internet censorship

[someguy]

So should the internet be censored to any extent? Should we allow decapitations to be put onto the internet? I'm not going into the capabilaty beacuse thats hard to do but if there should be any. Feel free to say its insane as if you look for stuff that is suppposed to be censored you can find it as shown by a news story I saw a while back I'll look and see if I can find that.

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

So should the internet be censored to any extent? Should we allow decapitations to be put onto the internet? I'm not going into the capabilaty beacuse thats hard to do but if there should be any. Feel free to say its insane as if you look for stuff that is suppposed to be censored you can find it as shown by a news story I saw a while back I'll look and see if I can find that.

ARTIFICIAL MOD NOTE (BECAUSE I'M NOT REALLY A MOD):

Censoring this thread.

Dave

 

[heretic888]

So should the internet be censored to any extent?

No.

 

[Cryozombie]

The internet IS censored to an extent.

Not that you cannot find the censored material, but they tend to crack down on people for having it online.

<Ahem> napster anyone?

I personally don't believe in censorship, but then again, there are some things you have to question the "legitimacy" of having online...

Copywrited films, Child Pornography, Lists of peoples Credit Card Numbers, etc...

Do they have a place on the net, or should they be censored?

 

[Touch Of Death]

I think internet censorship is going to happen but once again we are going to have to build even more prisons to house artists and photographers who depict adults as looking to young or super impose a child's photo onto a pre existing pornographic background, or simply write an inapropriate caption under the picture of a mother & daughter / father & son ect. Pete Townsend found out what happens when you use a server that has a bad rep. Its a new witch hunt for the criminal justice system to grow and prosper; its resources are endless.
Sean

 

[MisterMike]

I think a lot of ISP's are already doing that. Most will not let you host certain things that are contraband according to their end user/license agreement.

 

[Cruentus]

Censorship? No thank you.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Countries like China, Iran and other repressive nations already try to block content.
It doesn't work.

Online gambling is illegal in many parts of the world, yet it florishes in other friendly nations.

Should the internet be filtered, censored, etc? No.

Does that mean I condone graphic violence, rape, torture, etc? No.

I also don't care for certain types of music...I simply choose not to view/read/listen to them. I see the net the same way. I don't care for 'hate' sites, so I don't visit them.

For some extra information, visit http://www.peacefire.org/ on how to deal with blocking software.
Also of note: http://www.2600.com/
- Note: visiting these sites may cause problems with your IT department.


Now, with that said, a community is within its rights to determine what is allowed and not allowed. If you don't agree with a communitys ideals, you are usually free to go elsewhere. The larger the community, the harder it is to define things.

IMHO.

 

[Michael Billings]

Things I would censor (not that I believe in censorship)

Kiddy Porn
Snuff Films (the real deal)
Pop Up Adds
ALL MICROSOFT ADS
etc.

-Michael

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Ignoring whether it's practical or enforceable to censor the internet, I definitely think that it shouldn't be censored.

The internet is, basically, just another forum for expression. Besides, which group or community's standards of "filth", "vulgarity", or "immorality" would you use? The internet crosses so many nations and cultures that there's really no set standard to use in judging the acceptibility of content.

I'd only allow censorship insofar as the content itself directly causes harm or damage to someone. Porn is, of course, the perfect example. Pictures or videos of kids having sex, or nonconsensual videos, I wouldn't allow, but someone making a video of two CGIs going at it doesn't cause any harm other than that of people being offended by it.

I'm sure I'll have to rethink things later on, but as it stands now I think that, direct harm not being involved, the internet, as a forum, should be as uncensored as any other form of expression.

 

[Spud]

Consider the WWW is world wide web. There is a wide continuum as to what is socially acceptable across the world. Who sets the standard? The US? Cuba? North Korea? Denmark? Saudi Arabia? Maybe my friend in Nairobi Oil Ministry :wink:

Private networks such as AOL and CompuServe exist and are an option and subject to the social standards of their owners, but they aren’t exactly growing, nor do they have the content (be it good, bad or ugly) of the web.

One interesting thing I do is visit the various Yahoo news sites, Italy, India, UK etc just to see how Yahoo edits their content for photos based on the different target audience.

 

[Rick Wade]

maybe a rating system then you could set your kids computers and such. Just a thought.

Respectfully

 

[RCastillo]

I agree with Kaith, it's way too late. People are gonna do what they wanna do. That is why Organized Crime thrives here. They fill the need that people have. Unhappy? Turn the channel. :idunno:

 

[Cryozombie]

This is a really sticky subject too, because if you ban, Item A, which needs to be banned, how long before you ban B, then C, then D-Z.

The ONLY problem I have with the idea of "No Censorship" on the net... some things SHOULD NOT BE AVAILIBLE TO THE PUBLIC

If you think ANYTHING and EVERYTHINGshould be allowed... Please Post your Credit Card Number and Expiration dates here for me!

 

[Makalakumu]

This is a really sticky subject too, because if you ban, Item A, which needs to be banned, how long before you ban B, then C, then D-Z.

The ONLY problem I have with the idea of "No Censorship" on the net... some things SHOULD NOT BE AVAILIBLE TO THE PUBLIC

If you think ANYTHING and EVERYTHINGshould be allowed... Please Post your Credit Card Number and Expiration dates here for me!

Maybe its a personal responsibility to keep personal information secret. One does not have to use the net at all if they do not want to.

 

[Rich Parsons]

Maybe its a personal responsibility to keep personal information secret. One does not have to use the net at all if they do not want to.

This is true, yet you bought something from me over the phone or over the internet. Do, I have the right to put that information including CC numbers and exp dates, as well as what you purchased on the net? It would only be used by me and my associates for reference? yet it is available now for others.

Just A thought

 

[Cryozombie]

Maybe its a personal responsibility to keep personal information secret. One does not have to use the net at all if they do not want to.

Exactly, but on a daily basis I have access to over 6000 CC#s from our client database... Even if they took personal responsibility to keep their information secret, it doesnt mean I would...

I could potentialy distribute all that information to anyone who chose to visit the website that I put it on, and if it wasn't illegal for me to do so, well... would you want that?

 

[Makalakumu]

This is true, yet you bought something from me over the phone or over the internet. Do, I have the right to put that information including CC numbers and exp dates, as well as what you purchased on the net? It would only be used by me and my associates for reference? yet it is available now for others.

Just A thought

I think that if that were the case, I would make the choice not to buy anything over the phone or on the internet. If someone would like to risk their information in that way, it is their choice.

Much of this discussion comes down to personal choice. Should we limit that choice to protect people from the consequences or should we stay away and let people sink or swim on the choices they make.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I think that if that were the case, I would make the choice not to buy anything over the phone or on the internet. If someone would like to risk their information in that way, it is their choice.

Much of this discussion comes down to personal choice. Should we limit that choice to protect people from the consequences or should we stay away and let people sink or swim on the choices they make.

Ok limit yourself. Yet, take it one step further, you can say as Techno did, his cmpany has lots of numbers on their site. What if that became public. What of the store you bought from sold the numbers?

The point is that some things should be kept private as possible. Yet it is impossible with the exception of not having any numbers, and using cash only, including not paying taxes or having a standard job. So, the slippery slope of what should be on the net, and what should not be is just like the first post stated. How long after A is removed or not allowed that B is not allowed. Yet if you do allow everything then you open yourself up to total chaos as well.

This means you need a very active closed loop system, where those involved monito themselves and the system and give feedback to correct or adjust deviation from what is acceptable or not.


:asian:

 

[Makalakumu]

I think the fact that distributing personal information is illegal tells us that if it was not illegal the system could not function. If peoples personal information was at risk, people wouldn't use the internet for trade/purchases. So, perhaps the censorship of peoples personal information is a fundamental rule of a system. The system could not exist with out it. Are there any other fundamental things that need to be censored?

Rich - If my personal information was at risk if I put it on the internet, would I be limiting myself or protecting myself with choice not to use the system? My point is that risk means something different to everybody and some people are willing to risk more then others. Is this something that needs to be uniform and mandated?