Home | Blog | Software | Reviews and Features | Forum | Help | Donate | About us
topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • September 02, 2015, 11:58:15 AM
  • Proudly celebrating 10 years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Last post Author Topic: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored  (Read 23177 times)

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #75 on: March 03, 2012, 06:13:31 PM »
Censorship badge.jpg

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #76 on: March 03, 2012, 06:41:23 PM »
Talking of censorship...this proposal seems to be more than slightly relevant.
Media fears for freedom as watchdog unleashed
I never would have supposed that the Ozzie government would propose such a thing, but there we are:
Quote
The proposals, issued yesterday by Communications Minister Stephen Conroy, also seek to widen the scope of federal oversight to cover print, online, radio and TV within a single regulator for the first time.
Finally, there's to be some "regulation". That should fix the naysayers.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #77 on: March 04, 2012, 07:01:55 AM »
I find that one of the most saddening things about censorship driven by Government/State/Commercial Lobby organisations is the scope that it affords for potential and actual oppression of people in societies that, in historical terms, have only relatively recently (since WW2) been able to live in peace and freedom. The German surrender to the Western Allies and the Soviet Union took place in late April and early May 1945 - that was only 67 years ago, but probably before most of us reading this will have been born. The German surrender would probably not have been made then - if ever - if the Allies had not been strengthened by America joining the fight after the attack on Pearl Harbour by the Japanese in 1941.

This freedom and peace was earned with great difficulty and at the dear cost of hundreds of thousands of lives sacrificed for us in WWII, and arguably in WWI. The people from the oppressing countries in those wars were embraced by the victors and invited into that freedom. But as soon as that freedom came into being, it was to be under attack from all sides by ideologies hostile to it.

The advent of the Internet has heralded an incredible acceleration in communication, the transfer of knowledge and the enablement/fostering of freedom, reaching like a light deep into the darkest recesses of some of the most oppressive States, surprising despotic regimes like a Trojan Horse.

It became clear from various statements and acts over the last few years that oppressive regimes wish to be able to control and censor the Internet within their own countries, and (in the case of the US) censor the Internet in other countries - i.e., outside of their sovereign domain. Now it is becoming abundantly clear that regimes within "free democracies" are already moving progressively to control and censor the Internet within their own countries - e.g., including the US, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the EU countries.

I had been of the view that the current generations that are of the age to contemplate inheriting the Earth were not up to the task. That they undervalued history and the price of freedom and had shown themselves to be too apathetic and disorganised to do anything to confront the oncoming onslaught on their freedoms.
But I hope I was wrong, because I have just read about a new "manifesto" for freedom that has been drafted (in pastebin - here), which could help us to confront whatever is the latest piece of repressive legislation or proposal - e.g., including FRAND, SOPA/PIPA/ACTA/TPP or TSA or RIAA/MPAA or WIPO or Google or Facebook, or Google redesigning their country URL links to allow for (on an as-required basis) country-by-country filtering (censoring) on a national basis by those countries' governments.

Quote
From the Techdirt post Josef Anvil’s Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week:
… So where does all of this lead? To Glyn Moody’s article about the “We, the Web Kids” manifesto, my FAVORITE post of the week and possibly my favorite post EVER on Techdirt. This one article encapsulates almost everything that is discussed in this forum. Whether the debate is about SOPA/PIPA/ACTA/TPP or TSA or RIAA/MPAA or WIPO or Google or Facebook, we have to accept the fact that we are all far more connected than ever before, some of us are even hyperconnected, and it has changed us. We no longer just accept the opinions of “authority,” we want FACTS, we want data, we want the truth (or close as possible). This article details a fundamental shift in the way people THINK, and it’s not just the “web kids.” Personally, I didn’t grow up with the web, but I’m certainly not so blind as to miss how integrated into my life it is. Before the web, I didn’t talk to people all over the world on a daily basis, now I do. How I consume media is completely different, as I get to choose what, when, how, and why. In other words, the way things are done has CHANGED because of the internet.

This manifesto is a wake up call to politicians and corporations around the world. Your citizens and consumers have changed. They are becoming or have become a part of the digital era. They Skype, Tweet, FB, and IM their ideas, opinions, and comments without giving much thought about the process. They Google everything, they shop on their phones, they record video and post it before the “real news” can, they text while in meetings, they create with Gimp and NVU, they work with OpenOffice, and they consume media thru Netflix, HULU, Spotify, Grooveshark, HuffPo, and YouTube. They want to throw away physical storage and move stuff into the “cloud,” if you let them. They don’t want to hear that consumers shouldn’t dictate the market, because they know how to write reviews and share information. They don’t want to hear about laws being bought, and are willing to speak out and challenge the “old ways.”
(read the rest here.)
« Last Edit: March 04, 2012, 07:14:06 AM by IainB »

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #78 on: March 06, 2012, 11:57:36 PM »
A superb FREE film - Sita Sings the Blues - that @Renegade pointed to:
I found this: http://www.sitasingstheblues.com/
While reading this: http://mimiandeunice.com/
Mimi and Eunice is hilarious, so I figured I'd download the "Sita Sings the Blues" movie. (Still downloading -- very much looking forward to it, and too impatient to wait, watch, then post! :) )
But, check this from the site:
Quote
You don't need my permission to copy, share, publish, archive, show, sell, broadcast, or remix Sita Sings the Blues. Conventional wisdom urges me to demand payment for every use of the film, but then how would people without money get to see it? How widely would the film be disseminated if it were limited by permission and fees? Control offers a false sense of security. The only real security I have is trusting you, trusting culture, and trusting freedom.
You can read more at both those sites. If you're mildly interested in copyright and all that wonderfulness, check it out.
I watched the film with my daughter Lily. We loved it and have had repeat viewings. It seems the film is in a semi-autobiographical meta-context (if that makes sense?) of the film's creator (Nina Paley), but is also an accurate animated version of the epic Indian tale of Ramayana, set to the beautiful 1920's jazz vocals of Annette Hanshaw.

The other day we were browsing the website and reading all about and watching the YouTube videos about the copyright hassles that the producer (Nina Paley) went through. It seems that those beautiful 1920's jazz vocals are bound up in almost eternal copyright, due to the media-making lobby's successful attempts in getting the coverage of the copyright legislation extended indefinitely by incremental steps. The songs are a veritable treasure of human creativity locked up by a seemingly greedy, Dog-in-the-manger media group, and could well have never seen the light of day again if it had not been for Nina Paley's persistence.

I think this sort of thing (copyright hassles) could be a typical aspect - part and parcel - of the media-rights commercial lobby's strategy that seems to be driving a lot of the censorship that has been going on (the subject of this thread).
That this has more recently become a more public concern is only because it happened to rise to public awareness and there was an "Internet protest". The SOPA legislation was like a Trojan Horse that got belatedly spotted by an otherwise generally unsuspecting public.

So, I think that what I said above was/is probably true:
...that makes me wonder if that Internet censorship is not just a single narrow aspect of a much larger overall strategy of state censorship in the US, driven presumably by commercial interests rather than by genuine state security interests.

If it is true, then it could indicate that the corporate lobby groups are now effectively the real de facto lawmakers, and the Senate/Judiciary are now the administrators/bureaucrats who are paid to rubber-stamp and enact the new "laws". Presumably, this would make the State Legislature the puppets of the relatively few corporate legal Persons, enacting laws in the interests of those Persons and often against the interests of the many public persons - which would seem to run contrary to (or in breach of) the democratic process and even the duty of government to protect the people.

I could be wrong in this, of course - e.g., if I do not understand the system very well and the system is just fine.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #79 on: March 07, 2012, 05:43:44 AM »
Coincidentally, this interesting post from The Centre for the Study of Innovative Freedom:
Copyright is Unconstitutional: Update

TaoPhoenix

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2011
  • **
  • Posts: 4,385
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #80 on: March 07, 2012, 07:02:51 PM »
As a former tabletop gamer, I keep wanting to come up with an anti-copyright method ruthlessly abusing the "letter"  of the corrupt laws and hopefully an equally ticked off judge will approve it.

Something like "If a creative work is copyrighted the moment it comes into being in fixed form, then my web surfing history exists as my click before it becomes your tracking cookie, so therefore you owe me royalties of $150,000 per tracking cookie that you set."

Same idea, "My name was assigned by my parent at birth, so they're the copyright holders, (and gave it to me), so you can't sell my personal info either."

Renegade

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,787
  • Tell me something you don't know...
    • View Profile
    • Renegade Minds
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #81 on: March 07, 2012, 10:05:30 PM »
Coincidentally, this interesting post from The Centre for the Study of Innovative Freedom:
Copyright is Unconstitutional: Update

Looks interesting. I'm short on time, so I'll give it due attention either on the plane or next week.

As a former tabletop gamer, I keep wanting to come up with an anti-copyright method ruthlessly abusing the "letter"  of the corrupt laws and hopefully an equally ticked off judge will approve it.

Something like "If a creative work is copyrighted the moment it comes into being in fixed form, then my web surfing history exists as my click before it becomes your tracking cookie, so therefore you owe me royalties of $150,000 per tracking cookie that you set."

Same idea, "My name was assigned by my parent at birth, so they're the copyright holders, (and gave it to me), so you can't sell my personal info either."


Hehehehe~! ;D

LOVE IT~! :D

And... I just had a very sinister idea... Muahahahhhahaha~!

Alter the HTTP headers in your browser to include a "terms and conditions" so that whenever you visit a page, not only are you bound by their terms and conditions, but they are also bound by YOUR terms and conditions.

Yeah... Stick that in yer lawyers wahoo! :P


Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #82 on: March 13, 2012, 05:01:58 AM »
I am highly skeptical of journalists' ability to be objective - because an awful lot of them seem to censor themselves into PC (Political Correctness) or the prevailing ThinkSpeak or politico-ideology before they even decide to report on anything.
However, The Inquirer has this interesting post about Reporters Without Borders, which seems to indicate that they are apparently doing some things right:
Spoiler
Quote
Reporters Without Borders lists the enemies of the internet
These countries are the most oppressive online
By Dave Neal
Mon Mar 12 2012, 16:42

JOURNALIST GROUP Reporters Without Borders has published its list of the countries with the worst attitudes towards the internet and online censorship.

A couple of new countries have joined the list for this year, so if there is a dinner for the worst nations, then whoever organises that needs to add Bahrain and Belarus to a seating arrangement that already includes Burma, China, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.

These countries have "enemy of the internet" status, while some other less obvious destinations, including France and Australia, can be found lurking just below them in the "under surveillance" category because of their attitudes toward web filtering and blocking.

All of the countries have placed a boot on internet freedom, according to the report, and Bahrain, which is fresh to its lofty "enemy" status, won its high ranking for its "effective news blackout based on a remarkable array of repressive measures".

Bahrain harasses bloggers and detains them for dissension, it added, while Belarus has shut off the internet during protests and blocks a long list of web sites from its users.

The United Kingdom also makes an appearance, and the report's authors are concerned about the reaction to the riots of this year and any likely technical changes as a result.

"The United Kingdom, whose Digital Rights Bill aimed at protecting copyright has been singled out by U.N. Commissioner La Rue, went through a difficult period during the riots last August," it says.

"In a worrying development, the Canadian company Research In Motion, manufacturers of the Blackberry, made the personal details of some users available to the police without a prior court order."

Surveillance is stronger than ever before, goes deeper and is more effective, says the report, and there are few countries where it does not raise its head.

Where there is oppression, there is also activism, says the report, and hacktivist groups like Anonymous are said to be helping out activists in countries when and where assistance is needed.

"In order to combat increasingly competent censors, self-styled 'hacktivists' have been giving technical assistance to vulnerable netizens to help them share information in the face of pervasive censorship," it adds.

"Last year also saw the development of tools to bypass censorship and blocking of Web access, such as 'Internet in a suitcase' and FreedomBox. Cyber freedom activists are working flat-out to respond to increasingly effective censorship tools."
µ


Renegade

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,787
  • Tell me something you don't know...
    • View Profile
    • Renegade Minds
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #83 on: March 13, 2012, 07:33:32 AM »
Google is increasingly either banning or restricting videos that are critical of the US government. This one was banned, then restricted, and now it seems to be unrestricted:



The TSA contacted members of the mainstream media and threatened them if they reported on the content in the video above (how the TSA body scanners can be easily circumvented):

http://www.prisonpla...rs-nightly-news.html

http://www.prisonpla...itically-flawed.html

There are more stories like it.

Here's one where Google HAS restricted a video that is nothing more than a ridiculous parody of the TSA:

http://www.youtube.c...ch%3Fv%3DMFEBsNdiYbM

Hover your mouse over that link to check it. Now, here's the "real" URL. Click it and watch it change:

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=MFEBsNdiYbM

This post here is complete conjecture, but you can probably understand why:

http://reasonandjest...re-is-activist-post/

Then there's a farmer that was kidnapped and tortured by the LAPD:

http://www.naturalne...tos_prison_food.html

And that story got zero press in the MSM.

Like seriously... before pointing fingers at North Korea and god knows who else, there's a lot that needs to be fixed in the media at home.

I'm not saying that China's censorship is wonderful, roses, rainbows and unicorns. But you know what they say, when you point your finger, you have more pointing back at you.


Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #84 on: March 14, 2012, 06:23:26 AM »
Google is increasingly...
Thanks for all those links.

Now at least I think I can understand that I could have been naive when I made this post:
Secretary Clinton Announces State Department Use of Chrome
Looks like quite an impressive "Win" for Google here.

The post avoids the usual cliché of "excited", but unfortunately replaced it with another adjective - "enthusiastic". This is presumably a mistake - should have been "enthused", the back formation from the noun "enthusiasm".
Quote
We’re enthusiastic to be leading the charge to bring an enhanced web browsing experience to State employees executing the critical U.S. diplomatic mission around the world!
Of course the US State Department gave their approval to the use of Chrome. Why wouldn't they?    :-[

mwb1100

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2006
  • **
  • Posts: 1,430
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #85 on: March 14, 2012, 10:38:01 AM »
Here's one where Google HAS restricted a video that is nothing more than a ridiculous parody of the TSA:

http://www.youtube.c...ch%3Fv%3DMFEBsNdiYbM

Hover your mouse over that link to check it. Now, here's the "real" URL. Click it and watch it change:

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=MFEBsNdiYbM

I think it may be a stretch to say that this is part of some larger policy to restrict anti-government posts - all that's happening here is that YouTube/Google are making you sign in and verify/claim that you're over 18 to view it.  While there's nothing pornographic in the video, I think it's within reason for YouTube/Google to claim it may have material inappropriate for children. One could maybe view this as censorship, but I don't think there's reason to claim that it's politically motivated.

And the "changing URL" is just a redirect if you aren't logged in/'age verified'. The same way I'd be redirected to a login page here if I tried to reply in the forum without being logged in.

Renegade

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,787
  • Tell me something you don't know...
    • View Profile
    • Renegade Minds
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #86 on: March 15, 2012, 08:08:11 PM »
Here's one where Google HAS restricted a video that is nothing more than a ridiculous parody of the TSA:

http://www.youtube.c...ch%3Fv%3DMFEBsNdiYbM

Hover your mouse over that link to check it. Now, here's the "real" URL. Click it and watch it change:

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=MFEBsNdiYbM

I think it may be a stretch to say that this is part of some larger policy to restrict anti-government posts - all that's happening here is that YouTube/Google are making you sign in and verify/claim that you're over 18 to view it.  While there's nothing pornographic in the video, I think it's within reason for YouTube/Google to claim it may have material inappropriate for children. One could maybe view this as censorship, but I don't think there's reason to claim that it's politically motivated.

And the "changing URL" is just a redirect if you aren't logged in/'age verified'. The same way I'd be redirected to a login page here if I tried to reply in the forum without being logged in.



I know the URL thing. I just wanted to point out that it is happening.

There are simply far too many other videos out there that are completely inappropriate for children though. If they were serious about that, a LOT more videos would be restricted to over 18's.

I'm simply no longer willing to grant the benefit of the doubt in these kinds of situations anymore given the recent absolute hostility towards freedom of speech. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck... It's probably a duck.


Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #87 on: May 13, 2012, 01:58:35 AM »
Came across this interesting post on what apparently looked like Google censorship of legitimate political opinion/speech  - dated June 2004:
Google's Gag Order: An Internet Giant Threatens Free Speech

Renegade

  • Charter Member
  • Joined in 2005
  • ***
  • Posts: 12,787
  • Tell me something you don't know...
    • View Profile
    • Renegade Minds
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #88 on: May 13, 2012, 02:16:19 AM »
Came across this interesting post on what apparently looked like Google censorship of legitimate political opinion/speech  - dated June 2004:
Google's Gag Order: An Internet Giant Threatens Free Speech

This is precisely fascism.

Instead of the "government" doing the dirty work, companies do it. What the government can't legally do, companies can.

I really think that it's about time that "companies" have their rights severely restricted. If you don't like it, then don't incorporate. Pretty simple.
Slow Down Music - Where I commit thought crimes...

Freedom is the right to be wrong, not the right to do wrong. - John Diefenbaker

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #89 on: July 05, 2012, 10:49:46 AM »
Useful guidelines here that I had not been aware of, nor understood before now: Avoiding Censorship: How Blocked Websites Stay Online and Accessible [MakeUseOf Explains]
(There are useful embedded links and graphics in the post that are not copied in the spoiler below - see the actual article per link above for those.)
Spoiler
Quote
  • July 4, 2012 - By Chris Hoffman
    We’ve been hearing a lot about website-blocking recently, particularly with anti-piracy organizations forcing Internet service providers to block access to The Pirate Bay in the UK and elsewhere. However, when UK Internet service provider BT blocked The Pirate Bay, the block was only in effect for a few minutes before The Pirate Bay bypassed it.
    How exactly do supposedly blocked websites like The Pirate Bay remain accessible to so many people, in spite of all the efforts to block them? The answer lies in the way the Internet works.
  • How Websites Are Blocked
    When you load a website – say, by going to thepiratebay.org – your computer contacts its domain name system (DNS) server and locates the numerical IP address associated with that website. The DNS server responds with the website’s IP address and your computer contacts the IP address. Domain names like thepiratebay.org and makeuseof.com are human-readable shortcuts that DNS servers translate to numerical IP addresses.
    Blocking can cut off access at the DNS level or block access to the website’s IP address itself. Your Internet service provider runs your default DNS servers, so it can modify them and point thepiratebay.org or another domain name to a “Blocked” page.
    There are several ways around this – you can switch your DNS server to an alternative DNS server that isn’t run by your Internet service provider (ISP), such as Google DNS or OpenDNS. You could also visit the website’s IP address directly – for example, 194.71.107.80 is one of The Pirate Bay’s IP addresses, so you can access The Pirate Bay by plugging this number into your web browser’s address bar.
    Blocking can also cut off access at the server level. To prevent people from using the above methods to get around the blocks, ISPs can block access to specific IP addresses, preventing their users from communicating with the IP addresses entirely.
  • How Websites Bypass Blocks
    If only DNS blocking is occurring, websites can tell their users to switch DNS servers or access specific IP addresses directly. Even if specific IP addresses have been blocked, a website can quickly add a new IP address that point to the website.
    For example, after The Pirate Bay’s IP addresses were blocked, The Pirate Bay immediately added several new IP addresses that pointed to their website. While users could no longer access thepiratebay.org or 194.71.107.80, The Pirate Bay was now also available at 194.71.107.82.
    A Pirate Bay representative told Torrent Freak that “they can continue adding new addresses for years to come.” It’s like whack-a-mole – when an ISP blocks an address, a new one immediately springs up.
  • Legal System Slowness
    Compounding the problem for those who would block websites is the way the legal system works. The blockers often require court orders to block specific domains and IP addresses. Some of these court orders may allow the blockers – anti-piracy groups in the case of The Pirate Bay – to add new IP addresses to the block on short notice, while some do not. As some ISPs in the Netherlands responded when Dutch anti-piracy group BREIN told them to block The Pirate Bay’s new IP addresses – “we will do not comply without a court order”.
    Even if all court orders allowed anti-piracy groups to block new IP addresses without going through the legal system again, court orders would have to be obtained in a variety of countries against a large amount of ISPs. On the other hand, The Pirate Bay can add a new IP address accessible to the entire world and circumvent the block in a few seconds.
  • Other Ways to Bypass Blocks
    The Pirate Bay doesn’t even need to bypass the blocks itself. Pirate Bay users have a variety of ways to bypass the block, including accessing The Pirate Bay through proxies or virtual private networks (VPNs), which “tunnel” the traffic to another ISP. From The Pirate Bay’s perspective, the user is accessing their website from another country without website blocking. The tunnel then passes the traffic in encrypted form back to the user – as the traffic is encrypted and the user isn’t communicating directly with The Pirate Bay, their ISP has no way of blocking this traffic.
    In fact, The Pirate Party UK hosts a proxy that UK residents can use to access The Pirate Bay on ISPs where it’s been blocked. Tor, designed for accessing websites anonymously and circumventing government censorship of the web, can also be used.
  • The Streisand Effect
    Word spreads about new ISP addresses and other ways to bypass blocks extremely quickly. When a website as big as The Pirate Bay is blocked, news stories spring up and alert users to the block and ways of getting around it. The block may actually increase traffic going to the blocked website as a result of the increased media attention and exposure.
    This phenomena is known as the Streisand effect — named after Barbara Streisand, who, in 2003, attempted to remove photos of her house from the Internet. In response, news coverage about the incident resulted in a larger number of people seeing the photos. Similarly, people reading news stories about blocks of a website like The Pirate Bay may wonder what all the fuss is about and check the website out for themselves. News of the block actually increased traffic to The Pirate Bay.
    Have you ever had to get around a block to access a blocked website? Do you have any other questions about how websites are blocked? Let us know in the comments!


Stoic Joker

  • Honorary Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,879
    • View Profile
    • www.StoicJoker.com
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #90 on: July 05, 2012, 11:45:08 AM »
The pious and sanctimonious defenders of "good"/the children/pulchritude/whatever... should all be introduced to this Streisand effect by having it engraved on a cinderblock that is then dropped on their heads.  Maybe then they'd have enough sense to - take some of their own advice... - hold their tongues.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member
Re: Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored
« Reply #91 on: July 05, 2012, 08:54:09 PM »
^ +1 from me    :Thmbsup:
- though I would suggest consideration be given to using something more appropriately dense than a cinderblock - e.g., use an aggregate of granite gravel, rather than cinders.

IainB

  • Supporting Member
  • Joined in 2008
  • **
  • Posts: 5,432
  • Slartibartfarst
    • View Profile
    • Donate to Member