Theresa May to create new internet that would be controlled and regulated by government

crinkleshoes · 19 May 2017 at 19:57

Kenai said:
Not regulation of available information, no, which is what is being discussed.

Quite... the discerning mind can learn so much from reading views they disagree with. Even if those views are hateful.

All censorship would do is put a fake mask on people, it would force them to hide a part of themselves that they may even have the possibility to change if it was exposed. All that does is increase the hate and division and is a severely negative concept.

crinkleshoes · 19 May 2017 at 19:58

Tefal said:
so based on your posts in here, should the country mvoe towards a racist bent, ie bnp end up the leading party after a series of events.

this system is then altered to be that say supporting equal rights for blacks or wanting immigration to rise is the information that will get you sacked you'd still support its use?

Well put, the concept is in the eye of the regulator.

Trusty · 19 May 2017 at 20:01

crinkleshoes said:
Quite... the discerning mind can learn so much from reading views they disagree with. Even if those views are hateful.

All censorship would do is put a fake mask on people, it would force them to hide a part of themselves that they may even have the possibility to change if it was exposed. All that does is increase the hate and division and is a severely negative concept.

It's not really true though is it. China is pretty censored, far worse than us, yet their country doesn't seem to be imploding. They have actually created an internet which is far more advanced than the western one, it's why silicon valley is taking pages out of their books.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/technology/china-mobile-tech-innovation-silicon-valley.html

crinkleshoes · 19 May 2017 at 20:03

Macro said:
The thing is there is censorship anyway, it's just carried out by large corporations like Facebook/Google/Twitter/ISPs at their own whim based on their commercial interests.

I'm not saying censorship is the answer, I just struggle with the righteous indignation of some posts as if there is no censorship in everything we do every day anyway.

The difference is that there is a choice in that censorship.

They are trying to take away the choice.

crinkleshoes · 19 May 2017 at 20:06

Trusty said:
This is the ridiculous leap though, your thoughts are not being censored. You can think about murdering someone if you want, no police is going to come to your door and stop you, now if you start yelling that at the top of your voice then someone has to step in otherwise an innocent person is taken away from their life.

There are many more occasions where people threaten and never follow through... you'll find thousands of cases of that tonight across the country as people drink especially. They should all be arrested for thinking/expressing it without anything bad actually happening?

You've seen the film Minority Report... right?

opethdisciple · 19 May 2017 at 20:06

WHAT????

As if it wasn't bad enough. Out with this pillock.

StriderX · 19 May 2017 at 20:06

Trusty said:
It's not really true though is it. China is pretty censored, far worse than us, yet their country doesn't seem to be imploding. They have actually created an internet which is far more advanced than the western one, it's why silicon valley is taking pages out of their books.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/technology/china-mobile-tech-innovation-silicon-valley.html

Really? The origins of highly unsocial social apps is your idea of advanced?

Sad is the word your looking for.

Rroff · 19 May 2017 at 20:08

opethdisciple said:
WHAT????

Hey none of that hate speech now! if only we had a way to censor it.

Trusty · 19 May 2017 at 20:08

StriderX said:
Really? The origins of highly unsocial social apps is your idea of advanced?
Sad is the word your looking for.

Did you read the article?

crinkleshoes said:
There are many more occasions where people threaten and never follow through... you'll find thousands of cases of that tonight across the country as people drink especially. They should all be arrested for thinking/expressing it without anything bad actually happening?

You've seen the film Minority Report... right?

Again, this the leap youre putting on me, im not saying people should be locked up for thought crime, why have you even said that. If someone is saying they are going to kill someone, we have police to step to make sure those threats aren't real, that is a form of regulation. I believe in some regulation of certain aspects of society, why is this so crazy to understand. People are cray cray

crinkleshoes · 19 May 2017 at 20:09

Trusty said:
It's not really true though is it. China is pretty censored, far worse than us, yet their country doesn't seem to be imploding. They have actually created an internet which is far more advanced than the western one, it's why silicon valley is taking pages out of their books.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/technology/china-mobile-tech-innovation-silicon-valley.html

It's amazing the developments that can happen from slave labour... especially when the slaves aren't allowed to complain about their slavery without being imprisoned for it.

China is the perfect example why this proposed legislation is so terrible.

Macro · 19 May 2017 at 20:10

crinkleshoes said:
Well put, the concept is in the eye of the regulator.

Do you think the censorship of "the internet" would be to a differing standard than that already applied to media/speech etc outside of the internet? My quick reading of the quote was that content on the Internet should be held to the same requirements as other media etc and therefore would be subject to the same checks and balances. I don't think the UK was particularly censored and repressed before the masses discovered "the world wide internet web" in the early 2000s.

Just to be clear here I should probably say i'm not hugely in favour of censorship although I do think people, companies and groups should be held to account for their actions be it on or offline if it is deemed to contravene the prevailing laws of the land. I just think a lot of the "FREEDOM!!!!" outrage is a little hyperbolic, but what do I know?

It's only a matter of time before someone posts how their grandfather died in two world wars so they could post anything they like. frankly i'm surprised we've not yet seen the quote normally attributed (arguably incorrectly) to Voltaire

Trusty · 19 May 2017 at 20:13

crinkleshoes said:
It's amazing the developments that can happen from slave labour... especially when the slaves aren't allowed to complain about their slavery without being imprisoned for it.

China is the perfect example why this proposed legislation is so terrible.

Have you ever been to China? Which companies use slave labour?

jubei · 19 May 2017 at 20:14

xyphic said:
There are already laws that govern the difference between free and hate speech online, in the same way that there are laws to govern it offline. If you start shouting ISIS dogma on your twitter account, the police will take an interest. The main difference is that it's easier to remain anonymous on the internet, but censoring is *not* the way to tackle the problem.

Yep, check out the police meeting out justice for those that preach hate...

Uther · 19 May 2017 at 20:15

Trusty said:
It's not really true though is it. China is pretty censored, far worse than us, yet their country doesn't seem to be imploding. They have actually created an internet which is far more advanced than the western one, it's why silicon valley is taking pages out of their books.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/03/technology/china-mobile-tech-innovation-silicon-valley.html

Please tell me you're not holding up China as a beacon of light...

Macro · 19 May 2017 at 20:16

crinkleshoes said:
The difference is that there is a choice in that censorship.

There is? You place your faith in standards and imposition of censorship in commercial companies who make billions of dollars every year for using peoples data over a democratically elected government balanced by one of the oldest and most respected judiciaries in the world?

StriderX · 19 May 2017 at 20:19

Macro said:
There is? You place your faith in standards and imposition of censorship in commercial companies who make billions of dollars every year for using peoples data over a democratically elected government balanced by one of the oldest and most respected judiciaries in the world?

One attempts to save its platform, the other barely understands it.

Yes I would and so would a lot of other people when hearing "Terrorist hashtags".

sigma · 19 May 2017 at 20:26

Trusty said:
Have you ever been to China? Which companies use slave labour?

Doesn't China have its own censored version of Google?

crinkleshoes · 19 May 2017 at 20:26

Trusty said:
Have you ever been to China? Which companies use slave labour?

Yes & a close friend of mine has been teaching there for 5 years.

The censorship is a problem to many and yet they are scared to speak out about it for fear of reprisal.

crinkleshoes · 19 May 2017 at 20:26

sigma said:
Doesn't China have its own censored version of Google?

Yes

I setup a VPN for my friend to use when he wants to get round the filter. People shouldn't have to do this, yet the ones determined to get around it will find a way... so the only people it is punishing are the innocent ones.

He's one of the nicest people I know... he doesn't use the VPN for hate speech, to buy drugs, to commission hitmen or anything of the sort... information is so heavily controlled in that country that even basic searches result in heavily biased results.

opethdisciple · 19 May 2017 at 20:26

Trump is doing the same on the US with the abolishion of net neutrality.

Between the two of them we are going in to some dark places.

There are people who will vote for this woman? :confused:

I might move to North Korea.