Democrat Strategist: The Internet is No Longer Going to Be Open?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by B_TonyK8483, Dec 8, 2010.

  1. B_TonyK8483

    B_TonyK8483 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DuPage, Illinois
    Democrat Strategist: The Internet is No Longer Going to Be Open?

    http://www.youtube.com/v/ZrxUynysqRI

    This is an overly inflated controversy, which is clearly being exploited to further the objectives of those in power who wish to silence and censor those who wish to expose their misconduct.

    I kind of had a feeling when I heard earlier about 4-chan launching a denial-of-service attack against MasterCard (in revenge for cutting-off Wikileaks) this that it would be exploited to go after Wikileaks, labeling them as being dangerous and criminal and using this as an excuse to shut them down. I also figured that if Wikileaks was taken down, it would pave the way further Internet censorship.

    Never let a crisis go to waste, eh?
     
  2. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Many websites are taken down for posting information or content that either breaches contracts or is not supposed to be available on a public scale. This is not some sign of potential Internet censorship in any sense or fashion. Websites are hacked all the time, and much of it would be prevented if the companies who ran them actually took time to properly safeguard their servers. But they don't.

    Until our government starts to block web sites from being seen or used by the end user, such as the case of Iran and Facebook when they were having their dispute over the recent elections, then we can talk about censorship. This recent fiasco with Mastercard & Visa is nothing. That is, unless, every country on Earth is going to agree on a set standard for regulating the internet... and we can't even agree where to host the Olympics every two years.
     
  3. b.c.

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2005
    Messages:
    9,264
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1,671
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    at home
    That's right. You figured it all out.

    Having internet criminals hack into and crash financial service websites was all a "Democrat commie" plot, just-so's they can label them as "dangerous and criminal" and then use it as a devilish ploy to shut down Wikileaks and censor the entire Internet as a whole.

    Clever you! :rolleyes:
     
  4. B_TonyK8483

    B_TonyK8483 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2010
    Messages:
    115
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    DuPage, Illinois
    @ VinylBoy,

    I don't know if I can find the source right now, but the US Government did take 80 websites offline...
     
  5. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Yes, please find out which sites they are and investigate as to why they were. Again, nothing to see here. Your internet is not going to be anymore policed or traceable than it already is. And here's a hint for what you'll find: Many of the sites were shut down due to copyright infringement such as RapGodfathers & TorrentFinders. Of course these sites should be shut down. That is, unless, you consider the illegal distribution of music & movies to be "free speech".
     
    #5 B_VinylBoy, Dec 8, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2010
  6. TomCat84

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,497
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    32
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Please at least use the correct term. There is no such thing as a "Democrat" Strategist. The correct term is "Democratic" Strategist.
     
  7. Pitbull

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2006
    Messages:
    3,753
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Many of those site shut downs were actually due to trademark infringements
    (such as selling knockoff NFL team jerseys, Coach, Burburry, Timberland, Louis Vuitton)

    Here is a link for you.
    U.S. Government Seizes BitTorrent Search Engine Domain and More | TorrentFreak
     
  8. maxcok

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,392
    Likes Received:
    12
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Elsewhere
    Yes, I heard about this a few days ago. As of then I thought it was something like 400 sites? If the shutdowns are legit and follow established legal procedures, I don't have a problem. I'm just not sure what those legal procedures are and how they came to be. Not saying they're illegitimate, I just need to know more before forming an opinion. I'm also not clear how selling knockoff Louis Vuitton handbags falls under the purview of ICE Homeland Security, much less being given such high priority.
     
  9. midlifebear

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    5,908
    Likes Received:
    11
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nevada, Buenos Aires, and Barçelona
    Well, you might want to check out the following link before everyone gets all comfy and uninterested: WGAE - Take Action

    And you're welcome.
     
  10. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,879
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    598
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    Come off it. The ability of states to control the internet is growing all the time. Just look at the attack on wikileaks which must be being run by the US government. Either using law to close down sites they dont like or direct action. The UK just voted a big budget increase for doing this.
     
  11. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    Please. Your nationalistic beliefs are not going to trump thoughts that come from someone with actual professional experience in the development of websites for major corporations and the legal law. You need to come off it. This isn't the first, nor is it the last time ANY corporation or country goes to war against a website for some reason. It's been going on around the globe since the very beginning of the world wide web. Again, NOTHING TO SEE HERE.

    Besides, it wasn't that long ago that T-Mobile in the UK tried to block access to all LGBT sites on their products. T-Mobile In The UK Blocking Access To All LGBT Sites Offensive Or Not - Lez Get Real

    And your country has also proposed legislation that would block the use of certain P2P sites from various ISP - UK Bill Would Force ISPs to Block P2P Websites

    AND, how about Virgin Share deciding to block sites such as Megaupload & Rapidshare - UK ISP Virgin Media Blocks Rapidshare and Megaupload [Updated]

    All stories involving the proposed censorship of the internet from your side of the globe within the last year, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. So I wouldn't be obsessively talking about the US and their issues with net neutrality right now. Grant it, things are fucked up where we live, but don't even think about taking cheap shots on my expense.
     
    #11 B_VinylBoy, Dec 9, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2010
  12. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,879
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    598
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    your expense? do you work in the whitehouse cyber attacks division? I just posted that the US is attacking wikileaks and the UK just upped its budget for cyber crime. I dont know much about, for example, what they are up to in france, or zimbabwe. China is keen on cyber censorship. Did i say the US is the only villain? many governments are keen on this because they see their power slipping.

    You are right, though, that it matters more what the US is doing than the Uk, because the US is in the habit of using its muscle against other countries.
     
    #12 dandelion, Dec 9, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2010
  13. B_Marius567

    B_Marius567 New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    1,952
    Likes Received:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    H.W. BUSH tried to band sex on the internet.
     
  14. B_VinylBoy

    B_VinylBoy New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2007
    Messages:
    10,516
    Likes Received:
    7
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Boston, MA / New York, NY
    You don't have to work in the White House in order to know how some governments, corporations and religious organizations are adamantly taking their shots against what some people post on the internet. Many of them have been slow to the party to realize just how much content about them (good or bad) is on the web. I've designed and tested websites for some of the biggest corporations in the world and one of the things we're full aware of are the small little details that can get any site yanked off the internet. It's been going on since the very beginning of the web and this latest attack on WikiLeaks is nothing that hasn't been seen or experienced before. The OP, however, is trying to propagate this into being some kind of Democratic conspiracy to eliminate net neutrality, and even tried to reference a recent story about how our nation cracked down on websites that were selling & distributing illegal goods as well as engaging in blatant copyright & trademark infringements, as being additional proof to support his doomsday rhetoric. Hence my responses on this thread.

    And what did you say to that? Come off it. As if I don't know what I'm talking about. :rolleyes:

    That's nonsense. Although there are some obvious cases of censorship to point at with China and Iran, not every action taken by someone to take down websites that post inflammatory content about another is not a reason for people to start immediately screaming "censorship", or any other selective buzzword for some quick & cheap societal agitation. Case in point, if someone made a website about your family or business and propagated a negative stance to damage your reputation, you'd want the site removed as well. There's a fuzzy line between what is protected under "free speech" and what is legally punishable as "slander". There isn't a person here who has went through every single document on WikiLeaks to see just how damaging the content they posted really is. Not even I have done it. Therefore, it's premature and foolish to suggest that what's going on is censorship.

    A certain level of mistrust is necessary to keep governments in check. Outright paranoia doesn't help anyone.
     
    #14 B_VinylBoy, Dec 9, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2010
  15. NumberTwentySix

    NumberTwentySix New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    Vinyl is right. This is all a bit of a storm in a teacup. Without getting into file sharing, there is very little that can be censored on the internet, even when a government has near-total control. The Chinese govt. can keep casual searchers from finding anything incriminating, but a serious tech geek can get around whatever barriers they put up (which is why they put them in jail). The same goes for things like the pirate bay, torrents, or other p2p software. Such sites make themselves vulnerable when they try to monetize their services (napster, kazzaa) but if they are just acting as a host for links (torrentfinder) or a board (4chan) there is little that can be done to them. Anyone who wants to protect any kind of content needs to realize the simple fact that once something has been published online it is almost impossible to eradicate it from the public domain.
     
  16. dandelion

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2009
    Messages:
    7,879
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    598
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    UK
    Verified:
    Photo
    i wouldnt say this is about net neutrality, but it is about freedom.

    , and even tried to reference a recent story about how our nation cracked down on websites that were selling & distributing illegal goods as well as engaging in blatant copyright & trademark infringements, as being additional proof to support his doomsday rhetoric. Hence my responses on this thread.

    And what did you say to that? Come off it. As if I don't know what I'm talking about. :rolleyes:

    Perhaps I would, but assuming what they were reporting was true, I would not have any right to take action against them. Nor does the US now. What it is doing is attempting to hide the truth, completely the opposite of what I might try to do against a defamatory website.

    Even if what this website was saying was false, it is questionable I ought to have a right to take them down. What I ought to have is a fair and equal way to state my own version of the matter. The US has all the opportunity it could wish to do this. Truth is, anything it could possibly say publicly only makes matters worse.

    The objective here is to stop it happening again. If the information never gets posted in the first place, still no one would see it.
     
  17. NumberTwentySix

    NumberTwentySix New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    I've dealt with having data for sale on the web. In my experience, while most people have no problem buying it, about 3-5% think that making the purchase gives them the right to put the thing you developed up on their website for free.

    It doesn't matter if you make lines of code, video or audio tracks, images or documents. If you put it online, it can and will be reproduced by others and redistributed without your consent. I think the owners of the material need some recourse against the folks who republish their stuff without their consent. Something more stringent than making a phone call asking them to stop, pretty please, but less like Sony suing some soccer mom for millions because she downloaded 34 Vanilla Ice B-sides.

    It's all very well to say it isn't stealing, since when A makes a copy of B's work, and gives it to C, B still has it. But it is something, since A and C benefit from B's labor without paying B.
     
    #17 NumberTwentySix, Dec 9, 2010
    Last edited: Dec 9, 2010
  18. JackWyatt76

    JackWyatt76 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2010
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Gender:
    Male
    This thread isn't about net-neutrality, it's about the internet remaining open
     
  19. Bbucko

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2006
    Messages:
    7,413
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    58
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Sunny SoFla
    Actually, the OP was banned for having multiple accounts, all of which agreed with each other: agenda anyone?

    Besides, TC caught it early: beware of anyone who uses "Democrat" as an adjective and not just a noun.
     
  20. 123scotty

    Verified Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2009
    Messages:
    564
    Albums:
    2
    Likes Received:
    9
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    scotland
    Verified:
    Photo
    internet censorship is very real. in the uk there are offices only about 25 mls from me that i know look into internet traffic. yes originally under the guise of pedophiles and terrorists. yes that old chestnut. but it has gone way further with all isp's having to keep a six month record of all customers internet history. even worse after London bombings now the local council can check your emails and internet use without notice to the police. and like wikileaks the plug can be pulled when convenient to do so. so to the people who think the internet is a open uncensored. where have you been
     
Draft saved Draft deleted