The internet is the last place where people can logon and post their Music or photos and what not, And not get constructive feedback. The last place where we can do what ever we want! The Internet should be free of any monitoring.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36632527]tldr incoming[/QUOTE]
So rather than replying to each part of your comments, I pretty much agree with all your points except a few. I know it is a double standard to hate people who watch cp and be fine with watching snuff videos, but still I'm not entirely convinced that it's ok to watch cp. That's just me. If my school had a teacher who was known to watch child porn, there is no way I would let my kid have him/her as a teacher.
Also I really like the idea of having an kind of open-forum Crimestoppers thing, the only potential downside to having that is that criminals could look at that to see what evidence has been found and what leads are being followed. But the 4chan cat abuse example is an awesome example of what power lies in having a free and open internet. And I think it's definitely better to have too much freedom on the world wide web than not enough.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36639659]That's just me. If my school had a teacher who was known to watch child porn, there is no way I would let my kid have him/her as a teacher.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough. I think that feeling is founded in prejudice, but I can't really tell you not to be concerned about things that concern you.
[QUOTE]Also I really like the idea of having an kind of open-forum Crimestoppers thing, the only potential downside to having that is that criminals could look at that to see what evidence has been found and what leads are being followed. But the 4chan cat abuse example is an awesome example of what power lies in having a free and open internet. And I think it's definitely better to have too much freedom on the world wide web than not enough.[/QUOTE]
Well, I also have a problem with the idea. I think there's the danger of biased vigilante justice, as is the case in the already existing [URL=http://evil-unveiled.com/Main_Page]Evil Unveiled[/URL]. A lot of the stuff on this site is pretty much just outright lies and manipulations, but I also think they should be allowed to do it. Because, y'know, it's the wild west.
The problem is just if it becomes something where people take action against people who may or may not be innocent. But again, that would not be the site's responsibility so much as the people who do the vigilante justice. But indeed, I definitely think giving power to the people has way more pros than cons.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36641251]Fair enough. I think that feeling is founded in prejudice, but I can't really tell you not to be concerned about things that concern you.[/QUOTE]
I suppose it is, and correct me if I'm wrong or overgeneralizing, but I have a feeling that there are a lot of people that watch snuff videos out of curiosity or because the video featured has someone that's well known in them, but they don't watch it because they get any enjoyment out of it if that makes any sense? Whereas most poeple watch cp because they actually enjoy it or they get off on it, other than law enforcement personnel investigating them. Maybe I'm going out on a limb here but I still feel there's a slight difference.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36641251]Well, I also have a problem with the idea. I think there's the danger of biased vigilante justice, as is the case in the already existing [URL=http://evil-unveiled.com/Main_Page]Evil Unveiled[/URL]. A lot of the stuff on this site is pretty much just outright lies and manipulations, but I also think they should be allowed to do it. Because, y'know, it's the wild west.
The problem is just if it becomes something where people take action against people who may or may not be innocent. But again, that would not be the site's responsibility so much as the people who do the vigilante justice. But indeed, I definitely think giving power to the people has way more pros than cons.[/QUOTE]That's true, I can definitely see potential for abuse by politicians, or by anybody looking to defame someone. But if there was a way to 100% mitigate abuse and exploitation of the system I think it would be an awesome concept.
The internet should be a free place, if you're uneducated about what you're connecting to then you'll get what's coming to you.
I believe the Internet should be the wild west, fully open and rampant without any restrictions. It's much more interesting. I've had myself deconstructed, beaten up and reconstructed multiple times over the years by trolls, and that's pretty much because there's no moderation.
I agree somewhat with Shadow. I think the deep web and surface web should be merged. I also think that CP should be treated the same as any other illegal content. If it really is that bad, then we should be working to get rid of it in the real world, not enable people by having a place to put it.
When I think about a certain Road I might travel on the TOR network, I'm sort of thankful that parts of the web remain free.
In a way, todays world sort of reminds me of 1984, of course it's not a dystopian mind-controlling hellhole. But our utopia is bound by laws, observation and restriction. Not only by the government but in fact mostly by our peers and community. I feel safer voicing an opinion on a controversial topic over the web. I enjoy downloading movies, games etc.
Back to the first part I think everyone would agree that conducting business online is alot more comfortable than in person (that is, if you're confident in the precautions you & your business partners have taken). I love the fact that the internet really is a wild west, where anything is available just a click away.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36641978]I suppose it is, and correct me if I'm wrong or overgeneralizing, but I have a feeling that there are a lot of people that watch snuff videos out of curiosity or because the video featured has someone that's well known in them, but they don't watch it because they get any enjoyment out of it if that makes any sense? Whereas most poeple watch cp because they actually enjoy it or they get off on it, other than law enforcement personnel investigating them. Maybe I'm going out on a limb here but I still feel there's a slight difference.[/QUOTE]
No I think you are correct here. People who watch child pornography are definitely watching it because they're sexually interested in children. And while I don't know for sure, I imagine that [I]most[/I] people watch gore videos out of a morbid curiosity. But there is most likely also a few people who do the inverse; watch cp out of curiosity and/or snuff because it arouses them or is something they otherwise view as attractive.
I think the problem is when you make the assumption that because they enjoy watching it, they will inevitably also do it. Yes, someone who would want to watch child pornography probably would also like to have sex with a child, but I think it is unfair to jump to the conclusion that just because he finds the idea attractive, he must also be unable to tell right from wrong.
I think people have to realize that there's a difference between looking at something a person likes, and making the decision to pursue it in the real world.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36647693]I think the problem is when you make the assumption that because they enjoy watching it, they will inevitably also do it. Yes, someone who would want to watch child pornography probably would also like to have sex with a child, but I think it is unfair to jump to the conclusion that just because he finds the idea attractive, he must also be unable to tell right from wrong.
I think people have to realize that there's a difference between looking at something a person likes, and making the decision to pursue it in the real world.[/QUOTE]
That's also a very good point and I know that probably 9/10 (pulled that number out of my ass) of people that would watch cp would never act on those feelings towards a child, I've always neglected to question what may make a person have those feelings. They may have been sexually abused as a child themselves, which is why they might feel the way they do about young children, or there are probably dozens of other factors that made them into the person they are. Or they may have simply been born that way. I don't know. I suppose in either of those scenarios I would say its unfair to judge them as long as they don't act on those feelings or prey on children.
I think most of my feelings about this subject come from living in a very judgmental society where anyone that falls outside of social norms is often vilified or chastised for things that are outside of their control or that happened to them when they were a child. I still feel that anyone that acts on any feelings of lust towards children is very much in the wrong and should be caught/punished.
And for the record I'm still not comfortable with the creepy gym teacher with the cp videos on his hard drive teaching my child. I don't know if I'm right or wrong for feeling this way. The same thing would go for a priest, or anyone else in a position of trust that works with children. Perhaps it's just a stigma, or maybe it's a legitimate concern. But either way I know I am still not entirely comfortable with it. But I guess that also might just be part of being a worried parent. Any good parent would want to remove any chance of something bad happening to their child, this is why they make them wear a helmet when riding a bicycle for example, or tell them not to talk to strangers etc.
Also I feel like we're way off topic now but this has been a great discussion so far :v:
[editline]6th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Jookia;36646106]I believe the Internet should be the wild west, fully open and rampant without any restrictions. It's much more interesting. I've had myself deconstructed, beaten up and reconstructed multiple times over the years by trolls, and that's pretty much because there's no moderation.[/QUOTE]
Oh god yes. The one thing that makes me worried about the future of the web more than anything else right now is the anti-bullying/anti-trolling laws that are being reviewed or have been passed by different governments. The moment trolling becomes a crime the internet will no longer be the 'Wild West.'
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36651444]I still feel that anyone that acts on any feelings of lust towards children is very much in the wrong and should be caught/punished.[/QUOTE]
Indeed, indeed. The internet can be the wild west, then we'll have real life be the capital of consequences and where we actually try to be considerate to each other.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36651444]And for the record I'm still not comfortable with the creepy gym teacher with the cp videos on his hard drive teaching my child. I don't know if I'm right or wrong for feeling this way. The same thing would go for a priest, or anyone else in a position of trust that works with children. Perhaps it's just a stigma, or maybe it's a legitimate concern. But either way I know I am still not entirely comfortable with it. But I guess that also might just be part of being a worried parent. Any good parent would want to remove any chance of something bad happening to their child, this is why they make them wear a helmet when riding a bicycle for example, or tell them not to talk to strangers etc.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I see what you mean.
I don't think there's anything wrong with being concerned, in fact that's probably a really good thing unless it makes you attack the people that concern you out of prejudice. But concern just keeps you on the safe side, which can hardly be seen as a bad thing.
[QUOTE]Also I feel like we're way off topic now but this has been a great discussion so far :v:[/QUOTE]
Heh, perhaps we are pretty off-track. There's just many things to think about in a discussion like this. I mean for example piracy and child porn are very different subjects, but still very relevant, so~
I think governments and by extension corporations should be allowed to track you as they see fit.
I agree with some form of regulation of the internet, the world has become too reliant on it for communication, business and such.
For example, let's say a rival site to Amazon decides one day to DDoS Amazon's servers, and render the regular Amazon customers unable to buy products from Amazon, and instead they go to their competitor. This is an example where the internet needs to be regulated, and the law should become involved.
What I do not agree with however, is the censorship of websites, which is becoming increasingly common. This doesn't mean we should allow companies to knowingly host copyrighted content, but blocking access to websites such as ThePirateBay which merely links to that content should not be allowed. It would be like closing down a gun shop because a gun purchased from there was used to kill somebody.
The deep web is the part of the internet that is not indexed by search engines, it doesn't mean that there is illegal stuff on it. Besides, a big part of the deep web is internal college campus websites and similar stuff.
[QUOTE=_Maverick_;36619181]i myself don't really see the bad side of this.
i don't use all the bad stuff that lurks in the deep dark internet
but then, i support freedom of speech and information so i'm just a massive hypocrite. :v:[/QUOTE]
i don't see how that is being a hypocrite since its basically the same
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36652533]Heh, perhaps we are pretty off-track. There's just many things to think about in a discussion like this. I mean for example piracy and child porn are very different subjects, but still very relevant, so~[/QUOTE]
True, true. And no one has really brought up sites like Wikileaks (except for in the context of snuff vidoes) or the Patriot Act, which is a little disappointing. But it seems like the vast majority view having a completely free and open internet while still supporting going after people who commit certain crimes. If anything it looks like governments are moving towards more regulation and limiting free speech (not necessarily even just to remove illegal content, anti-bullying laws for example), which is definitely the [i]wrong[/i] direction.
here's the point of the internet:
transferring information from one place to another.
when someone tries to break the concept of transferring information, then there may as well be no internet at all.
The fact of the matter is, is that people get sad that they don't make as much money or are unhappy about what is discussed or what is being done.
The internet is just a tool. You can't say it's illegal for me to process copyrighted information within my brain, so why do people feel the need to get angry about this amazing tool?
[QUOTE=Noss;36652813]I agree with some form of regulation of the internet, the world has become too reliant on it for communication, business and such.
For example, let's say a rival site to Amazon decides one day to DDoS Amazon's servers, and render the regular Amazon customers unable to buy products from Amazon, and instead they go to their competitor. This is an example where the internet needs to be regulated, and the law should become involved.[/QUOTE]
Yeah. I'm pretty sure you can go to jail for knowingly participating in a DDoS attack. But that's not quite what this thread is about.
[QUOTE=Noss;36652813]It would be like closing down a gun shop because a gun purchased from there was used to kill somebody.[/QUOTE]
Indeed, although it's a very sketchy gun shop.
[editline]6th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=AK'z;36654199]here's the point of the internet:
transferring information from one place to another.
when someone tries to break the concept of transferring information, then there may as well be no internet at all.
The fact of the matter is, is that people get sad that they don't make as much money or are unhappy about what is discussed or what is being done.
The internet is just a tool. You can't say it's illegal for me to process copyrighted information within my brain, so why do people feel the need to get angry about this amazing tool?[/QUOTE]
I like the way you think.
And I don't think it's so much the tool itself that people get upset about, but what people can do with it. It actually reminds me of the gun debate in a lot of ways.
The problem is there's so much shit on the internet. A lot of stuff should be taken down as the OP pointed out, but if we give the government the right to do that, nothing stops them from claiming harmless things they don't like are bad and removing them. The government doesn't like power limitations. Either they have all the power over something or they have none of it.
I find it weird that there has been almost nobody in this thread that oppose the idea of a totally free Wild West internet, yet the reaction is completely the opposite in a thread actually about child pornography?
[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;36654545]The problem is there's so much shit on the internet. A lot of stuff should be taken down as the OP pointed out, but if we give the government the right to do that, nothing stops them from claiming harmless things they don't like are bad and removing them. The government doesn't like power limitations. Either they have all the power over something or they have none of it.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the problem is that the government will just steamroll onwards once you let them taste a little bit of power, the problem is something you're showing in your own post. If you agree that some [I]"stuff should be taken down"[/I], then you have already opened the can of worms that is the ability to take down whatever someone decides is bad.
And who decides what is bad? Well, the government is part of making that decision. So I think we have to be steadfast in saying that data cannot be bad and as such they should remove none of it.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36654465]It actually reminds me of the gun debate in a lot of ways.[/QUOTE]
Totally agree with that.
I also do think Wikileaks is worth mentioning. I've seen people bring up the point that people can be endangered from the documents that are leaked, and that this point should support not leaking those documents. Again I'd want to point out that transparency and honesty would probably work better overall in the long run, had the governments been going about their business in an honest way.
I would like to think that if you get in trouble for being honest, you're probably doing something wrong, especially as a government.
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36654465]
reminds me of the gun debate in a lot of ways.[/QUOTE]
Reminds me to bring up how the internet concerns "non-physical" aspects of life.
Things used to be physically communicated, not any more.
The internet just isn't a place to police because it's literally impossible to do so with accuracy. Unlike say, drug dealing.
Here we're talking about ones and zeros.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36654888]I find it weird that there has been almost nobody in this thread that oppose the idea of a totally free Wild West internet, yet the reaction is completely the opposite in a thread actually about child pornography?[/QUOTE]
I think this is because child pornography is such an emotional issue, and not unjustly so as it involves actual victims who are for the most part completely defenseless or not aware of what's going on and often have issues that develop that follow them for the rest of their lives. But when it comes to the internet I think most people are willing to give up a little if it means not having the government decide what they want to control on the internet and how. But as you made me realize in this thread when someone uploads cp the damage that they cased for the child is already done, and arresting people for downloading it isn't going to change anything even though they may be doing something that's morally questionable. And then again brining morality into something like this opens up yet another can of worms.
[QUOTE=Sherow_Xx;36654888]
Totally agree with that.
I also do think Wikileaks is worth mentioning. I've seen people bring up the point that people can be endangered from the documents that are leaked, and that this point should support not leaking those documents. Again I'd want to point out that transparency and honesty would probably work better overall in the long run, had the governments been going about their business in an honest way.
I would like to think that if you get in trouble for being honest, you're probably doing something wrong, especially as a government.[/QUOTE]
Well if you remember when Wikileaks leaked the 'Afghan files,' or whatever that huge leak they had from the U.S. military on the Afghan war, which was hugely embarrassing for the U.S. Government, but also potentially dangerous as it contained the uncensored names and villages of some of the Afghans that may have been cooperating with ISAF forces. Even the Taliban said they were scanning through the documents and were going to assassinate people caught working with the infidel forces. I don't know if it's ever been proven that somebody has been killed just because their name was listed in those documents, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were.
Anyways back to the point I can totally understand the U.S. military going after Bradley Manning since he was the source of the leak, and like you said the government should support not leaking those documents. I don't know what going after Wikileaks or Julian Assange is supposed to accomplish.
[editline]6th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Gmod_Fan77;36654545]The problem is there's so much shit on the internet. A lot of stuff should be taken down as the OP pointed out, but if we give the government the right to do that, nothing stops them from claiming harmless things they don't like are bad and removing them. The government doesn't like power limitations. Either they have all the power over something or they have none of it.[/QUOTE]
Well this is pretty much my stance at this point. It's going to be impossible to remove all illegal content, and once the government starts exercising control over it, like you said, the government doesn't like power limitations. Also, who is the government to decide what's bad? Like I said earlier, some of the anti-bullying and anti-defamation laws that have been passed recently are particularly worrying.
[editline]6th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=AK'z;36654957]Reminds me to bring up how the internet concerns "non-physical" aspects of life.
Things used to be physically communicated, not any more.
The internet just isn't a place to police because it's literally impossible to do so with accuracy. Unlike say, drug dealing.
Here we're talking about ones and zeros.[/QUOTE]
Yup. There's always going to be false positives, and you're going to have people slipping under the radar. Even if the government does try to start censoring it there's always going to be ways around it and instead of censoring the internet they're acting more as a gatekeeper, which is just as worrying.
It may as well be the wild west. Given what's going on.
[QUOTE=nehkz;36656736]It may as well be the wild west. Given what's going on.[/QUOTE]
Care to elaborate a little?
[QUOTE=DamagePoint;36656820]Care to elaborate a little?[/QUOTE]
Certainly. Well, first of all the government in my country have decided to block a certain website (I'm sure you've heard about it) which is just absolute madness. The madness of these people, thinking they have power to control what was always meant to be a free place. Secondly, since the internet is a free place, it's like, let's say cowboys invading a Indian tribe. It shouldn't happen. (Sorry if that made no sense, I'm very bad at expressing myself in words.)
What the fuck are you talking about
[QUOTE=oclictis1;36670606]What the fuck are you talking about[/QUOTE]
I don't know.
The suits can't handle being the goddamn Indians for a change, so they want to imprison the cowboys? How lame is that? Roll them in tar and feathers (callout threads) Or drag 'em through town behind a horse (CWC, Jessi Slaughter and so on). It's the only way.
Unlike the Indians, we shouldn't have any reservations about exterminating the Suits since they have no culture worth preserving or respecting.
[editline]9th July 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=oclictis1;36670606]What the fuck are you talking about[/QUOTE]
It's the establishment!
I'd rather leave the law to the websites themselves than a government.
I think that governments should stay out of things they don't understand.
The anonymity of the internet is what gives it its zeal. If everybody were to have their name attached to everything, I don't think we'd be able to talk quite as freely about things that we like to.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
