my beloved Congress and the Internet

[shankle]

This is a rant so......
Seems everything Congress gets its hands on they ruin.

They managed to screw up the satellite dish industry.  The airways belong to the people and not Corporations.
Tv used to be free and should remain so. Now they are double dipping by advertising and a yearly rate to watch
our own airways. Lovely.

Now we have what amounts to socialized health care. It's only going to get worse.

Now in their infinite wisdom are going to improve the Internet for you.
I should be able to do what I want , when I want on the internet as long as it does NOT harm anyone else.

God help whats left of America.

[oex]

What are they doing to the internet?

[GregL]

Now they are double dipping by advertising and a yearly rate to watch our own airways.

What yearly rate?

Now we have what amounts to socialized health care. It's only going to get worse.

No, we do not have socialized health care, I wish we did.

I should be able to do what I want , when I want on the internet as long as it does NOT harm anyone else.

I agree.  Why can't you do this?

[Ghandi]

Just hope that they're not going to try and screw the countries internet access/freedom, in the *name* of 'prevention'. Yet another way to make the world a nanny state, instead of trying to weed out and remove the problem, they'd rather try to just sweep it under the rug as if it didn't ever happen. (What? No... That doesn't exist anymore, our internet filter eradicated it all...)

I say that they need to look at the punishment instead of just trying to blanket the whole thing, give the bastards the electric chair or lethal injection, it would send out the proper message, that those sort of behaviours have no place in modern society and any person who exibits such behaviour will never be a productive or safe member of society, why waste our tax money on keeping them alive and comfortable in prison?

HR,
Ghandi

[oex]

I say that they need to look at the punishment instead of just trying to blanket the whole thing, give the bastards the electric chair or lethal injection, it would send out the proper message, that those sort of behaviours have no place in modern society and any person who exibits such behaviour will never be a productive or safe member of society, why waste our tax money on keeping them alive and comfortable in prison?

Well said Ghandi but the question is how do you protect the children not prevent the adults from being sick.... Of a number of sick individuals I have had the misfortune to come into contact with in my life some came into contact with this material after related problems as kids, I dont believe that anyone is born evil, life just shits on some in misfortunate ways and their perceptions grow from their experiences....

This is not different from real life experiences, often the abused move forward to being abusers later in life.... The internet is indescriminate it is able to warp minds that otherwise wouldnt have been warped....

I think there are 2 solutions:
1) Blanket ban
2) 2 Teir internet

Child protection software has been ridiculed by various groups and is unused by the majority of the un tech savy, the government has to step in, it only has to clean up a greater mess later otherwise.... Hey it could be your kids browsing dodgy sites as teenager for a sick laugh like they do on sites like ogrish.com and snapping when they hit their 30s or 40s after the world has treated them like shit....

Yes I understand the importance of freedom of information and the issues with banning stuff on the web but then I have seen kids do stupid things on the web, do drugs etc etc and live to regret it....

Burn the adults that look at this stuff at the stake but dont subject the kids to it

[dedndave]

i would hope that kind of activity has tapered off
what this really is - is the government taking away more of our freedoms
they want to be in control of everything - they have no business messing with the www at all
they can't tax it if they don't control it, though
just wait until they find some way to charge taxes for internet usage

[Ghandi]

With regards to the 'victim abusers', i agree that its a shame that they've been set on this path of destruction. What i dont agree with is patting them on the head with a "Poor guy" when they perpetrate that evil onto another innocent person. The circle has to stop and as long as society is willing to look the other way and make excuses for its shortcomings, it will flourish as it has done with the relaxation of what is seen as 'acceptable'.

My opinion on the death penalty is controversial i know, i get it all the time, but its my belief that if we send a clear message to all criminals that such crimes against other human beings simply will not be tolerated, then there is potential for improvement. No rediversion courses, no rehabilitation, simply put "If you commit such a heinous crime against other humans, especially innocent children, then you forgoe and forfeit any and all rights as a human being. If proven beyond a doubt (and away from the alternate reality which all lawers seem to live in) then your life is forfeit, no questions asked, no second (third, fourth... how many goes does it take to get the picture they're not going to reform, its ingrained in their psyche) chances, just lights out Renee...

So, blanket approach wont work, Tor and such will make sure of that. Prohibition never works, it always drives it further underground where its harder to find and stop. If the pedophiles and sickos of this world were removed, then you would see a drastic reduction in the amount of this material available and it would have a roll-on effect of protecting children in the sense that these bastards wouldn't feel so free and able to just pick and choose their victim(s). Make the penalty severe and watch it (the problem) shrink again.

We can never rid the human race of such perversions, but we can send a clear message that it is not to be accepted or tolerated in any way shape or form. At the moment the message is "Its wrong, but everything is ok cos when you get caught you'll get 'treatment' and rehabilitation (read: free accommodation & meals) for a shortish period of time, where you'll be released to re-offend. Sorry, i meant re-assimilate into society."

@dave: I agree mate, just another way for Uncle Sam to stick it to the little guy and tell him "We own you."

HR,
Ghandi

[oex]

With regards to the 'victim abusers', i agree that its a shame that they've been set on this path of destruction. What i dont agree with is patting them on the head with a "Poor guy" when they perpetrate that evil onto another innocent person.

Yeah we are in agreement, there is no excuse and they should be punished without doubt however I would say in the case of the internet that the community bares some of the guilt, there are laws at least here in the UK about putting pornography on shop shelves that kids can reach in soho in London their are age ratings on the shops you cant go in unless you're 18 (not that that is my scene I'm just worldly :lol), yet no such laws or preventions exist on the internet.... Society expects kids to grow up too fast and assumes they have responsible parents.... Kids have the right to be kids without that shit.... The internet is better these days, Google prevents access to sites but I remember a time when the internet was like the Wild West, it has grown up a lot since then and any government intervention now might be a bit late as usual but I grew up thinking the USA was a really sick place....

On the payment front with Dave's point, yeah :lol they have no business messing with it but we live in a world where so much is automated they are running out of things for people to accept minimum wage for, we are in a time of serious employment issues, they just need a reason to setup a quango to employ a load of people to monitor a load of pointless data and hey this is a reasonable excuse isnt it :green

[Ghandi]

Society expects kids to grow up too fast and assumes they have responsible parents.... Kids have the right to be kids without that shit....

No, its all the bloody do-gooders who keep saying that children shouldn't be treated as 'kids' but at the same time to 'allow them to be children'. So which is it? Keep them innocent as long as you can and have them go out into the world to be fleeced and such, or do we overeducate them and make them cynical little know it alls who know nothing but can't be told?

Give the responsibility back to the parents, because at the end of the day it is their job and responsibility to look after their children first and foremost. People who dont/cant simply should not be allowed to have children under their care and there are already avenues which people can take to rectify such situations. One of the problems of this modern society is that we're all conditioned and prepared to cast stones and judge what is going on in someone elses backyard yet we're not willing to look at our own for problems, instead saying that the society should take care of it or that it is the societies fault that it is happening.

At the end of the day, if the parents can't supervise or protect their children, then what are they doing putting their kids at risk? Its all good and proper to say "We need tighter regulations on the web" but that doesn't stop the people who don't obey the law, they're already criminals who dont give a rats arse. I'm a slaughterman by trade and i know the dangers and risks involved. I woudln't let my son go running around there unsupervised until i felt that he knew enough to protect himself. The same thing applies to the internet. For some reason people have (naively) believed that the WWW is a nice, friendly, shiny and clean place. But its not...

Just like any other medium for sharing information or expressing thoughts, feelings, etc, it is open to all sorts of material. Ban the shit content, for sure, i'm not saying that is a wrong thing. What pisses me off is that a faceless entity believes that by telling the populace (and enforcing it) what they can or cannot view is ridiculous. In Australia they're saying that it will apply to Refused Classification material. The scary thing is that they have no list of what is or isnt' acceptable and basically it is giving the entity the mandate to regulate and prevent WITHOUT EXPLANATION.

So if some prick gets a bee in their bonnet about a website which they dont like, as long as they can think up enough shit to make the regulators frown, it will be blanket banned. Yay for progress!!!

HR,
Ghandi

[oex]

The assumption here is that they have 'parents' rather than 'parent', that they have expertise to give their child/children the education they deserve on the internet and that the children could do without the internet if they couldnt provide that.... That is simply not the case, no child in todays society can have a fair shot at anything without having internet skills, I expect most children learn more about the internet now from their peers than their parents and most know how to use it better than their parents due to it being a relatively new technology that their parents didnt grow up with.... This is not necessarily the fault of the parents it depends very much on circumstance.

As a society we have to take some responsibility for everything, we dont say if your kid is sick leave it to the parents or if your kid needs schooling leave it to the parents we accept that formal structures are required to ensure that not only the people with jobs and education and money are able to bring up their children safely and give them the best chances in life.

You sound like a responsible parent in regards to the internet and educated in terms of how computers work and how to make them safe but take note on how many single mothers indeed women frequent this board (PS. If I got it wrong male/single/30/educated, shares your passion for asm algorithms and would walk half way round the world for love :lol).... In the real world this is still a male dominated past time.... How many children have access to unprotected computers or web enabled mobile phones outside the home

I have a link in another post that just proves that even accomplished netizens that use IRC can be conned by AI bots let alone paedos in chat rooms I have posted it below.... There is a distinct lack of regulation on the internet recent scandals are sites like facebook.... The only true safety on the internet is to sit with your child all the time they are on it till they know at least what you know and by then there will be newer threats, I'm reminded of a computer I fixed for a family that had a virus on it sending back all their children's personal chat logs and videos, the parents had AV software and no idea this was happening....

If you have a better solution that protects the vunerable but at the same time protects civil liberties then let the regulators know but like facebook they have to put a plan on the table to have it considered and critiqued in the first place.... These plans governments are introducing all over the world dont make the internet safe they make it safer, thay target the worst offenders in an attempt to remove the worst threats, this is nothing new, google has been doing it for some time the question really is why is a US company looking out for the welfare of citizens before the governments, why did the governments not do this when they introduced the internet.... The answer is simple, Ideology....

You say give the responsibility back to the parents, unfortunately abuse is generally performed within family units, luckily as a society we support the government to create laws to make this illegal unlike some hundreds of years ago when child prostitution was rife in the western world.... What makes the internet so different from the real world that it shouldnt be policed to some extent

If a website is banned, taken offline for a short time without due cause there would be an uproar, unlike other mediums like newspapers and tv even legit websites can be hacked with illegal content put on them, these powers may seem draconian but so is a completely unregulated medium....

Balance must be struck but the mentality that says anything goes is already dead and this uproar is simply because government not businesses has stepped in.

Maybe you assume that whilst you have time to teach your child all the complexities and dangers involved in accessing the internet you dont have time to contact your local politician or the regulatory authority alone or with a parent group to make sure that your child's civil liberties are also being respected including in regards to the internet amongst everything else.... Maybe that is best left to parents of children who are solicitors or lawyers or somesuch who are less adept on computers....

http://www.darkreading.com/insiderthreat/security/privacy/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=225600304

PPS. Dont steal my chatup line

[Ghandi]

The only 'true' solution to the internet debate is for there to be an international referendum where every single connected country comes to agreement on what is not acceptable, but we all know the chances of that. What is wrong with installing safeguards onto the computer to prevent access to said questionable content, in the absence of a supervising adult? If companies can get it right to protect their shit from unauthorized use, then so can parent(s) and if it is so fundamental to a childs education/development (which i actually question to a degree) then it should be something considered by the government/education department.

We don't let any Tom, Dick or Harry in off the street to scrub up and perform a labotomy but with proper training and education, they can pretty well select who is suitable for a surgeons license. Take the same principle to driving a motor vehicle, even though they are a bit lax with their vetting of 'unsuitables', they still make people show that they are educated enough and sensible enough to drive before they are given a permit let alone an actual drivers license.

Now, we're talking about something which is speculated to be one of the biggest events so far in mankinds history, because it has enhanced the 'global community' and allowed closer interaction on a different scale than there ever has been before. So, as the old adage goes... "With great power also comes great responsibility"...

Doesn't this mean something? Shouldn't the young, naive or unproven be given at least a rudimentary education of what is sensible behaviour on the internet and tested to see whether or not it actually sunk in? Its not the content of the internet which should be regulated, it the actual access which should. If there was a problem with 8 year olds crashing motor vehicles all the time, is it a solution to ban all types of cars which they don't crash? Possibly it is, but i would think that it would be more sensible to just not let people who don't fit the 'safety criteria' do the dangerous activity.

With regards to the sickos, its not the internet which is enabling them to spread and congregate, its society turning its back on the cause of the  problem, trying instead to soothe the infected sores which are the symptoms. Cut the disease out at the core and watch it die off and shrivel.

HR,
Ghandi

[jj2007]

Now in their infinite wisdom are going to improve the Internet for you.

You mean the PCNAA, "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act"?

A new U.S. Senate bill would grant the president far-reaching emergency powers to seize control of or even shut down portions of the Internet.

The legislation announced Thursday says that companies such as broadband providers, search engines, or software firms that the government selects "shall immediately comply with any emergency measure or action developed" by the Department of Homeland Security. Anyone failing to comply would be fined.

http://204.74.214.194/forum1/message1098278/pg1

[redskull]

You mean the PCNAA, "Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act"?

I thought the whole idea of the internet was that there couldn't be a 'kill switch', or any other single point failure?  These kinds of bills just waste paper; they remind me of blazing saddles: "Gentleman, we've got to protect our phoney-baloney jobs!"

-r

[donkey]

The only 'true' solution to the internet debate is for there to be an international referendum where every single connected country comes to agreement on what is not acceptable, but we all know the chances of that.

:) yes the referendum would work well. It would go like this:

The world votes:

650 million votes for a free unrestricted internet
250 million for some restrictions
100 million for complete government control
3 billion apathetic undecideds

Then China votes:

For some reason the vote in China was unanimous, 1.3 billion votes for absolute government control of all information and websites as well as complete per person tracking of any usage and all information referenced and read.

The people have spoken...

After the referendum the only site left on the internet is this one

Edgar

[oex]

:lol

The only time there is ever a referendum is if it is expected it will pass