|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2007 8:20 pm
This is something that was brought up in a debate recently. I think that, however much people say they're against it, things are going to go in that direction. Ten years from now we will probably look back on today as the era of freedom on the internet. I wonder how long it will be before you have to submit a social security number, or other national ID number, in order to join sites like this, or myspace, or whatever.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:31 am
I don't think it will ever get to that point as far as sites are concerned, because the internet is International. I do think the possibility exist for having that kind of thing with the Providers, though. AOL, Roadrunner, and pretty much every other provider of internet sevice may require us to submit an Id number or something, because those are based inside individual countries.
Unfortunantly, I'd have to say you're right. Things are heading in that direction. I've already heard talk of Censoring Terrorist sites and propaganda, and we all know thats only the beginning of a long and slippery slope. Soon, anything innapropriate on the internat could get you in as much trouble as anything innapropriate on T.V. Assuming, of course, that we allow it. Internet freedom is important ot a lot of people, so we might very well win this battle, even if the government plays the "we're doing it to fight terrorist" card. Which you know they will. The War on terror is like a second War on Drugs, its giving the government lost of powers it shouldn't have, and they're milking it for all its worth.
In recognition of this, I came up with a slogan. War on the Wars. The "War on the Wars" would essetially be the fight against the War on terror, and the War on drugs. A catchy slogan like that always helps get attebntion, which is exactly what we want.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 10, 2007 4:45 pm
I don't think I'd support a War on Wars. The War on Terror goes both ways: Muslim extremists have declared a holy war against us. I know you could probably argue about who's to blame for that--admittedly we still have troops in odd places that most people don't even know about-- but the fact remains that they pose a legitimate danger.
But I don't really think that will be the reason for increased internet regulations, because laws covering that sort of thing are already in place. It is, for example, illegal to give directions for bomb assembly and directions for using it against people. And we've all heard about conversations from AIM being used as evidence. I'm afraid I don't know the details about those laws, though.
Most of the time when I hear someone talking about increased regulations on the internet, they're talking about sexual predators and the children. I think it will be the argument 'think of the children' that will lead to... I don't know, maybe letting the FCC have at it.
I know myspace was talking about doing something to identify sex offenders, and sometimes employers check on what potential employees do online.... I think at some point in the future sites may require you to prove your identity, regardless of what country you're from.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:30 am
Its true that muslim extremist pose a real danger, but the war on terror is a far greater danger to our civil liberties. Like the war on drugs, it is being used as the basis for governemnt expansion. Our fight against the war on terror would be against increased government powers associated with it, not the War itself. And we could always drop the "s", and go with War on the War, cause I didn't hear any objections to fighting the war on drugs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 6:13 pm
I'm sort of on the fence about the War on Drugs right now. Just to let you know, I tend to be sort of moderate--libertarian with a lowercase 'L.' Which still means that my classmates think I'm cruel and insensitive for not supporting the idea of a nanny government that operates on sky-high taxes. And my slightly socialistic government teacher seems to think I have anarchist sympathies.
Anyway, just thought I should tell you that I'm not actually a member of the Libertarian Party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 30, 2007 8:18 pm
I think internet censorship and regulations could get much worse, like in China where Google China and other big search engines censor search results because the government tells them to. They also have the Great Firewall of China there that the government uses for "monitoring and control." And has anyone ever heard of ECHELON?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 11:12 am
On Muslim extremist websites: it begs the question, if you're going to commit a terrorist attack, wouldn't it be more practical to not announce your intentions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 4:48 pm
FentheRed On Muslim extremist websites: it begs the question, if you're going to commit a terrorist attack, wouldn't it be more practical to not announce your intentions? The websites are more about propaganda then anything else, they're meant to cause fear and waste government resource investagating the claims.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Nov 17, 2007 10:52 am
there are already people undermining our internet freedoms. mainly companies like comcast, which are blocking certain types of internet traffic, preventing certain forms of communication, hindering free speech, violating the first amendment freedoms set out in the constitution. A good analogy for our constitutional freedoms is "Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins." These companies have every right to price their services as high as they wish, but they are in the wrong if they are blocking communication of any sort. Sufficient evidence exists to prove that Comcast, at the very least, is blocking certain types of internet traffic. If the case is that this communication is maxing out their bandwidth, they need to either expand the "tubes", lower their advertised bandwidth, or get out of the internet service provision industry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
