Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

The Government's Plan To Kill Independent Web Sites

page: 3
174
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   
This legislation will accomplish nothing. I believe what would happen when you visit a website, is that a very long disclaimer message will pop up. If you check no, the page won't be displayed. If you check yes, the page will be displayed. Therefore, everyone checks yes.

Secondly, many websites will chose to re-locate overseas rather than face additional threats by the US government. In most cases they can simply move their equipment overseas. Either way, our high-tech website jobs will be going overseas. For medium sized websites who will actually be affected it will be a choice between popping up an annoying message and moving overseas. Only some small websites have tracking cookies. Personally mine are automatically deleted.

Governments have no business regulating the internet in any way, shape, or form. They never have and never will. It just causes problems. Alternative news may get slightly hindered by this legislation but the chance such a law will kill most independent media sources is simply zero.




posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 05:31 PM
link   
There are some good reasons for what the goverment wants to do.

One is so that they can get to people who are making threats online in an expiditous manner.

The other one is bit touchy, as this website is very guilty of this. There is a huge amount of hate and misinformation on ATS. Sites that don't attempt to curb this and set the record straight according to available evidence aren't good for the public as a whole. They just continue to perpetuate lies and create a huge amount of disillusion based on those lies. Freedom of speech and opinions are one thing, continuing to spout propaganda which goes againt all factual information is another.

I think ATS moderators would do well to discourage opinions which are formed based on a false set of facts. Failure to do so is the opposite of the ATS stated mission which is to deny ignorance.

Everyone wants to blast the mainstream media for doing the same thing. Why nothold ATS and similar sites to the same standard?



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
This system is being rolled out in the UK under the title "Phorm Scheme"

The House of Lords like it


Government advisors recognize the beneficial role that online advertising technologies like Phorm’s can have on the future of the internet.

blog.phorm.com...

However it seems that the majority of the public here in the UK definitely don't like it!!

it is the simple idea that a third party will be monitoring, even anonymously, where you go online that has spooked people. On the Virgin forums at cableforum.co.uk, 95% of those who answered a poll said they would opt out of the deal.

www.guardian.co.uk...



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by disgustedbyhumanity
 


Who do you think creates the majority of internet threats? I don't think its unemployed teenagers with a yale degree nor small marketing companies based in hong kong and singapore as microsoft will have you believe....hmmmm



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Argyll
 


Good old Brown; first a NON-TRANSPARENT Iraq enquiry, when he said he would be more transparent and now he wants to charge all land-line owners in the UK, £6 per year so everyone gets broadband.

hmmm, i wonder why
So they can bloody snoop even more. It's all starting to come together



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by mister.old.school
 



Interesting. Lets say they do pass this. What's to stop us from giving out of our own pocket to keep it (ATS) going? Or am I being too naive?



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   
Wow. This is bad.

I have now become even more concerned about the socialist activities of our government. I think that people who hate ads and popups need to put up and shut up. They don't have to go to independant websites, but people like us who choose to go to independent websites shouldnt be complaining because it is a privilege to even be on a free website!



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Yesterday MSM (The Times) deliberately destroyed an independent online public interest journal with help from the British Courts. The court ruling also dealt a blow to bloggers in general:


The High Court in London has ruled that bloggers have no right to privacy under British law since “blogging is essentially a public rather than a private activity.”

The case was brought by The Times newspaper after it discovered the identity of a blogger in the police service who wrote the popular NightJack web page, which was awarded the Orwell Prize for political writing in April.


Bloggers have no right to privacy says British court vnunet.com

The Guardian's insightful article on the case is worth reading in full:
NightJack blog: How the Times silenced the voice of valuable frontline reporter



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 08:05 PM
link   
Just my $0.02:

1) No government can try to stick its nose this far into other people's commercial interests and still, in good faith, call themselves a capitalist democracy.

2) Everyone here is acting as though this bill would kill all Internet advertising, and therefore all independant sites. I haven't read much about it outside of this thread and a few news stories linked from here, but it's clear to me that the bill would actually target advertising networks that use cross-site cookies to track users. Well, there's a simple way to side-step that: Stop tracking users with cross-site cookies. Site owners are still going to want advertising to generate revenue, and commercial enterprises will still want to advertise their products and services. If this "opt-in" business makes using tracking cookies too problematic, then I guess that the tracking cookies will go away. I am sure that the ads will not.

Nezuji



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilAxis
 





The case was brought by The Times newspaper after it discovered the identity of a blogger in the police service who wrote the popular NightJack web page, which was awarded the Orwell Prize for political writing in April.


Sounds like someone didnt like the fact this person got an award- AND was probably printing the truth. I am so tired of people who tell the truth getting washed out by greed, power, and money. If the truth is to set you free- how come only liars are the free ones?



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 09:05 PM
link   
The sad thing is, since the very beginning of the internet and the www, I've always thought the powers that be would have two things on their minds - how to control it, and how to profit from it.

I think the freedom of information it provides rivals the movable-type printing press as one of the great inventions of man. It's a shame there will always be those who a scared by the freedom of information it provides - like the early church worrying about commoners being able to read the bible for themselves...



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   
The people who want to "control" the internet........, I wish they were more concerned with controlling adult content and kiddie porn as opposed to be concerned about free speech!

Yet, we keep re-electing them. We have only ourselves to blame for this.

They cheat on their wives and we forgive it. Sex with boys? How about you taze him, hog tie him, and drag him into the wagon?

ENOUGH!

They want to take away our free speech while they cheat on their wives and take bail out payments under the table (you wonder why some of the companies "lost" their bail out money?).

I read an article today that the Pentagon has a test question about what low level terrorism is? Apparently, protesting is the answer. Not hate crimes. Who knew?

Our government is set up so that we can vote out these people. Let's start exercising that right before our elections look like something out of Iraq or Iran. Since 2000, we have been seeing signs of that already.

Still, we just type about it on the internet.

We need to make not voting uncool. Very uncool. Uncool like the KKK is uncool. Uncool like pedos are uncool.

If you don't vote, your more then uncool. Your scum. At the bottom of the bucket kind of scum.

We are letting DC take our country away from us.

Look at the Iranian protesters. Or how about the people who sacrificed themselves in China (Tee-en-eh-men Square).

People in China and Iran care more about freedom then we do. No wonder they hate us. They are right when they say we are lazy.

VOTE! Everybody. Not just every four years. When ever there is an election, no matter how minor, lose the remote and go vote.

Step away from the key board. Go vote.

Am I still on thread? Maybe I should make my own topic.

Go vote these people out before they make your vote not count.

They want to take away our right to free speech? We'll take away their right to be in DC.

If you want to be cool, go vote.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikerussellus
Interesting. Lets say they do pass this. What's to stop us from giving out of our own pocket to keep it (ATS) going? Or am I being too naive?


I cannot lay claim to having familiarity with the costs of this website, apparently such data will not be revealed. However, it's not difficult to fathom that operating a presence such as this is the full-time job of at least two people, if not more. When you include that with the likely cost of the servers -- likely seen here -- I believe you end up with operational costs well beyond the donation capability of regular members.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 09:54 PM
link   
well if you want a serious debate about this issue, then I suggest you state the facts and understand them as well.

Jews own a majority of publishing houses, journals, newspapers, radio stations and TV stations. They also own a majority ( if not all) of the big banks. The big banks I refer to are the primary dealers to the federal reserve. The stakeholders of the federal reserve are all jewish. The military industrial complex is owned by jews.

Foreign aid ( if you want to disguise it as that) to Israel since 1949 has reached into the 100s of billions of dollars.
74.125.47.132...:9cf-A228EOYJ:www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf+U.S.+foreign+aid+to+israel&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Who owns the media? Just a few articles (of FACT) that might tingle your spine.

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk...

www.natall.com...


Its all about control, intimidation and global domination. And guess who leading that charge?

So, its much more than big business taking over the internet. Its just more of the same for US who know the facts, and are not afraid to voice them.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 09:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nezuji
but it's clear to me that the bill would actually target advertising networks that use cross-site cookies to track users.

There is no such thing as "cross site cookies."

The term "tracking cookie" has been created by the media to scare you. All cookies "track", calling such things a "tracking cookie" is like calling a chair a "seat chair".

From what I had already known, combined with my research on this thread, there appears to be little to fear, and no provable harm to have come from behavior-targeted banner advertising. Each "third party" advertising network I researched makes it very clear they care nothing for your name and personal details, they simply attempt to learn about what you like -- "you" being a disassociated numeric identifier -- to give you more relevant advertisements.

The cookie, in this case, contains that disassociated numeric identifier that relates to a series of collected data on the servers of the advertising networks. There's nothing personal.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by allclear
Jews own a majority of publishing houses, journals, newspapers, radio stations and TV stations...

I suppose it was only a matter of time before this thread (dealing in some respect with big media) became polluted with this knee-jerk blanket-blame game.

Perhaps some additional extended research of your own would reveal that the vast majority of the companies you suggest are, in reality, publicly traded companies with a diverse range of stock holders from all walks of life.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 10:09 PM
link   
why be blind? it is safe and comfortable to be so. it is hard to face the facts whether you're smart or dumb. there will always be a specific control factor in any given situation. this forum allows us to expound, but who is pulling the strings of disinformation? beautiful prose and ediquette for all answers to questions like this. or situations, is an approach to seek and reveil the answer but if you realize that there is a huge, prodigious hand over our faces and the earth, then one will know that it really does not matter what "they" do to us. i am not too religious, but i feel that we are here and property of something or whatever. let these things happen and you do not have to control it. just let it happen but knowing that it does not change your mind nor heart in you eternal belief system.



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by mister.old.school
 


m.o.s., like I pointed out on my opening post there are, from a CT point of view, two seemingly divergent priorities to be reconciled within this discussion.

There ARE valid privacy concerns on the internet, some of which ARE related to "cookie" protocols. But there also is the valid concerns raised within your OP.

In essence it's almost like they're putting us in a position to choose which devil we want ...

Do we protect ourselves from the "bogeyman" spying on us at the expense of free expression or vice versa.

This is of course a contrived false choice. The reality is, as I have already pointed out, that there is already technology available to protect ourselves and our privacy without government intervention.

Also I think this legislation may be a last desperate measure from those who have all but lost the control they used to exert.

[edit on 17 Jun 2009 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Take back control of your cookie handling by doing the following:

With a Windows OS, go to Tools (from your browser) then Internet Options > click on privacy tab > click on Advanced tab > then check the box "Override automatic cookie handling" > then, choose the "Prompt" option for handling of 1st party and 3rd party cookie handling.

Then, do a disk cleanup at the end of every day while choosing which boxes you choose to check/eliminate during the disk cleanup. Disk Cleanup could be auto-configured in Task Manager to run automatically at a certain time of day, once a week, etc.

Yes, the internet MUST remain as the only vestige of free speech that still remains. Who do the Feds think they are, your Master? The Federal Govt. is not even run by Americans, but rather a cabal of so-called International elites. It is ultimately your choice as to whether or not you (collectively) will allow yourselves to be introduced to a 'new' world of Serfdom....or not.

Live Free or Die trying.
When all chaos breaks loose, remember the ones who did this to you and go after them, not your neighbor. We need more Patriots in this country, not Slaves!



[edit on 17-6-2009 by Perseus Apex]



posted on Jun, 17 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by mister.old.school
 


Great thread Op!.




From what I had already known, combined with my research on this thread, there appears to be little to fear, and no provable harm to have come from behavior-targeted banner advertising. Each "third party" advertising network I researched makes it very clear they care nothing for your name and personal details, they simply attempt to learn about what you like -- "you" being a disassociated numeric identifier -- to give you more relevant advertisements.

The cookie, in this case, contains that disassociated numeric identifier that relates to a series of collected data on the servers of the advertising networks. There's nothing personal.


Gotta call BS on this though...

You don't REALLY believe in this so-called 'benign' nature of these cookies do you?

Similarly, you don't REALLY believe you have ANY actual privacy on the Internet, do you?







top topics



 
174
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join