Cameron and William Hague: "Internet must remain open"
21 replies, posted
[quote]UK prime minister David Cameron and William Hague, the UK's foreign secretary, have spoken out against government web censorship in countries like China and Russia, warning that the internet must remain free and open.According to [URL="http://www.itpro.co.uk/637099/uk-aligning-with-us-cyber-war-response-strategy"]ITPro[/URL], David Cameron spoke about web freedoms at the[URL="http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=Speech&id=684997682"]London Conference on Cyberspace[/URL], saying, "Governments mustn't use cyber security as an excuse for censorship… Government doesn't own the internet, Government does not shape the internet."
Hague also pontificated on the dangers of 'the heavy hand' of state censorship, arguing that 'stifling' internet access will only lead to a 'fragmented and ghettoised' web.
Hague told delegates, "The internet must remain open and not become fragmented and ghettoised, subject to separate rules and processes in different regions set by isolated national services; with state-imposed barriers to trade, commerce and the free flow of information and ideas."
[h=4][B]Flourishing[/B][/h]"I believe we must aspire to a future for cyberspace which is not stifled by government control or censorship, but where innovation and competition flourish and investment and enterprise are rewarded," he said.
"Nothing would be more fatal or self-defeating than the heavy hand of State control on the internet, which only thrives because of the talent of individuals and of industry within an open market for ideas and innovation."
As well as freedom to access the web, Hague also spoke of the importance of other human rights online.
"It is my passionate conviction that all human rights should carry full force online: not just the right to privacy, but the right to freedom of expression.
"Human rights are universal. Cultural differences are not an excuse to water down human rights, nor can the exploitation of digital networks by criminals or terrorists be a justification for states to censor their citizens."
[h=4]Naming no names...[/h]Although he was careful to avoid name-checking any specific countries, it seems likely that [URL="http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/china-creates-whitelist-for-approved-sites-659757"]China[/URL] and a number of Arab states were on Hague's mind as he spoke.
Certain websites and news outlets, [URL="http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/google-outlines-a-new-approach-to-china-699672"]including Google[/URL], have been blocked and, in some cases, internet access has been completely cut off by respective governments.
William Hague isn't the only one who thinks that internet access is a human rights issue; creator of the world wide web, [URL="http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/sir-berners-lee-net-neutrality-may-require-laws-944713"]Sir Tim Berners-Lee, agrees[/URL].[/quote]
[url=http://www.techradar.com/news/internet/internet-must-remain-open-says-uk-foreign-secretary-1038067]Source[/url]
I support this statement.
Though I believe that it might go unheard.
I agree, Plus get a loophole put in to make it open and free at the workplace "Not my Desk" is not an "adult entertainment" website...
Internet is the purest form of free speech in the world. Please let it remain that way.
I wish my internet was free, so to speak. I also wish it wasn't shit.
I wish more "big" people would come out and say this.
[QUOTE=mole3700;33084025][url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/11/pornography-internet-service-providers]Hypocrites.[/url][/QUOTE]
Another U-Turn by the Coalition.
I'm glad I voted Conservative for once!
What, british politicians not being utter asshats?
WOW!
[QUOTE=Thom12255;33088049]I'm glad I voted Conservative for once![/QUOTE]
If you forget that a few months ago they wanted to ban facebook and make porn opt in.
I never thought Cameron would be so pro towards internet freedom.
Then again, being the slimy Tory snake he is, these could merely be unbacked words that he's just saying in an attempt to calm any fears surrounding the net, whilst in reality he's probably in the pants and pockets of special interests groups.
[QUOTE=mole3700;33084025][url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/11/pornography-internet-service-providers]Hypocrites.[/url][/QUOTE]
This ticks me off, the internet is NOT a cable TV package, it's not a product, you don't "order" websites. The internet is a free speech platform, it's a image of reality. At it's core, it's just a way for a computer to talk to other computers. Or rather, a way for humans to talk to other humans.
You can't "opt-out" for pornographic websites in the same you can't "opt-out" for real life have pornographic elements.
This opt-in program, combined with that porn TLD, ".xxx", is putting us dangerously close to the internet turning into product like TV. Just think about it. Porn is huge business AND porn is detested by society. It's so simple, put porn in a little box and then sell access to this box. After that, you can starting putting everything anything in boxes and selling those boxes.
Can someone explain the porn opt-in to me please?. Isn't it just a system that restricts the viewing of porn unless a household/institution decides that it wants to view porn by telling its ISP. Because I don't really have a problem with that as long as it remains free if you request to view those domains.
[QUOTE=skifer;33088757]Can someone explain the porn opt-in to me please?. Isn't it just a system that restricts the viewing of porn unless a household/institution decides that it wants to view porn by telling its ISP. Because I don't really have a problem with that as long as it remains free if you request to view those domains.[/QUOTE]
What do ISP's have to do with the content that happens to be on the internet? They aren't paying for it, they aren't buying the right to distribute websites. Their job is to connect you to the internet.
[editline]2nd November 2011[/editline]
If parents are so obsessed with protecting their children from reality, then they can use some software that blocks websites [b]locally[/b]. Not let the some corporations shape and eventually centralize the last form of decentralized communication.
[QUOTE=RyanDv3;33089050]What do ISP's have to do with the content that happens to be on the internet? They aren't paying for it, they aren't buying the right to distribute websites. Their job is to connect you to the internet.
[editline]2nd November 2011[/editline]
If parents are so obsessed with protecting their children from reality, then they can use some software that blocks websites [b]locally[/b]. Not let the some corporations shape and eventually centralize the last form of decentralized communication.[/QUOTE]
ISP's are simply a bridge to the internet and people should be allowed to choose what they want to view/do on the internet, simple.
Then why shouldn't there be a list of what to include/exclude from your monthly package as long as it remains free with the standard monthly fee to view that domain. Also you should know porn is far from the reality if you've had sex then you would know. It gives children in particular a bad perception of sexual behaviour and the opposite sex. After all porn is a representation of reality not reality itself, this representation can be distorted and received by an child as reality. It may be obvious to us that porn in its mainstream form isn't the real deal. But to a still developing person they may get the wrong idea after all we are not all the same. Amateur porn is fine but even that can be extreme in some cases and it should be the parents decision whether to include this content in their package or not.
It shouldn't be a case of blocking websites but a matter of choice of what you want to be included in your bundle. I don't think we should cotton wool younger people... but they shouldn't be thrown into the fire neither. We just need to make sure that they get to the right start so they don't become sex addicts or louts.
[QUOTE=mole3700;33084025][url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/11/pornography-internet-service-providers]Hypocrites.[/url][/QUOTE]
Except that was shown by the BBC and everyone else to be the opposite, you have the choice when signing up whether you want parental controls or not
[QUOTE=MasterG;33091123]Fucking hypocrites.
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14322957[/url]
[url]http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/12/world/europe/12iht-social12.html?_r=1&scp=13&sq=Internet%20Censorship&st=cse[/url][/QUOTE]
Your first source does not involve the government at all. The second was before they realised how easy it was to catch everyone as they were posting their loot everywhere :v:.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;33088049]I'm glad I voted Conservative for once![/QUOTE]
Reeeeally? I have no idea who I want to vote for. The conservatives are awful, lib dems have fucked themselves and labour were responsible for the mess we were in.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.