Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Jun 2011 18:51 UTC
Internet & Networking It's official now. The signs had been there for a while now. While the west bangs on about the importance of freedom and democracy, they don't actually want anyone to have too much of it. The US, France, and the UK have jointly pretty much declared war on freedom on the web.
Thread beginning with comment 476711
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Let's all panic!!!
by saynte on Fri 10th Jun 2011 01:19 UTC in reply to "Let's all panic!!!"
saynte
Member since:
2007-12-10

Thanks, I agree with you. Some countries declare that they're going to cooperate to police the web and suddenly the sky is falling. I don't understand.

I found many of the opinions in the article unrelated to the inciting event. It made it seem like the recent news limits freedom, which I can't see any facts to support.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Let's all panic!!!
by marblesbot on Fri 10th Jun 2011 04:53 in reply to "RE: Let's all panic!!!"
marblesbot Member since:
2009-12-25

The need for governments to act proportionately in cyberspace and in accordance with national and international law

Why should the government have any role on the internet and the free speech on the internet?

The need for users of cyberspace to show tolerance and respect for diversity of language, culture and ideas

Oh, this one is always a good one. In the name of "fairness" to everybody, governments ALWAYS pick a favorite.

The need to respect individual rights of privacy and to provide proper protection to intellectual property

Providing protection ti IP should say it all, but I'll also add that when a government starts talking about rights of privacy, they're scheming.

The need for us all to work collectively to tackle the threat from criminals acting online

Really? This one's not self explanatory?

The promotion of a competitive environment which ensures a fair return on investment in network, services, and content

They want a fair return on their investment. That's called taxes. Tax the people who's money they spent making their investment. That's paying for the same thing twice. You're also paying a service provider for access, so that's really paying for it three times. And what services and content? I think that relates to the intellectual property.

Edited 2011-06-10 04:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

jabbotts Member since:
2007-09-06

I'm going to have to side with Mr Schneier about the criminals online issue.


The need for us all to work collectively to tackle the threat from criminals acting online


If they actually want to curtail crime online; fix the low product quality delivered to end users with config settings based on "allow all" approach to security for benefit of the product vendors.

I mean RSA was broken into because of crap product quality in Flash and the business decision that html is an appropriate format for email. The PDF format intentionally includes executable code. For what? It's a document format. It has no justification for including executable code in the document. Canwest this year had fully patched Internet Explorer and Safari exploited and yet still. Speaking of IE; WTF is a web browser doing embedded deeply into kernel space?

Nah.. the laws being written are to benefit politicians and big business lobby groups. If it was really about "protecting the children" they'd focus on the crap quality of what's delivered to consumers.

Reply Parent Score: 2