Internet Censorship

[Ramzi]

Thoughts? For or against? I have a feeling that the discussion will lean to left, but I want thoughtful answers. Should information how to commit crimes be allowed to stay, or instructions on how to make bombs? I know that there are arguments about human choice, but how far does choice go? And how does freedom go? To maintain order in a society, we need to set limitations, but where we should set those limitations is where people disagree. So, what do you guys think? Do things that society deems evil, such as child porn, have a place on the Internet under the guise of expression? Let's hear it.

[Tedob1]

who the **** are you? YOU want thoughtful answers, you'll find everything you need to know by reading emily post, *******

[SarinMage]

untill we can learn to live without rulers and governments, everything will be chaos, and all limitations wil lbe broken...untill people instinctivly get along, there MUST be chaos, only if we have complete chaos will things balence out, weve lived the extreme of being ruled by people, now we need the opisite extreme.

try everything before you choose ?!?

::random intoxicated rambling might not make any sense to anyone but me, sorry.. but hopefully you get what im saying::

[thesecretfire]

Down tdob1, down boy! Jeez, any particular reason you're flaming him?

Anyhoo, as with just about anything, a proper balance is required. Basically, stuff that presents a specific danger to people involved, like the aformentioned examples of child porn and bomb making, should probably be banned or removed. But the problems with it are these: If you ban it, how can you make sure that legitimate content isn't blocked or removed? If you give a body power to ban internet material, how can you have adequate controls over the power of that body? How do you stop it form being biased towards certain interests? As the DMCA continues to show us, powerful laws are easily abused.

[BiZaRo]

Tedob1 you'r to hard be more peaceful
Everyone has a right for hys own opinion
Something i realized is that humans can't live whith eachother, the point is that people will never be able to get a society that will works completly until they learn to live with each other

[Mahakaal]

Well IMO, some things might be wrong but be acceptable by society. Alcohol and Tobacco for example. But you get Marijuana, and everyone looks down on you. Again IMO, dope is less harmful than Tobacco OR Alcohol, the question has to do with Conformity. I think you have to question your values and look at the pros and cons of EVERYTHING, before you decide.

At the same time you must be aware of the fact that some people might just not be ready for a particular type of information/change whatever. Therefore they should be protected against harming themselves or others. If you dont tell a child, that fire is hot, he/she is bound to hurt him or herself and possibly others. However that also does not mean that you smother the person by being overly protecting or overbearing. You have to find a balance between exposure and information. And allow them to form their own ideas.

PS I might have digressed a bit

[Reality]

Assuming that it is possible to regulate the web in that fashion.

For the most part I have to say that regulating the content on the internet would be a travisty to free speech. That said, there are some things that need to be kept off the web. Basically anything that would be illegal in print should be treated likewise digitally. IMO

[MrLinus]

I have to agree with Reality. One thing to keep in mind is that the Internet is not controlled by the USA no matter how much it's government thinks its so.

Further, if you want Free Speech with it comes, unfortunately, the ugly side of Free Speech. How to create bombs, how to hate, how to kill, how to maim. But remember that it is a two-edge sword for them as it is for you. If you don't agree, put up a site that says why and challenge them.