Utopia Temple
Main Forum Page Register an Account for Free! Calendar Frequently Asked Questions about this Board View New Posts Advanced Search Login
  Utopia Temple Forums > General Discussions > Respectable General Discussions

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Post New Thread Reply
Author Thread
Posts: 1540/1637
(17-Jan-2012 at 08:09)
Internet Censorship

It's always a bad idea. The internet has so much potential for good. I think that it should be totally free and neutral, it should be an anarchy. You never know what amazing things can emerge given the Internet's staggering interconnectivity.

Thoughts? Objections?
#1  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Gotterdammerung Add Gotterdammerung to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 6928/7006
(17-Jan-2012 at 12:06)


Objections? Simple - it isn't working in practice.

Most of the 'information' on the internet now is crap. Is it churned by any old idiot, and the result is an avalanche of low quality junk information.

Tell me why that is a good thing.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.
#2  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Voice of Reason Add Voice of Reason to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1541/1637
(18-Jan-2012 at 00:42)
Re: Internet Censorship

Originally Posted by Voice of Reason: View Post
Most of the 'information' on the internet now is crap. Is it churned by any old idiot, and the result is an avalanche of low quality junk information.

Tell me why that is a good thing.
That's what old idiots like to do. I don't see why you have to participate in it.

You are free to create your own information networks on the internet which excludes old idiots if you wanted to.

Instead of trying to regulate the whole internet, all you need to ever do is regulate your part of the internet.
#3  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Gotterdammerung Add Gotterdammerung to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 6932/7006
(18-Jan-2012 at 12:24)


That is the point. Wouldn't the internet be far more useful if we didn't have to ignore 90% of it? Wouldn't it be a lot more useful if, when we use a search engine, we didn't get results that are 99.9% useless? Or have to add on a string of Boolean operators to filter out the idiots and risk missing something useful?

The internet should be useful. It should be the greatest source of information ever, but making a free-for-all for the crazies has ruined it.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.
#4  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Voice of Reason Add Voice of Reason to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2845/2860
(18-Jan-2012 at 22:26)


He may have a point Gotter. We would have few Hate the Jews and vor posts in general if we only allowed high quality info

Mars II - American Scientist
PhD - Physical Chemistry

Last edited by Mars II, 18-Jan-2012 at 22:29.
#5  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Mars II Add Mars II to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1545/1637
(18-Jan-2012 at 23:21)
Re: Internet Censorship

Originally Posted by Voice of Reason: View Post
That is the point. Wouldn't the internet be far more useful if we didn't have to ignore 90% of it? Wouldn't it be a lot more useful if, when we use a search engine, we didn't get results that are 99.9% useless? Or have to add on a string of Boolean operators to filter out the idiots and risk missing something useful?
That's the same argument for eugenics.

The problem is that it is hard to judge whether something in the 'waste' will end up being valuable. Do you take the risk? I'm not a horder, but isn't it a cop out to say we arn't smart enough to sustain both useful and un-useful? Why is it either/or?
#6  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Gotterdammerung Add Gotterdammerung to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2846/2860
(18-Jan-2012 at 23:43)


Originally Posted by Gotterdammerung: View Post
That's the same argument for eugenics.

The problem is that it is hard to judge whether something in the 'waste' will end up being valuable. Do you take the risk? I'm not a horder, but isn't it a cop out to say we arn't smart enough to sustain both useful and un-useful? Why is it either/or?
I know, it was sarcasm. It's the same as the free speech issue in the other thread. Who's going to decide what's good information? People like him? HA! The whole point of free information is that there is little certainty in who is absolutely right or wrong so we have no business censoring information.

The exceptions occur when you use speech to harm others. Things like calling for violence against others or child porn. And yeah, then you have to debate what harm is but I think that is a restriction and discussion we should have. Completely open and free just gives criminals free reign. But as far as "quality of information" goes - no restrictions.

Mars II - American Scientist
PhD - Physical Chemistry
#7  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Mars II Add Mars II to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 3975/3983
(19-Jan-2012 at 04:09)


today we talk to Oog, the first human to speak." What do you think of language, ook?"
"Language garbage. Too much talk. No talk of hunt. Of mate. Much talk of issues. Rights. Talk of nothing."
We also talk to Johannes gutenberg; "mr Gutenberg, what do you think of the advancement of your printing press?"
Gutenberg:"Absolute garbage. It was invented as a tool to spread the intellectual works among a greater number of people. Now it glorifies a bunch of nobodies,has very little intellectual substance, and is merely an opiate of the middle class."
I am sure that the inventors of the telephone and television were not aware of the significance of the goods on the people of the time. Nor that spammers and robocalls would make the telephone a nuisance, and high cable rates and garbage TV shows would be normal fare, rather than science and political forums.
All these forms of communication were able to grow despite the varied uses they were put to, in fact they may have grown stronger because of the freedom to express different and varied ideas without restrictions placed upon them, beyond the ones society places.

My point being that any invention can be capable of having opposite actions, one good and one bad. Placing restrictions on them, no matter how benign the idea seems, will result in loss of information on the subject, and loss of importance of medium, and loss of choice for the user. If you restrict internet access only to information that has been certified as truth you will run into problems from corporations, religions, government, advertisers citizens, subscribers, bloggers, entertainment industries,etc etc.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”
#8  
View Public Profile Find more posts by filcher Add filcher to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1546/1637
(19-Jan-2012 at 04:58)
Re: Internet Censorship

Originally Posted by Mars II: View Post
The exceptions occur when you use speech to harm others.
This is where I disagree. Speech is just words, as long as its not invasive or physically harassing, it's upto the minds of the listens to decided what do to. Speech alone cannot harm anyone.
#9  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Gotterdammerung Add Gotterdammerung to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2811/2825
(19-Jan-2012 at 06:14)


So what exactly are we talking about? The SOPA PIPA thing? Or just general censor?

For general censore it depends on what you mean. If it's about porn I actually like the idea of transferring all porn to ending in xxx instead of com org or so on. Not censor it anymore then it is now just to make it more clear so you know what you are clicking


The idea of stripping anonymity to some extent like in South Korea also has some merit depending on the circumstances I suppose

Quote:
I know, it was sarcasm. It's the same as the free speech issue in the other thread. Who's going to decide what's good information? People like him? HA! The whole point of free information is that there is little certainty in who is absolutely right or wrong so we have no business censoring information.
True enough. Until we have one united world goverment no country should be forcing it's will upon the others as far as internet is concerned

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views
#10  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1548/1637
(19-Jan-2012 at 07:07)
Re: Internet Censorship

Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
So what exactly are we talking about? The SOPA PIPA thing? Or just general censor?
General internet censorship with relevance to SOPA/PIPA issues.

So go for it.
#11  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Gotterdammerung Add Gotterdammerung to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 6935/7006
(19-Jan-2012 at 12:09)


Originally Posted by Gotterdammerung:
I'm not a horder, but isn't it a cop out to say we arn't smart enough to sustain both useful and un-useful? Why is it either/or?
When people go to the internet for information, it is because there is *something they don't know*. How, from that position of ignorance, are they supposed to know if the information they get is good or bad? They could do that only if they already knew the answer.

Of course you can apply the same argument to buying your information in print, but if you buy it in print you can be sure that the thing was written by an expert in the field, and went through a fact checking process from a publisher scared of litigation.

The problem with the internet as it stands is that most of the information comes from idiots, many of whom just pretend to be scientists or whatever, and fact checking doesn't seem to exist. Compounding this is that most of the fakes get their information from... the internet! So, the crap information gets repeated and repeated. Look at then number of wrongly worded or wrongly attributed quotes, for example.

I don't know what your field of expertise is, but in mine the misinformation is far more abundant that good information, and people are taking in that bad information thinking it is genuine.

How, I want to know, is making a mountain of misinformation freely available to billions of people a good thing?


Quote:
Speech alone cannot harm anyone.
Speech is never alone, because speech is a social act. History is full of examples of speech doing a great deal of harm by conveying bad information such as "This ship is unsinkable" or "Just walk over there. there will be no-one left alive to resist after the artillery has finished."


Originally Posted by filcher:
Placing restrictions on them, no matter how benign the idea seems, will result in loss of information on the subject, and loss of importance of medium, and loss of choice for the user.
How does getting rid of the lies and misinformation result in a loss of information? If it is genuine information (in contrast to a lie or misinformation) it is unaffected.

Sure, those people who choose to peddle lies and misinformation will be affected, and they are doing a good job of cloaking their 'freedom to lie and misinform' as 'freedom of speech', by trying to equate their lies with a genuine opinion. Don't be taken in by it.


Quote:
If you restrict internet access only to information that has been certified as truth you will run into problems from corporations, religions, government, advertisers citizens, subscribers, bloggers, entertainment industries,etc etc.
When Mr Guttenberg's invention was regulated to eliminate the lies and misinformation, it thrived. A whole print industry sprang up.


Originally Posted by DHoffryn:
Until we have one united world goverment no country should be forcing it's will upon the others as far as internet is concerned
We have one united UN who manage to regulate other international issues such as maritime and aviation law. They could handle the internet too.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.
#12  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Voice of Reason Add Voice of Reason to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2812/2825
(19-Jan-2012 at 13:54)


Quote:
When people go to the internet for information, it is because there is *something they don't know*. How, from that position of ignorance, are they supposed to know if the information they get is good or bad? They could do that only if they already knew the answer.

Of course you can apply the same argument to buying your information in print, but if you buy it in print you can be sure that the thing was written by an expert in the field, and went through a fact checking process from a publisher scared of litigation.

The problem with the internet as it stands is that most of the information comes from idiots, many of whom just pretend to be scientists or whatever, and fact checking doesn't seem to exist. Compounding this is that most of the fakes get their information from... the internet! So, the crap information gets repeated and repeated. Look at then number of wrongly worded or wrongly attributed quotes, for example.
I don't know what your field of expertise is, but in mine the misinformation is far more abundant that good information, and people are taking in that bad information thinking it is genuine.

How, I want to know, is making a mountain of misinformation freely available to billions of people a good thing?

Well I think that's actually the opposite. It doesn't take that much to lie at the back of the book. Do some misleading langauge and so on and present yourself again in a misleading and so on. However with the internet not so. You can check the credentials of someone and criticism of their work immediatly. And they are academic resoures which are so far limited only to universities and so on who could be released to the general public

So if anything I think the internet is far better as sorting out the misinformation then regular books are

Quote:
How does getting rid of the lies and misinformation result in a loss of information? If it is genuine information (in contrast to a lie or misinformation) it is unaffected.

Sure, those people who choose to peddle lies and misinformation will be affected, and they are doing a good job of cloaking their 'freedom to lie and misinform' as 'freedom of speech', by trying to equate their lies with a genuine opinion. Don't be taken in by it.
You know as well as I do that it's impossible to enforce this so I don't really see why we are even bothering with this

Quote:
When Mr Guttenberg's invention was regulated to eliminate the lies and misinformation, it thrived. A whole print industry sprang up.
And is now dying

Quote:
We have one united UN who manage to regulate other international issues such as maritime and aviation law. They could handle the internet too.
I fail to see why they can do anything but b.s The internet is perfect as it is now. The only thing you need are tiny imrpvoments that comes from the internet and time itself

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views
#13  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 6937/7006
(19-Jan-2012 at 14:11)


Quote:
It doesn't take that much to lie at the back of the book.
If they lie at the back of a book they can be prosecuted. If they lie on the internet they can't.


Quote:
You can check the credentials of someone and criticism of their work immediatly.
Oh yeah? Fantastic... tell me exactly how you think you can check the credentials of some blogger who either provides no name at all or invents one.


Quote:
You know as well as I do that it's impossible to enforce this so I don't really see why we are even bothering with this
In what way is it impossible?


Quote:
I fail to see why they can do anything but b.s
That failure is your problem and it means nothing to me. The UN administers a lot of international issues and there is no reason at all why they can't administer the internet. You just don't want to admit it.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.
#14  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Voice of Reason Add Voice of Reason to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2813/2825
(19-Jan-2012 at 14:27)


Quote:
If they lie at the back of a book they can be prosecuted. If they lie on the internet they can't.
Depends on how you lie. Tweak a few words, put a few misleading sentence and you can still easily lie. And with a book you can't do a search and see how much of it is true.

Quote:
Oh yeah? Fantastic... tell me exactly how you think you can check the credentials of some blogger who either provides no name at all or invents one.
Well if there isn't an author you simply check the data they are posting. Really VoR it's not that hard

Quote:
In what way is it impossible?
Really. You don't think it's impossible to make sure that everyone on the ineternet is giving solely factual and truthful information. Something we can barely even manage on the news

Quote:
That failure is your problem and it means nothing to me. The UN administers a lot of international issues and there is no reason at all why they can't administer the internet. You just don't want to admit it.
And your utopia is your problem but since I am a better person then you it does mean something to me. It's amusing

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views
#15  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 6938/7006
(19-Jan-2012 at 15:31)


Quote:
Depends on how you lie. Tweak a few words, put a few misleading sentence and you can still easily lie.
And if you do, you are open to prosecution. Is that really so difficult to understand?


Quote:
Well if there isn't an author you simply check the data they are posting. Really VoR it's not that hard
Check the data how? If it is by reference to other anonymous internet sources you are into infinite regression - have you heard of that? If it is by reference to print you have proved my point.

Either way, you lose, and you are right - it wasn't that hard.


Quote:
Really. You don't think it's impossible to make sure that everyone on the ineternet is giving solely factual and truthful information. Something we can barely even manage on the news
Expose them to prosecution if they lie. Easy.

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." But let it be considered that he did not mean a real and generous love of our country, but that pretended patriotism which so many, in all ages and countries, have made a cloak of self- interest.
#16  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Voice of Reason Add Voice of Reason to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2814/2825
(19-Jan-2012 at 17:02)


Re: Internet Censorship

Originally Posted by Voice of Reason: View Post
And if you do, you are open to prosecution. Is that really so difficult to understand?
Except for the fact that you are not unless you lie directly and even then it happens very rarely. You can weasel as much as you like on books and almost nobody can touch you in the vast majority of cases



Quote:
Check the data how? If it is by reference to other anonymous internet sources you are into infinite regression - have you heard of that? If it is by reference to print you have proved my point. Either way, you lose, and you are right - it wasn't that hard.
You are aware that not everything on the internet is an anoymous source right? Unless you are searching for some really obscure topic there are more then enough legitimate places that can give you a good reference for the data and people you want to check. Unless you are an idiot. And this seems to be your complaint about the internet from what I see. It's not idiot friendly enough. And well that's yours and your peoples problem honestly






Quote:
Expose them to prosecution if they lie. Easy.
Yeah sure that would work so brilliantly. I am sure the court system would love that. And considering how effective it is with politicians and normal media I can only imagine how eager people would be to enforce truth on the internet


P.S Are you trying to do a Gotter imression? Before you were always a weasel but at least some of your arguments had at least a resemblance of logic. Now you seem to be floating in some kind of a weird utopia like land

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views
#17  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 3976/3983
(19-Jan-2012 at 18:20)


Quote:
How does getting rid of the lies and misinformation result in a loss of information? If it is genuine information (in contrast to a lie or misinformation) it is unaffected.
So what is misinformation? Are the norse Gods any less real because their worship fell out of fashion? Does this mean that the Christian God a lie because logically he should not exist in the form that religion has made him, and will fall out of fashion at some point in the future. What about Jesus and Mohammad? Can we prove that Iran is not planning to build a bomb, any more than we can prove they are? Can we prove that creating jobs and stimulating the economy is going to have the long range effect of economic growth?

Quote:
Sure, those people who choose to peddle lies and misinformation will be affected, and they are doing a good job of cloaking their 'freedom to lie and misinform' as 'freedom of speech', by trying to equate their lies with a genuine opinion. Don't be taken in by it.
There are books out that refute global warming, that talk about the existence of ghosts, that speak about prophecies, horoscopes, tarots. I think these are all lies and researchers have explained why they are false, yet the books are still published and I have yet to see the authors hauled into court on any charges.

Quote:
Oh yeah? Fantastic... tell me exactly how you think you can check the credentials of some blogger who either provides no name at all or invents one.
Why would you want to take the word of a random person on the street as fact anyways? Why not simply check out a proper site where you know who is providing information, and can verify they are actually who they say they are.

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”

Last edited by filcher, 19-Jan-2012 at 18:24.
#18  
View Public Profile Find more posts by filcher Add filcher to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 3815/3861
(19-Jan-2012 at 20:44)


Re: Internet Censorship

There really is no such thing as free speech. Here in these forums one is not able to say anything they want or fear the ban hammer.



Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Yeah sure that would work so brilliantly. I am sure the court system would love that. And considering how effective it is with politicians and normal media I can only imagine how eager people would be to enforce truth on the internet

And who is the judge what is true and what isnt? Only recently Pluto was a planet now its not. Should we charge all those that said it was in textbooks and other sources? WHat about the rags that old women buy about the stars? What about playboy and hustler and thier photoshopped pics?


Perhaps VOR and company wants us to back to Orwells book 1984 and newspeak where the "truth" changed daily.

Never Forget

September 11, 2001
#19  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Invictus2001 Add Invictus2001 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 1551/1637
(19-Jan-2012 at 23:11)
Re: Internet Censorship

Originally Posted by Voice of Reason: View Post
When people go to the internet for information, it is because there is *something they don't know*. How, from that position of ignorance, are they supposed to know if the information they get is good or bad? They could do that only if they already knew the answer.
You're making excuses for stupidity.

If I don't know something, then one ought to use critique and reason and power of deduction to determine what is likely. Even information in a vacuum can be questioned and refuted and modified and reasoned.

Sure, this dictatorship of misinformation is problematic, but moreso for stupidheads (yes, that's the technical term) not decerned, half-bright---heads.

I'm having fun.

Quote:
Of course you can apply the same argument to buying your information in print, but if you buy it in print you can be sure that the thing was written by an expert in the field, and went through a fact checking process from a publisher scared of litigation.
So you've solved your own problem. Read only printed media (or digitized version of them).

Quote:
The problem with the internet as it stands is that most of the information comes from idiots, many of whom just pretend to be scientists or whatever, and fact checking doesn't seem to exist. Compounding this is that most of the fakes get their information from... the internet! So, the crap information gets repeated and repeated. Look at then number of wrongly worded or wrongly attributed quotes, for example.
So the problem really isn't the internet then, it's idiocy.

Quote:
I don't know what your field of expertise is, but in mine the misinformation is far more abundant that good information, and people are taking in that bad information thinking it is genuine.
Bad, Eve! Put that apple back IMMEDIATELY!

Quote:
How, I want to know, is making a mountain of misinformation freely available to billions of people a good thing?
Misinformation is a darwinian gift to make the stupidid stupider and the smart smarter-er.

Quote:
Speech is never alone, because speech is a social act. History is full of examples of speech doing a great deal of harm by conveying bad information such as "This ship is unsinkable" or "Just walk over there. there will be no-one left alive to resist after the artillery has finished."
Again with the excuses for stupidity.
#20  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Gotterdammerung Add Gotterdammerung to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump:

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Internet Blows CIA Covers Invictus2001 Respectable General Discussions 14 13-Mar-2006 15:11
Internet disgrace tylerrrrr Respectable General Discussions 12 10-Mar-2006 16:49
Korean Internet Users Launch Hacking Attacks on ........... Crew Respectable General Discussions 18 26-Jun-2004 16:37
Control over Internet. Bernel Respectable General Discussions 22 14-Apr-2004 16:45
Are you an internet Junky? Brentlysnow The Lunatic Asylum 9 22-Jan-2004 04:54


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 01:21.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.