Main Area and Open Discussion > Living Room

Sorry, This Post Has Been Censored

<< < (17/19) > >>

TaoPhoenix:
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:
Coincidentally, this interesting post from The Centre for the Study of Innovative Freedom:
Copyright is Unconstitutional: Update
-IainB (March 07, 2012, 05:43 AM)
--- End quote ---

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."
-TaoPhoenix (March 07, 2012, 07:02 PM)
--- End quote ---


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

IainB:
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:
SpoilerReporters 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

--- End quote ---

Renegade:
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.prisonplanet.com/tsa-body-scanners-proven-worthless-infowars-nightly-news.html

http://www.prisonplanet.com/tsa-tacitly-admits-1-billion-dollar-body-scanner-system-is-critically-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.com/verify_age?next_url=/watch%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.com/watch?v=MFEBsNdiYbM

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

http://reasonandjest.com/blog/2011/09/where-is-activist-post/

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

http://www.naturalnews.com/035216_raw_milk_photos_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.

IainB:
Google is increasingly...
-Renegade (March 13, 2012, 07:33 AM)
--- End quote ---
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".
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!
--- End quote ---
-IainB (March 03, 2012, 01:41 AM)
--- End quote ---
Of course the US State Department gave their approval to the use of Chrome. Why wouldn't they?    :-[

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page