Censorship of the internet is on the increase

  Forum Editor 06:47 18 May 2007

throughout the world.

click here

  g0slp 08:04 18 May 2007

No suprises as to which countries are vigorously doing this, is there?

  donki 10:21 18 May 2007

Its hard to tell what to think, certainly its great way to distribute and gather information. On the other hand there are certain things that obviously should be shut down for everyones benifit.

  Fruit Bat /\0/\ 10:55 18 May 2007

'It chose 41 countries for the survey in which testing could be done safely and where there was "the most to learn about government online surveillance".'

Some countries not tested, and therefore not on the list North Korea springs to mind as a likely place for goverment filtering.

'A number of states in Europe and the US were not tested because the private sector rather than the government tends to carry out filtering, it said. '

So what is your ISP filtering out and why?
We demand that they filter spam but would be upset if we found they were blocking us from other content.

  Cymro. 10:59 18 May 2007

Either we have self censorship or we put up with being censored by someone else.

Let`s face it there are many sites on the Internet that should be censored.

  Kate B 11:44 18 May 2007

No, Cymro, nothing should be censored. If there are things you don't want your children to see, then it's up to you do to the censoring, not the state. One person's disgusting filth is another person's turn-on, and to drive things out of sight is to drive them underground - they don't go away. If anything, they gather strength where you can't keep an eye on them.

There are lots of things on the web that I don't want to see. I definitely don't want to see child porn, or al Qaeda beheading captives, so I don't look for those things. They're repellent - but should they be censored? People who are interested in that stuff will find it anyway.

  donki 12:00 18 May 2007

I dont agree, by giving such things a viewing place such as the NET ur allowing more people to have access to it. Child porn and other perverse media is underground already wif its on the NET or not and should be routed out and stopped at all costs. People are making VAST amounts of money out of these kinds of activities.

If sumthing is against the law why should it have public access? I mean the thought of magazines on your local shops top shelf of child porn, or proaganda supporting terroist groups would be discusting and would/should never happen. Y should the NET be different?

  [email protected] 12:13 18 May 2007

to think you can stop this with censorship is hardly realistic or workable, people use use sites and contacts others find disturbing, will not just dissappear, it's the way of things. At the momment at least people can monitor roughly whats happening.
my local magazine shop can get any magazine you want, any drug, conterfiet printing plates and illegal weapons amongst other things, laws drive things underground and doesnt stop them.
it's a free world and very possible and easy to block these nasties from the eyes of the young and innocent, it's an evil world and surpressing free views because some find them offensive has never worked IMHO.

  [email protected] 12:23 18 May 2007

sorry, didnt really make sense, the point i was trying to make was access to all things evil is obtainable by one and all. You will not think 'ooh i'll buy a big gun' when you walk into my local shop because he doesnt advertise them.
i find the web the same, i have never come accross any child porn or political views unless i were to search for them, and it doesnt matter how many rules and nanny state, big brother tactics are in force if i want something i'll find it.

  wee eddie 12:38 18 May 2007

There are many things out there that are not my cup of tea. The fact that people make money out of people that are willing to pay money is one of the facts of human existence should not be part of the balance. It is your decision not to visit the site that counts.

Child Pornography is one of the concepts that causes me a considerable amount of internal debate. I prefer it that I am given the choice not to visit such a site.

But being selective is the road to ruin, after all if you decide to ban Child Pornography, I elect to ban my Political Rivals sites and if I get into power I can do what I want.

  Kate B 12:53 18 May 2007

That's spot-on, wee eddie. There are a couple of things we can probably agree on, child porn obviously being one of them, but so much else is open to debate that it quickly becomes unworkable.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

Xiaomi Mi Mix 2 review

What went wrong at the Designs of the Year 2017

iPhone X news: Release date, price, new features & specs

Comment regarder des séries et talk-shows américains en France ?