It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the Internet About to be Censored ??

page: 5
125
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 06:06 PM
link   
Ok so let me get this straight, when the FED prints up money out of thin air that would not amount to stealing? Then we appear compelled to use this money that represents basically just paper and ink as some kind of property purchasing device? Who appears as the real pirate? The FED printing up monopoly money then locking people up whom don't use it or the person whom has something such as information and shares this with others in order to increase happiness, enlightenment, etc? They might as well define talking as illegal because copyrights can be infringed by expressing the memorized instructions of a program. What happens to programmers that have photographic memories, how can you destroy that? I guess you might ratchet up lobotomy and forced psychiatric drugging to force people to learn that sharing was a bad social choice? Which seems the most anti-social, the people talking to one another or the ones paranoid that someone might learn something bad if they talk to strangers? I think the rest of the world knowing this about the US will mop the floor with our leaders. We will become a laughing stock not for our foreign policy but our internal policy as well, maybe this battle just seems pointless to me. People fighting over green bio-survival security tickets because the government tells them to. People not cooperating with each other in fear of violating copyrights as if the new McCarthyism has returned but in the embodiment of an Ideal of reality. These are social constructions, why not just declare everyone a law breaker in America? Seems kind of absurd, ridiculous and foolish to head down a path to encourage stupidity. That would only result in the dissolution of America, states should just secede, create free speech states vs. non-free speech states. Seems that we need to define the difference between authoritartian fascism and freedom. Forget about the old arguments about slavery, secede for freedom, says states can in the Constitution. People in government keep creating all these socially constructed boundaries and forget that they are just exercising their own minds imagination. Cops and ex-military learned how to kill or make bombs, etc, shouldn't they be restricted in their freedom the same way we restrict the information? How do we know they might go rogue? Censoring information ends up making economies crash, crime goes up and overall harm/destructive outcomes pervade. JUst look at the War on Drugs, a complete attempt to destroy the minds of all Americans by telling them they can't control their own bodies or minds.

"As illegal drug use becomes equated with illness, and its coercive control with treatment, the people caught up in this crowd madness--as anyone familiar with linguistics might expect--lose not only their common sense but their sense of humor as well." --Thomas Szasz

I think the control to censor books appears inflamed by the drug war rhetoric, as well as the attempt to control the Internet, they appear spawned by a repressed fear of the self.




posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Internet isn't going to get too cencored, but internet in USA might. There are other countries as well, but as far as I am concerned we are actually getting freedoms of internet written into laws here in Europe. Maybe you people should do a lot more work to get more logical (or reasonable, whatever) people elected.

As already stated, copyright reasons have nothing to do with cencorship.

It is also true that whoever publishes whatever media, has the right to decide what he publishes and what he does not. I'm quite certain that computer magazines are not accused of cencorship for not publishing hardcore banana fetish porn videos. I'm going way over the point here, I know that, but it is quite reasonalbe to expect such a right from a publisher.

Even ATS can delete our posts, even when it does say in terms and conditions that they don't. They have all the right for that. They don't do that, I do trust them in that.

Cencorship requires an agenda against or polarized compared to subject being cencored. Otherwise, there is no cencorship but a decision to not publish instead.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 07:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by bubbabuddha
They might as well define talking as illegal because copyrights can be infringed by expressing the memorized instructions of a program. What happens to programmers that have photographic memories, how can you destroy that?
You are mixing things, talking would not be illegal in the same way that "burning" a CD or a DVD is not illegal, what is illegal (in most cases) is the reproduction. In that way, talking would not be illegal but saying the instructions of a program would be (and is) not only illegal but also (at least in my case, and I suppose in the case of most programmers that do not work for themselves) may go against a signed agreement that says that I, as a programmer, cannot reproduce in any way the code that is created inside the company.


I guess you might ratchet up lobotomy and forced psychiatric drugging to force people to learn that sharing was a bad social choice?
Only when you share something that is not yours. What do you think of anyone using your car anytime they wanted (if you have a car)?

In the case of copyrighted material, the creators of the material live of selling it, so by "sharing" it with others you are limiting the possibility of the copyright holder selling it, and in that way you are "attacking" the way of living (and the means by which he/she lives) of the creator.


People not cooperating with each other in fear of violating copyrights as if the new McCarthyism has returned but in the embodiment of an Ideal of reality.
That does not make any sense, and if you know something about copyright you know it. If you don't know then it would be better if you did not talk about something you don't understand.


Censoring information ends up making economies crash, crime goes up and overall harm/destructive outcomes pervade.
As someone that lived in a country with real censorship, I can guarantee that that is not true, censoring information only limits the information other people get, and when you control what people hear and read you can make them do what you want without the people even understanding what is happening, because they do not have that information.

Once more, I suggest you learn something about the subject, it would be better in every way.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by bubbabuddha
They might as well define talking as illegal because copyrights can be infringed by expressing the memorized instructions of a program. What happens to programmers that have photographic memories, how can you destroy that?
You are mixing things, talking would not be illegal in the same way that "burning" a CD or a DVD is not illegal, what is illegal (in most cases) is the reproduction. In that way, talking would not be illegal but saying the instructions of a program would be (and is) not only illegal but also (at least in my case, and I suppose in the case of most programmers that do not work for themselves) may go against a signed agreement that says that I, as a programmer, cannot reproduce in any way the code that is created inside the company.


I guess you might ratchet up lobotomy and forced psychiatric drugging to force people to learn that sharing was a bad social choice?
Only when you share something that is not yours. What do you think of anyone using your car anytime they wanted (if you have a car)?

In the case of copyrighted material, the creators of the material live of selling it, so by "sharing" it with others you are limiting the possibility of the copyright holder selling it, and in that way you are "attacking" the way of living (and the means by which he/she lives) of the creator.


People not cooperating with each other in fear of violating copyrights as if the new McCarthyism has returned but in the embodiment of an Ideal of reality.
That does not make any sense, and if you know something about copyright you know it. If you don't know then it would be better if you did not talk about something you don't understand.


Censoring information ends up making economies crash, crime goes up and overall harm/destructive outcomes pervade.
As someone that lived in a country with real censorship, I can guarantee that that is not true, censoring information only limits the information other people get, and when you control what people hear and read you can make them do what you want without the people even understanding what is happening, because they do not have that information.

Once more, I suggest you learn something about the subject, it would be better in every way.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 08:30 PM
link   
something seems likely to happen to the internet... One time I brought up ron paul having a campaign in a comments section and they just took it down. I'm pretty that was the reason.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by computerwiz32
This is not really the GOV but it's more of CEOS of big corps that are pushing for this.


Who do you think is in control of the government...?

The people? Nope. Multinational corporations.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 09:06 PM
link   
WOW Alex sure was fired up in that video and he got me fired up too !

i have been wondering when this would be attempted, i remember smelling the Garbage that Al Gore was preaching about internet #2 years ago.

is it really possible for us to stop this from happening ? i hope so.

star and flag from me

[edit on 25-8-2008 by easynow]



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 10:39 PM
link   
This is insane? I would totally believe it. For a long time I've had this discussion that the Net would be the downfall of the media and all the disinformation by one way or another-It makes sense now that they would do anything to stop that from happening.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 10:56 PM
link   
Here's the thing: it's going to happen slowly.

As much as the government fears a massive place where strangers can interact freely, they need it to establish an air of discredibility: whatever's on the internet isn't valid because ANYONE can be on the internet.

Over time, many years, this attitude becomes harder ingrained in the public consciousness, and people start to prefer the e-postage system. You see in a hundred years nobody alive in America is going to remember what it was like before the internet. It's something we rabidly absorb because we understand what this is, we were the generations at the forefront of it's potential. But our children, and their children, will know the internet as a resource and a tool and like every other in our history it will become an exploited part of the machine.

There is hope! We raise our children absolutely insane. Whaddya say!?



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by jimmyjackblack
 


no just creating your own server will not get around such stuff.

your ISP can filter what you see... what you look at.

to get around these you need to find proxy servers which allows you to use another person ISP internet connect this allows you to bypass any filter or restraints .

Now if they go crazy and all over the world starts filtering everything then we would need to make our own satilight and dishes and try to make our own network.

this is the only way I see this. I know for a fact I one time used a proxy server from Arabia which I went on torrent sites this was blocked showing the GOV page saying that this website is against islam and other laws and you are not permitted basicly on torrent sites they have porn ads so they stop anyone from going on the internet on those type of sites illegal downloads ect ect.


So your ISP can filter what you get. Their is no new technology in this usally schools do this.


These are just my thought just trying to share also I flagged this thread Nice find OP.

I also want to add that AT&T and many other network provides are head machos they have alot of control on the internet ect.

I been looking for an NSP or ISP to give me a line since I am starting a website and have a server at my house my current ISP gave me a threat about their policy on servers they don't allow them so I have to shutdown my server and finally found one ISP. While looking for a NSP I found many NSP's and also got to talk to interesting people. One guy I would say was young in his 20's told me some stuff about control on the internet. He told me alot . This was brought up by me saying that I want a dedicated line I can't afford any machos pulling the plug on the line ect.

I saw one nsp pull the plug on a 19 year old who was hosting his website and they done this becuase he was running a website for people who don't bealive in god.

just my thoughts on this subject.

Pleas flag this. If everything fails ATS should get a ISP in Russia and have a website and a proxy server running just in case and then find some way to give the IP address to us so we can proxy to the site.

this would be one way around this only if it's just the U.S

Russia has ISP's I know of that allow anything I mean anything alot of hackers use Russia ISPS because they don't reply to police or anyone.
They have their own lines.



posted on Aug, 25 2008 @ 11:45 PM
link   
I don't believe it's possible to censor the internet. I mean, they can surely try, but there will always be loopholes, backdoors, cracks, hacks, etc. Look to the befuddlement of the recording industry in fighting the technological war against piracy.

The main problem is, that no matter how many people a corporation or government institution has to enforce the censorship - there will always be 10x that many working contrary to their efforts. A single structured organization simply cannot move fast enough to plug all of the holes that innumerable and highly flexible individual users poke in their safeguards. Hell, you can probably expect many of the very people working on implementing such a system to intentionally poke holes in it themselves. Even in China, do you really think that the internet is censored? Perhaps on the surface, but dig a bit deeper and there is a subculture of hackers, phreakers, and mischief makers still surfing happily away on whatever site they wish.

If censorship is put in place, you might have to do some digging, but there will be workarounds developed. I would also expect the number of DDOS and other malicious attacks to increase severely.

Knowledge is power.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 08:27 AM
link   
The TCP-IP architecture is in itself uncontrollable, and that's the good news. People need to know this and stay with internet 1. If there is a peer to peer decentralized architecture in place the internet will always be free. If there is a server centralized system there will always be people trying to take the lions share of control.

People need to realise this and choose technology which is open and difficult to control. Sure, there will always be spying, but if the PTB can't stop people from communicating directly en masse the false flag disinfo state will not survive.

So save the internet people, to save yourselves



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 08:40 AM
link   
I would like to remind that we can always go to encrypted traffic. That way it is certainly impossible for any goverment agency to spy on anything. It matters not that they can break an encryption, because if everybody uses encryption, there will be billions of streams of encrypted streams going here and there.

I'm quite certain they cannot break even 1000 encryptions a hour if we use some 64 bit encryption method. When you have billions of those.. Go figure.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by rawsom
 


Encryption wont help. They will "block" based on IP-address.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Nah...theres no way they would be able to censor the internet. If they do...there will be a HUGE uprising by millions and millions of users all over the Country if not the World. If you watch the YouTube video, the guy is obviously mad over the fact that HIS websites were censored in Britain and that HIS YouTube/Google videos seemingly had their counters removed. The thing is...you need to give space to the other people of the world to have top videos as well...you cant always have the #1 spot because eventually people will want something new. Or maybe the fact is that he has so many comments that dont add up with the video views because they possibly count the views according to how much of the video a person watches. Just going to the page wont count as a video view because obviously you havent watched the video.

Now...he told us why his websites were censored...but how do we know thats the ONLY reason why his websites were censored? Maybe he could have been doing something illegal?



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by computerwiz32
 


The Goverment & Corporations are really one in the same. There are high level goverment officials sitting on the boards of all major corporations around the world. You can no longer look at the two as seperate entities. The gov/media complex is fully aware of the damage that the internet has done in terms of the spread of information and they intend to eliminate the threat one way or another.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   
We cant do anything. These videos with "wake up" is actually quite meaningless. What can we do even when we are awake?

Passing on this video wont help either. You think the governments are going to care what the people think?

As long as the corporations can publish whatever they want, they will be happy, and thats all the governments need.

I dont see any way of stopping this development. Enjoy a free Internet while it lasts.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by SsjDave3
Nah...theres no way they would be able to censor the internet. If they do...there will be a HUGE uprising by millions and millions of users all over the Country if not the World.
No, if it is properly done nobody would notice.

The best way of censoring is not prohibiting you of accessing some data, is to made that data unavailable, preferably in a way that it may look like it never existed.

Suppose, for example, that you wanted to see someone's biography: you go to Google and search for the name, nothing interesting appears, what would you think, that Google (or someone above it) was censoring that information or that the information simply did not exist?

Even if you are certain that the information exists and you say that to someone that does not have the same original information you have, that person will probably say that you are being paranoid.

That is the way censorship works, the people who produce or work with the information know that it exists, the people searching for it know that it may exist, all other people do not care, and that is the power of censorship, the people that do not care with things that do not affect them directly.


If you watch the YouTube video, the guy is obviously mad over the fact that HIS websites were censored in Britain and that HIS YouTube/Google videos seemingly had their counters removed.
I did not watch the video for two reasons:
1 - I hate videos with information that could be read, it's a waste of time seeing a six or seven minute video with information that I can read in two or three minutes.
2 - I don't like people shouting in my face.

As I did not saw it I can not say for sure if this was the case, but I have seen many people considering censorship things that are just technical problems, because they do not know how things work they accuse other people of being behind their problem, and the counter is a good example, I am sure all YouTube video counters work in the same way, not updating every time someone watches it.


Just going to the page wont count as a video view because obviously you havent watched the video.
Or the counter works as the counters I have made, and only counts real accesses, meaning that if you see the page it counts as one hit, but if you only refresh it does not count as a new access because it was not a new access. And as I said above, it probably isn't real time.


Now...he told us why his websites were censored...but how do we know thats the ONLY reason why his websites were censored? Maybe he could have been doing something illegal?
And we really know that the sites were censored?



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 02:30 PM
link   
reply to post by wayno
 


Living in Germany and watching Tonight Show with Jay Leno on NBC home page doesn't work, but i would crawl for any of these limited sites, because the majority of independent blogs are open to everybody worlwide.



posted on Aug, 26 2008 @ 03:39 PM
link   



new topics




 
125
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join