So? What does that have to do with UK internet censorship?
UK Copyright Lobby attempting to restrict the Internet in the UK
- Thread starter magick
- Start date
So? What does that have to do with UK internet censorship?
This already happens to a huge extent and is put in place already by companies.
I live in Belgium the land of very poor internet services (no movie services, no TV services, no digital radio services) even apple doesn't have a tv or movie section... netflix here means police radar controls on the motorway.
The BBC website blocks all sporting coverage from the UK, even post match interviews even though no Belgian station is covering these matches. (iplayer doesn't work.) I would buy the BBC services if they were payable but they are not due to EU's archic broadcasting rights which is still split by geographic locations rather than by language.
I can get round it by paying per month to be routed through a proxy but this is difficult to monitor (ie only certain sites should go through a proxy) and my VPN was causing me problems but why should I have to go that way in the first place.
So I already live in a country where services are limited unless i'm willing to flaunt the terms and conditions of the service and purchase it by other means.
Not through government intervention by through necessity.
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 3 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 1,670
- Location
- Glasgow, Scotland
He specifically mentioned using a US based VPS to route his traffic so the UK govt cannot censor him
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,781
Exactly and when you extrapolate out it ties in.
The UK government says we are censoring the web ("it's the right thing to do"), first it'll be blocking by the ISP so people will navigate around it like they do in China etc.
Then the VPN/TOR software will become illegal, or only for commercial/corporation use, then it'll just be a quick phone call to the USA to get all the records of UK customers who have bought the software from American VPN providers.
I know this sounds like a conspiracy nutjobs dream, it's not meant to and I'm not ranting for the sake of it - and I'm not a conspiracy fanatic either. I just see the way things are going and they are only getting worse.
I don't know if it will happen, I'm certainly not saying it will - but the systems are there to certainly make it possible.
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2004
- Posts
- 3,651
- Location
- Dublin, Ireland
This already happens to a huge extent and is put in place already by companies.
I live in Belgium the land of very poor internet services (no movie services, no TV services, no digital radio services) even apple doesn't have a tv or movie section... netflix here means police radar controls on the motorway.
The BBC website blocks all sporting coverage from the UK, even post match interviews even though no Belgian station is covering these matches. (iplayer doesn't work.) I would buy the BBC services if they were payable but they are not due to EU's archic broadcasting rights which is still split by geographic locations rather than by language.
I can get round it by paying per month to be routed through a proxy but this is difficult to monitor (ie only certain sites should go through a proxy) and my VPN was causing me problems but why should I have to go that way in the first place.
So I already live in a country where services are limited unless i'm willing to flaunt the terms and conditions of the service and purchase it by other means.
I use this to watch iPlayer in Ireland, It should work for you too.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65774021&postcount=99
Nate
I know, but my point is who cares if the US know your details or are viewing the traffic? They can't do anything apart from shut down your £2 VPN.
That's about as much use as an e-petition.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Labour were notorious at passing knee jerk laws. That one being the craziest. Me and Mrs. LordSplodge like a bit of, er, well lets just say it involves things like cat 'o nine-tails. yet if we record this now we are committing a crime? I mean WHAT THE ****
I regularly write to my MP and have done so with regards to this and my MP has passed the letter on to Ed Vazey. In fact I'm such a regular activist that I think my MP is sick of writing to me (but he always does)
It's a very slippery slope the moment you push the child porn button. ie...
Fair enough to ban paedo sites....
Then it's also fair enough to ban torrent sites etc, since they may contain child porn.
But then one can proxy/vpn out. So we need to close those off too to protect the children.
Dont then forget that paedos may OMG congregate and discuss their vile perversion on internet forums and boards. Better ban that too.
And all your instant messenges need to be "filtered" and monitored just in case the other person you're talking to is "grooming" you, or you're swapping strategies on how to be a paedo.
Soon, we'll be only left with a white list of sites "allowed" and heavily policed/censored so the "children are protected".
The key here is not to censor at all, but to use the EXISTING legislation to punish those who have, supply and access such filth.
And that would largely depend in them being US companies or just companies from another nation that have leased a server in the US... And that they keep logs (a large proportion don't).
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Yeah but if you try to argue against this you must be a paedophile as only paedophiles would be against "protecting the children"
*ponders*
I wonder if entertainment sites and the RIAA/MPAA/BPI websites would get blocked under the copyright infringement law that they propose?
http://www.dailytech.com/Major+Reco...y+45M+USD+for+Pirating+Music/article20632.htm
I wonder if entertainment sites and the RIAA/MPAA/BPI websites would get blocked under the copyright infringement law that they propose?
http://www.dailytech.com/Major+Reco...y+45M+USD+for+Pirating+Music/article20632.htm
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,781
LordSplodge said:
That, my kinky friend is exactly what I'm saying. Here's the clever (insidious) bit though...the government would say "No no, we aren't trying to tell people what they can do in their own homes" it's only for EXTREME acts involving serious harm to various body parts (between consenting adults remember). The clever bit is that the limits between serious and non serious aren't defined and it's up to a judge or jury to decide.
Juries are made up of the public who (many of) read the red tops who love nothing more than a kinkster to point the weirdo/freak finger at.
More frightening is that there have been several situations (sorry don't have links at the moment but I do remember reading them) where people have been searched or had the Police raid their house looking for (for example) drugs, not finding anything but they get them with this new law, where the images were held perfectly legally before.
It gets better...OK you think, I'll encrypt my naughty files so no-one can see them. Ah yes, but you have to tell the Police your password or you could find yourself in jail...and if you do tell them your password you could find yourself in jail anyway.
LordSplodge said:
Good to hear but personally in situations like this I don't think it makes any difference, the newspapers make the policies in these instances.
Exactly - the thing to push the emotive button with the public is either paedo, benefit scrounger, immigrants, or terrorists.
Yeah but if you try to argue against this you must be a paedophile as only paedophiles would be against "protecting the children"
Double exactly.
No you can't police the internet but you can police *access* to the internet - take the Arab Spring, I think it was Egypt that with a press of a button cut internet access for the whole country while it was going on.
Yeah but if you try to argue against this you must be a paedophile as only paedophiles would be against "protecting the children"
Ban children from the net.... have the internet connection rated 18+ and have the parents sign a waiver which absolves the ISP from any legal responsability should a minor be using the net.
I am fed up telling parents about how unsafe even youtube is for kids yet i see kids use it all the time.
Mums are the worst offenders as they simply don't know about the dangers.
Bring back the Soviet Union. No one cared a toss about these things before the Berlin Wall came down..
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
If, hypothetically speaking I like red welts left on my behind after a good whipping what business of anybody's but mine and Mrs LordSplodge? I like the fact if we recorded this for, er, future entertainment we are now criminals making extreme pornography. It's bat-**** crazy.
Even more so if the Police can collect this when searching for drugs, I mean that's not what the warrant is for but it really doesn't surprise me. It has always been a governments wet dream to control what its citizens can do and think. The law on encrypted files is a perfect example - can't have hidden secrets form the Government, now can we?
Fixed that for you...
Soldato
- Joined
- 6 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,781
Yup, as I say, it's gone utterly utterly crazy and most people don't realise it unfortunately.
There's some more information here and here, I warn you, that first link will leave you steaming...and remember government policy that affects 60,000,000+ people has all stemmed from that.
Where's Magick gone? You started this thread, lets have some of your opinions apart from it doesn't affect you personally.
There's some more information here and here, I warn you, that first link will leave you steaming...and remember government policy that affects 60,000,000+ people has all stemmed from that.
Where's Magick gone? You started this thread, lets have some of your opinions apart from it doesn't affect you personally.