Ask Your Question today
From what I've gathered, Senate is trying to past a bill that will allow corporations to be able to censor the internet and delete URLs! Sites like tumblr and reddit are getting people together, so they can protest by saying "No".
| No, I don't agree | 50 | |
| Yes, I agree | 24 | |
| Bollocks! | 20 | |
| I'm packing my bags and moving! | 26 |
Actually it is YOUR job as a parent to monitor what you children are viewing online, NOT the Governments. YOU have the power as the Parental unit to pull the plug, and block certain sites. Because you FAIL as a parent does not mean that WE have to suffer.
The censorship bill can also censor/destroy websites such as " Is it normal?" and other sites as well that are not vulgar in any sense. Any web site that is deemed " Not PC" can and will be taken down. That is a violation of our Constitutional rights. The internet is a part of our free speech, take away out free speech online and we will be no better off than China.
My advice, start being a parent and stop expecting everyone else to do your job.
So anyone who disagrees is simply immature and irresponsible?
Bite your tongue.
And in your view (according to you replying to the original reply up there) anyone who agrees with this inevitable bill are retards?
Shut your mouth!
Where in my post did I say that I agreed with the post you replied to? In fact, where did I state my opinion on the bill at all? All you have done is assume. Please leave your emotions out of this.
On the EXACT same token I was originally replying to the original post, when all of a sudden YOU said that to me (actually you asked at least)
Under your logic, I should have said where in the post does it say that anyone who replies is irresponsible?
If you look at the reason why I put that in, it was ONLY because I was reflecting the ORIGINAL posts words back onto him.
ie Normally I don't just willy nilly go about saying this on ANY post!
You just caught in the crossfire I think.
Maybe so, but the Bills also will fine and censor legal sites, and open the door for corporate abuse.
I agree.
Definitely sites (even such as this one) may be victimized due to some (or many) posts that don't fit the 'Bill'. I'm sure that the Administrator here would appeal such a decision and in time it would be back up again (possibly under stricter policy) I only use 'this' site as hypothetical general example.
But 'corporate' abuse.. This is one of those huge areas that we could get all tangled up in words.
This type of 'censorship' has already been created in other countries, and the 'people' are still living their lives normally, still with information overload on the web.
Think of this 'Bill' as an insurance that the politicians can't be attacked for doing nothing. Sites will still be accessible everywhere (I mean websites pop up overnight, the process to stop the 'illegal' sites takes longer) So its just a screen to make others feel secure and the people in power are seen doing the right thing.
I don't feel that large corporations are as safe as they once were (to do anything) Most changes are transparent, and usually (these days) when a corporation tries to affect many individuals/groups, it will still be posted on the web the next day, for all to see.
The 'control' area still seems to the religious 'corporations'. I have no idea why there aren't more restrictions in this area alone. The 'constitution' was not made to allow the abuse of others. If you are concerned about corporates I'd suggest you look at your own church (money making enterprise) first. They should not be exempt from allowing illegal activity promoted all over the web. Keep religion out of politics in my view.
I'm immature and irresponsible, ofc, what else, and if bringing kids to this world stupifies me and cause me to willingly give up my rights, thanks for the heads up btw, i will reconsider. Which illegal site i want to keep up? All. Who the fuck is going to define what is illegal and what is not? What is next? Censoring newspapers?
I do not get malware, i can protect my computer, I do not need any bigbrother.
There's your defense guys.
In a nutshell!
@BoredGuy, know this, its inevitable anyway.
As for defining which site is good or bad, there will be an appeals area that allows users to state why the site should not be taken down. Yes true it takes about 6 weeks to turn a decision around, but theses are just teething issues, as the months and years roll on you'll thank those that agreed to this sensible act.
I'm happy that human spirit will always be able to fight back and break their chains to freedom. Enslave the net, and something else will appear to remind us we are humans and not some kind of ant colony. I will be never thankful for any freedom taken away from me, for any reason, even if it supposedly made me "safer". Herds needs a shepherd, and i'm not even a sheep.
Yes, what's all these other legal crimes that stop people just going around shooting people for fun?!
Geez, I wouldn't want to live in your idea of 'freedom' (ie without laws like this one that is coming in) I live in a society. You can go crawl under a rock if you like.
"The land of the not so free" I believe is the phrase for the USA.
You people just keep getting funnier to the rest of the world. How many more liberties do you need taken away before you realize you have a dictatorship and not a democracy ?
Is that why there's a banner covering the title of this site?! What the hell is happening!? We're all going to turn into robots soon...or maybe the world will end next year.
I know very little about it, so I am not at liberty to give an opinion or lend support to either side.
What I will say is that I seriously doubt that the government would pass a bill that would shut down any URL for any reason. A reason would ALWAYS be given, such as because the information on it is dangerous or contains illegal material. The government would be able to shut down these sites much more quickly.
I don't KNOW this for a fact, but I think the way the bill is being described in media is ridiculous. The idea that the government would go on an internet "killing spree" is laughable.
The US govt. can incarcerate US citizens without a trial. The US govt. can MURDER US citizens without a trial. Now they can take away first amendment rights...
Anyone with any knowledge of history - please tell me what other governments / leaders had these powers?
If it passes, you better believe I plan to leave this country a little bit sooner than expected.
These crazy old men are ruining what used to be a decent country. I can't wait until my generation is up there making the laws.
Oh god this Dad guy 10/10 guy would rage again. This guy HAS to be a troll...or a republican haha. Nobody is this stupid.
the united states of hitler .. watch it folks, they might even take your computer away, and give you 12 lashes, lol ... the thing that seems f'd up to me, that every law that is served, they collect money in fines, and we get poorer in paying .. a new law is passed everyday in the united states .. and in another 200 more years probably, you broke the law by walking out your front door, then by the time you get to work, you have 4 more fines to pay, as they keep collecting ...... sorry, but i think the whole darn thing is eff'd up, because no matter what it is, no matter what anybody does, there is always something wrong with it that others tend to push, and a new law is passed again .... example: i'm for the seat belts when it comes to cars, but i wouldn't in force it if i had control ... reason? .. how come the guy on the motorcycle doesn't have a seat belt on? ... and we're safer in the car, correct? ... just another excuse to in force the law and fines to be served, as WE as americans keep right on paying if we so much break any of these laws .. pretty soon, there'll be so many laws, you'll save yourself money just by staying home ....... now that is in my opinion, and i hope i'm entitled to that at least without someone wanting to blast me away for what i said or how i think, and then find a way to have a law against that too .. now i didn't blast anybody here notice, because you and i all have the right to feel the way we feel .. let's at least be free to do that!
Illogical reasoning.
Look a youtube video of your child dancing would not be taken down. If the 'bill' somehow implies this then that's not the intention and it obviously would not be justified EVEN if the bill is passed. ie You could still vote in favor of it.
The next example of same video to this site, again would not be reasonable in shutting the site down. Unless of course in both instances it was somehow pornographic.
The intention of the bill (strangely without reading it) is to stop unwanted sites being accessed. ie illegal sites, spam that type of thing. All good.
And yes by the way, a site would be taken down straight away if anything that was already illegal on the site, after the bill is in place, or at anytime after that if the site decides to allow any illegal activity.
Anyway, that's my logical reasoning.
its the beginning of the end. just wait until they make weapons illegal.
It is inevitable.
Get use to it.
Censorship like this already happens in other countries, they are all ok.
The mere fact that 'Agree' is winning here (as per I posted as well) Maybe IsitNormal can now take down that ridiculous huge black bar, Stop Censorship?
Why do I and others agree?
Because this is for the safety of our children, and if Facebook goes down (an extreme hypothetical unlikely) this means that they have suddenly allowed child porn or something, and Facebook are crazily standing their ground!!!!
Now lose the black bar already!
so essentially whats happening is that riaa will be able to shut down any site hosting any content they think you are using unfairly and instead of disputing it, will draconily shutdown the entire website its on. Since websites will get sick of dealing with the disputes, people will stop uploading any kind of copyrighted content even content that would fall under fair use.
It's similar to what happened here when the courts granted what are known as super-injunctions. They basically said that newspapers are no longer allowed to print the news if the subject of the news doesn't want it printed. And anyone speaking it, even the general public on Twitter (for example) would be in breach of the injunction and face imprisonment.
It didn't work at all. Thousands of people were retweeting things that were subject to injunction. What were the courts going to do? Jail ten thousand people for the crime of pushing a button on Twitter?
The reality portrayed in 1984 is becoming scarily and rapidly more real these days.
I find this a little ironic, due to that fact that, even if it is happening now, actually George Orwell was 27 years late, and if anything we are living on borrowed time. Hardly rapid at all :/
Well it's not like he categorically said it would be in 1984, it's just a warning of what could happen in the near future if we let it.
The book was first published in 1949, a LOT has happened since then, including a shit ton of freedom restricting laws.