor of it. I am generally politically naive (not to mention I generally detest all things political) but damn…how could that many of them voted for it? What was their rationalization? What’s the rationale for this SOPA bill? Stamping our piracy? Great! Find a different way to do it! Why? Intellectual laziness, power thirst, indifference, money, and a whole barrel full of reasons. Each have their reasons, some a mixture. ---
**Author:** ![Eve](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/9e8a1a/32.png) [@Eve](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eve)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/71 "2012-01-18T14:49:11Z")
> [@](#): > > “SOPA is like dealing with a lion that’s escaped from the zoo by blasting kittens with flamethrowers.” I would think blasting kittens with flamethrowers would be extremely effective. Though of course only experimentation would prove the point. ---
**Author:** ![leahcim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b4bc9f/32.png) [@leahcim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leahcim)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/72 "2012-01-18T14:52:31Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > Ah, I see now. It works if Javascript is off. Well, that’s a cop out. It’s not really down if it’s just using Javascript to block you. Maybe it’s a metaphor for how SOPA will censor the internet enough to be a major annoyance for most people, and despite this still be ineffective. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/73 "2012-01-18T15:36:54Z")
Its not at all clear to me that sites like Wikipedia would be in any danger of going dark under these bills in their current form. I have yet to see an analysis of the actual text of the legislation that convinces me that these bills are as nefarious as they’re being cracked up to be. I’m open to be persuaded, however. On the other hand, I believe that there should be a legal power in some form to effectively order the closure of a website that is nothing more than a conduit for unlawful activity, in the same way that any business can be shut down for similar reasons. I don’t accept on a fundamental level that online entities should be free of the law that brick-and-mortar entities are subject to. Perhaps the methods outlined in these bills aren’t effective, but that isn’t the same as saying that these bills constitute violations of fundamental rights. If anyone knows of an analysis of the legislation that specifically calls out text that is objectionable and offers a compelling argument as to why it’s so awful, I’d love to see it. Barring that, however, I’m worried that Wikipedia and the other blackout sites are wasting their powder on an issue that might not be as critical as it’s being made out to be. This is the kind of tactic that can really be used only once. For those that do stick up for free speech rights on the internet, I hope that this really is the critical case that they are saying it is. ---
**Author:** ![Larry\_Mudd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/f14d63/32.png) [@Larry\_Mudd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Larry_Mudd)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/74 "2012-01-18T15:42:02Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > OK…I get it…but I fail to understand why politicians in the US government, when presented with a bill that they obviously know is controversial/inherently has bad elements in it/could cause unforeseen repurcussions that there isn’t more of a “hey, wait a minute” attitude about them. Pharmaceutical and entertainment industry lobbyists, mainly. ---
**Author:** ![IntelliQ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e99b99/32.png) [@IntelliQ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/IntelliQ)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/75 "2012-01-18T15:49:06Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Its not at all clear to me that sites like Wikipedia would be in any danger of going dark under these bills in their current form. I have yet to see an analysis of the actual text of the legislation that convinces me that these bills are as nefarious as they’re being cracked up to be. I’m open to be persuaded, however. > > On the other hand, I believe that there should be a legal power in some form to effectively order the closure of a website that is nothing more than a conduit for unlawful activity, in the same way that any business can be shut down for similar reasons. I don’t accept on a fundamental level that online entities should be free of the law that brick-and-mortar entities are subject to. > > Perhaps the methods outlined in these bills aren’t effective, but that isn’t the same as saying that these bills constitute violations of fundamental rights. > > If anyone knows of an analysis of the legislation that specifically calls out text that is objectionable and offers a compelling argument as to why it’s so awful, I’d love to see it. > > Barring that, however, I’m worried that Wikipedia and the other blackout sites are wasting their powder on an issue that might not be as critical as it’s being made out to be. This is the kind of tactic that can really be used only once. For those that do stick up for free speech rights on the internet, I hope that this really is the critical case that they are saying it is. It’s ripe for abuse and infringes on due process - even the slightest cursory glance throughout SDMB today will provide you with numerous reasons. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/76 "2012-01-18T15:57:10Z")
> [@IntelliQ](#): > > It’s ripe for abuse and infringes on due process Can you be more specific? > [@](#): > > - even the slightest cursory glance throughout SDMB today will provide you with numerous reasons. Believe me, I’m in deeper than the “slightest cursory glance.” I see a lot of handwringing and doomsaying, but not a lot of reasons. Maybe the handwringers and doomsayers are right – I honestly don’t know yet whether I agree with them – but so far as I am concerned, no one has yet put forth a rational, coherent case on what exactly is wrong with the legislation. There is a lot of emotional rhetoric about “breaking the internet” and such, but I have yet to see how that rhetoric is justified. Maybe you’re right and I haven’t paid enough attention, but even if that’s the case, can anyone offer me a well-thought-out, rational, sound case for these conclusions, with reference to the actual language of the bills? ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/77 "2012-01-18T17:24:35Z")
I too would welcome such an analysis. ---
**Author:** ![ctnguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@ctnguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ctnguy)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/78 "2012-01-18T21:39:20Z")
[Here](http://blog.reddit.com/2012/01/technical-examination-of-sopa-and.html) is an examination of SOPA and PIPA from the people behind reddit. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/79 "2012-01-18T21:48:26Z")
Arkansas Senator Boozman wrote. "Please be assured that I have removed my name as a cosponsor of S.968 and should it be brought to the floor of the U.S. Senate for a vote in its current form, I will oppose it. " Cool. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Lowry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e95f7d/32.png) [@Sam\_Lowry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Lowry)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2012, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765/80 "2012-01-18T22:41:45Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > Can you be more specific? > > Believe me, I’m in deeper than the “slightest cursory glance.” I see a lot of handwringing and doomsaying, but not a lot of reasons. Maybe the handwringers and doomsayers are right – I honestly don’t know yet whether I agree with them – but so far as I am concerned, no one has yet put forth a rational, coherent case on what exactly is wrong with the legislation. > > There is a lot of emotional rhetoric about “breaking the internet” and such, but I have yet to see how that rhetoric is justified. Maybe you’re right and I haven’t paid enough attention, but even if that’s the case, can anyone offer me a well-thought-out, rational, sound case for these conclusions, with reference to the actual language of the bills? [Here’s a description](http://consumerist.com/2012/01/boing-boing-has-gone-dark-heres-why.html) by Cory Doctorow of Boing Boing. I don’t have the bill in front of me, but how I understand it from the articles I’ve read, the issue could be as follows. [ul] [li]There’s an article on cats on Wikipedia.[/li][li]I put some information on Wikipedia, then link the website for Cat Fancy for citation. [/li][li]The article on Cat Fancy I link to is legit, with nothing violating copyright, but elsewhere on the website there’s a video of Sylvester the Cat from Looney Tunes.[/li][li]Warner Bros. (or whoever it is that currently owns Looney Tunes) is upset about the unauthorized posting of a Sylvester short, so they can get a court to take down [CatFancy.com](http://CatFancy.com). They can also take down any website that links to [CatFancy.com](http://CatFancy.com).[/li][/ul] I might be missing something, but that seems to be how it would work. Wikipedia then would be crippled, because it’s difficult enough to keep up with what people are posting directly to Wikipedia; it’d be basically impossible to keep up with what people are linking to on Wikipedia. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wikipedia-shutting-down-for-24-hours-on-january-18/609765.md?page=5)