Slashdot Mirror
German Search Engines Self-Regulating
Philipp Lenssen writes "Heise reports the German search engines Google.de, Lycos Europe, MSN Germany, AOL Germany, Yahoo.de, T-Online and T-Info today in Berlin announced the forming of a self-regulating organization (Babelfish version) under the hood of the German FSM (the "Voluntary Self-Control for Multimedia Service Providers"). Their combined goal is to streamline the process of censoring content ruled illegal under German law, so that a user's search results are stripped from such items."
"a user's search results are stripped from such items"
So... it only returns the illegal matches?
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
I love the non-restrictive US.
So that means no more Hitler...or anything remotely linked to WWII...i feel bad for the German student writing the book report about WWII's causes...that's gonna be pretty odd...
Have you seen the arrow?
I'll admit that I haven't RTFA, but I think censoring search engine results is a bad idea for all -- this is a poor move by the German engines. Does the German law system have the equivalent of the US system's law where once you start filtering content, you are responsible for everything you link to? The name of the law/standard in the US escapes me right now.
What's stopping someone in Germany from just going to Google.com instead of Google.de? Would they not then get uncensored results?
Who doesn't like free music?
This just sounds like a way to work together to get the illegal stuff out faster and with less work from each company. I bet this results in a cost savings for each group involved. Instead of one group at each company doing the work, one group overall does it and the results could potentialy be faster and more accurate.
Evolution or ID?
Isn't part of the EU constitution a bit about free speech?
How does that affect these national laws which prevent us from expressing hate openly?
Does anybody know how Google's censoring mechanism works? Does it only censor when you visit google.de and shows you everything for google.com or do you get censored content for google.com as well?
So poop sex and fisting will still be available then?
One thing listed was " glorification of violence".
Wouldn't that mean web sites and game servers for half the games out there could be considered illegal?
Reasonable laws quickly become unreasonable when they're written too vaguely.
Operator, give me the number for 911!
MSN already banned searches for "Adolf Hitler" from it's German search engine, which does of course make a lot of sense, as only Neo-Nazi scum would search for something like this.
People like me who are interested in history would never entertain even the thought to search for "Adolf Hitler" or "Holocaust" on the web.
After all we might stumble on sites like this:
http://www.holocaust-history.org/
Now wouldn't that be terrible...
Mod me down if you want, but I never got how a progressive society in any form could censor content. Now, I understand the historical contexts here, and I understand how the good 'ol USA has in some senses (or at least, in some peoples' eyes) has become a stomping ground for hate groups since nobody else will take them.. but I never got the point of "you can't post that opinion" or "that image, hurting nobody, is banned". I also understand that here in the US we have plenty of laws outlawing things which hurt nobody.. but HTML and GIFs?
Perhaps somebody from the European states could enlighten me.
I don't agree with the censorship...but on the postive note, I am glad to see all of these different companies coming together with a common directive. Considering the "search engine wars" they are involved in, I am amazed reps from each company can even get in a room together without geek warfare breaking out.
http://jayceecorder.blogspot.com
Censorship is bad. So why self-censor? Are the german users unable to decide for themselves what is right to see or not?
I think its a good initiative from the search engines, although its probably because they are afraid of being sued... But people who want to obtain illegal information, will still be able to get it via other free american search engines...
FSM (the "Voluntary Self-Control for Multimedia Service Providers")
Worst acronym ever.
You'd think Germans would be better at that sort of thing...
--
I saved Latin. What did you ever do?
Just use google.li, they provide the same results but without any censorship. Google.de appears to filter at least some radical Nazi sites an other forbidden conten for some time now.
Seems fair to me. I'm all for free speech, but not when it entices crime.
Define "crime."
Speeding is a crime. In many parts of the United States, for example, exceeding 65 MPH is a crime, and on most urban expressways, exceeding 55 MPH is a crime.
The song "I can't drive 55" (1980s crapola music, but nevertheless) arguably incites one to commit a crime. Under the law you just cited, that would be censorable material.
As would many discussions here on slashdot in opposition to existing copyright law, patent law, and in support of many peer-to-peer networking technologies.
I can understand why Germany finnds such speech annoying and offensive, but censorship isn't the answer, and I'm afraid Europe (and perhaps most of the western world) is about to get a lesson in just how bad an idea censorship, even of offensive material, really is, and exactly how much worse such a cure is than the disease it's intended to address.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
What's the difference between PC users and a newborn baby? PC users don't smile when you spoon-feed them. WTF is wrong with the governments today? Do they need to have "we know better" written on everything they do? Matter of fact I'm pretty sure they don't. Or do they think I'd be happy to see Bamby rabbits when searching for "Hitlerjugend"? BTW - does searching for such a thing automatically make me a pro-nazi?
From the article:
Forbidden in Germany and restricting the freedom of speech are child pornography, right wing extremist "hate" sites, incitement to commit crimes, race discrimination, treasonable conduct as an agent for sabotage purposes, glorification of violence, or offence against the law for the protection of the youth.
I can understand the child pornography thing, or even the right wing extremist "hate" sites and race discrimination, but what if someone is doing research on the rise of extremist groups and race discrimination? Are they now just SOL? Also, glorification of violence? Have you seen how many german kids play FPS online nowadays? It may be a little late for that.
Also, will Google.de be the only part of google to block this out? If so, one could still just click on "google in english" and bypass the censorship since it only applies to Google.de?
Just use an anonymous web proxy....
Seems like yet another foiled attempt to legislate the Internet!
http://www.reeb.freeserve.co.uk
Google was caught filtering out neo-Nazi sites back in 2002 so MSN is just following common practice.
"We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
This FSM Approved by the Comics Code Authority.
--
make install -not war
I was also redirected to Google.ca for several days in a row (for some reason still unknown to me). This happened whenever I connected from my home computer, which is located in central Virginia. Once you are at Google.ca, however, you can click on "Go to Google.com" which sends you to http://www.google.com/ncr, which will not redirect you to Google.ca, even if you actually are in Canada.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
How about "Self-censoring"?
Propaganda and hate speech are kind of like the flu -- if you are exposed to different forms of it (and assuming it doesn't kill you) your immune system becomes stronger. This is the equivalent of putting a baby in a bubble and expecting them to grow up healthy.
That's why the answer to free speech is always more free speech, not censorship.
Forbidden in Germany and restricting the freedom of speech are..., glorification of violence, ...
They don't have video games or action movies in Germany?
One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
Ah, so you filter content without a chance to really test to see if the content is illegal (like in court), and the decisions as to what is legal and illegal content is done by someone other than a judge.
I like this new model. With the AU law requiring ISPs to report instances of child pornography (and no mention of liability if the ISP happens to be mistaken), the trend seems to be making everyone an unpaid law enforcement officer, especially when they are not accountable in any way whatsoever.
Gosh, when companies take the law into their own hands... what do you call that?
I guess this is what everyone wanted who complained that US not letting local or state government take control of the cable and other services.
Is this what you want? Government control cenorship? I mean all I read yesterday was how bad the US is? We have our own problems, but the people still run the country(for the most part).
Deserving got nothing to do with it.....shuffle
The issue of what content is illegal, and whether it should be or not, is a separate one. The government is the one that's making the content rules, the search providers are just responding -- and doing so by forming a group because it probably makes technical and economic sense. The fact that they are forming a group has no real news in itself: presumably they were already having to supress the content, now they are just working together to lower their pain levels.
I tried to think of any negative consequences, and only that the group could get into trouble if they acted as a cartel and exchanged price or operating sensitive information, or worked together to filter out foreign competitors or foreign content. Cartel behaviour is a well known phenomena, and easily possibly in the realm of search and information rather than products and prices.
- I am a german, but I am not a nazi. I belive in a democracy and don't want to change that.
I am not for censorship
The neonazis say "Die Nazis haben nie Gaskammern gebaut, alles eine Lüge" (Translation: "The nazis never built gas chambers, that's a lie!"
If you use google.de, you will get the "censored" results. For example links to informations/documetation websites that explain why this was a bad period in german history....
I think there will be no links to any websites of Garry Lauck"
If you use google.com you will get "the american version" of the results.
My opinion is that you can not surpress other "beliefs" but you can inform that these beliefs are bad or caused people to behave barbarous against other people.
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
FSM = Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Medien
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
I don't believe that the actual cryptography is restricted. (I know you can use PuTTY here, and I suspect it is perfectly legal to use the "European version", however that may differ.) I am definitely no expert in this matter, so I could be wrong, but absent reliable information to the contrary, I don't think I am. For a while, certain cryptography programs (e.g., SecureCRT) could not be sent overseas. This meant that if you were downloading SecureCRT you had to acknowledge (by clicking on a button - real secure) that you were actually downloading it within the US. Since I always downloaded it within the US, I have no idea if they were doing any checking beyond asking you to verify that you were in the US. This restriction, btw, has been removed - at least for the time being.
You could be right, but if so, could you please cite some evidence? I tried doing a Google search, and came up negative. I.e., it did not confirm or deny what you are suggesting.
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Censorship is a slippery slope. I agree with the Neo-Nazism ban in Europe--oftentimes, it's the only weapon the authorities have in the fight against hate crimes. http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/story.jsp?sto ry=604279 However, in the same Russia, the entire mass-media is controlled by the government and independent news media tend to "mysteriously" go out of business.
Is your security more important than your freedom?
Brian: Yeah, uh, about your pamphlet, uh, I'm not seeing anything about German history between 1939 and 1945. There's just a big gap.
German Tour Guide: Everyone was on vacation! On your left is Munich's first city hall erected in 15--
Brian: Wait, wait. What are you talking about? Germany invaded Poland in 1939 and--
German Tour Guide: We were invited! Punch was served!
Brian: You can't just ignore those years. Thomas Mann fled to America because of Nazism's stranglehold on Germany.
German Tour Guide: Nope. Nope. He left to manage a Dairy Queen.
Brian: A Dairy Queen? That's preposterous.
German Tour Guide: I will hear no more insinuations about the German people! Nothing bad happened!
They don't force anyone to modify the game. You can even sell the original game - but you cannot advertise that version. Clients have to specifically ask for the "ab 18" (age 18 or older) original version. That has an impact on sales.
A lot of game producers find it more attractive to modify the game and be able to sell it to more age groups.
If the content filtered out from the search results is really illegal, the authorities should go after those who put the contents online.
And if the german authorities cannot stop the contents because it is located in other contries, this kind of censorship is no better than the censorship done by countries like Iran and China. The only difference is that it is called "voluntary". Please note that Germany has a history of banning both extreme rigth-wing and extreme left-wing political speech.
FSM = Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Multimedia
Grundgesetz * 23. Mai 1949 - 30. November 2007 - http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/
Yet google.de still claims that is serches the same number of site that google.com does:
Suche auf 8.058.044.651 Web-Seiten
Searching 8,058,044,651 web pages
www.google.com/intl/zh-CN/ also claims to search the same number of sites, and China is a more dangerous place for free speech than Deutschland. I suppose that's why there is no google.cn
The situation is kind of reversed. While there is no problem with nudity (even full frontal nudity in prime-time television), violence is frowned upon and you won't see as much of it as you can on US TV. Movies with scenes of violence get more restrictive ratings. Check out akas.imdb.com and compare the "Certification" part of movies with violence or horror.
What's going to happen? How's the censorship boogeyman going to bite us in the ass?
... though hopefully not.
You sound remarkably like a troll, or a young teenager still so wrapped up in your own cultural bigotry and ethnocentrism that you believe yourself and your society to be above learning from anyone else in the world. As a citizen of a country whose president has the latter character trait, such characteristics are rather easy to identify.
To address your point, lest someone innocent reading this actually buy into your "nothing can happen, prove otherwise! Failure to prove otherwise proves it will never happen and anyone who suggests otherwise is an ass!" tripe:
Define A as illegal (may be a misdemeaner, may be a felony, or EU equivelent) (e.g. copyright violation).
Define B is inciting A. E.g. Criticizing copyright is an implicit incitement to commit copyright violation, which is a crime.
Apply law banning "incitement to commit a crime." E.g. "You may not critizie copyright, because to do so incites people to violate copyright, which is a crime."
No reform is possible, as no one may speak out against the existing law.
Apply this to pretty much any law the current powerholders have a vested interest in maintaining, irrespective of the public interests. Software patents might be a good example in another couple of years
Frankly, if Germans in particular, and Europeans in general, are unable to grasp this, you have a whole world of political hurt coming your way.
This ins't to defend the American idiocy of the last half decade in any respect. We have plenty of hurt coming our way, as a natural consiquence of our own stupidity. That, however, doesn't immunize Europe against the consiquences of its own failings as well, or legitimize the bigoted notion that because a non-European made an observation about the implications of a European law, it has no value.
How? What's the lesson we're going to learn, and who's going to teach it to us?
You're going to teach it to yourselves. Just as you did the lessons of world war II. Like any society, you'll probably come out of it in the end in one of two states: 1) with an extended period of darkness (e.g. the "dark ages", where it took more than a millenium to learn the lessons of dictatorship vs. democracy that the fall of the Roman Empire [shouhd have] taught) or 2) with a potent, unforgettable lesson in the crippling effects censorship almost invariably has on the democratic process.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Good little Germans.
"Whenever the cause of the people is entrusted to professors, it is lost." ~ V.I. Lenin
One of the great benefits to society of free speech is it makes it easy to spot the idiots.
If someone's a racist asshole, better for all involved for him to be openly proclaiming his assholishness on a street corner for all to hear than for him to be keeping it to himself in his basement. In either case, his actions will be informed by his racism, but in the former case, that fact is obvious.
...you could just use google.us couldn't you?
Concerning games there usually is a special version for the German market. There is no blood in such versions or the blood isn't read. Not that it would really make a difference... I know.
It's funny that the AC above mentions Mortal Combat. I can remember how me and my friends were wildly speculating about the finishing moves back then.
However, I have never heard of a (popular) Movie which wouldn't make it to Germany because of such restrictions. There is an index of censored movies, but it just consists of a few pages and there actually isn't anything spectacular in it.
I don't read replies by ACs.
Why you can still argue if the German law is a good or a bad thing in that case, most ranting slashdotters should think about the reason why the founding fathers&mothers of the Federal Republic of Germany installed this law in 1948/49.
It was because they were still under the impression of the horrifing death the Weimar Republic experienced in the late 1920 and early 1930, leading to the birth of the 3. Reich.
Nazis came to power because of their demagogic methods, what is called "Volksverhetzung" (special form of sedition) today and the Communists paroles of that time werent much better only on the opposite side of the political spectrum.
Critical, sensitive, rational thinking didnt reach the masses (voters) at that time. And the founding fathers feared that the masses could be blinded again.
So like USA citizens see it as an important right to own weapons because of their history and people of other nations might think it is strange, Germans might see it as important to censor Volksverhetzung in any kind because of their own history.
Keep that in mind.
For all who want to know more about the background of the dying Weimar Republic this book is perhaps the best:
Sebastian Haffner -- Defying Hitler: A Memoir
--- censored
Knowledge should never ever be censored.
Never.
Bending over for absurd rules only perpetuates them, and the tyrants that make them..
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Until the great-grandfather (my original post's father) mentioned it, I'd never heard of it. I've went to the PuTTY download page and they do not mention a European version. Since it was made in England (I'm assuming), I do not think that any of the US laws apply to it (i.e., AFAIK, the US laws regarding cryptography limit cryptography techniques in the US leaving the US, not vice-versa, or at least that used to be the case).
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
If you qualify that as 'less restrictive', I'm sure many will agree.
Unfortunately, even here our freedom of speech is no longer honored as it was intended by our founding fathers. "for our protection" ( or just for lawsuits to generate cash for the attorneys )
Sure we are better of then most ( all? ) but we aren't perfect at this point.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Similarly, in Japan: The Seagraves note: The Yamamoto Dynasty is largely concerned with Japan's massive and systematic looting of gold and other treasures ("Golden Lily") from more than a dozen nations. This loot largely disappeared during the war. Where? Into corrupt LDP coffers
The events of Golden Lily form a core element of Neal Stephenson's novel Cryptonomicon.
-kgj
-kgj
The political compass actually does a much better job of categorising politicians than than left/right can possibly manage.
Am i the only one who readed this quickly and thought the germans were searching for some kind of self-regulating engine? "Gee, another perpetual motion wannabe" was my first thought.
I know, i know. I just woke up.
Anyway, dangerous stuff. It's about freedom of speech: instead of censoring what you can say they're censoring what you can listen, which limits the FoS of a third party. I can understand if they want to kill child pornography, but if a white supremacy retard wants to have a site with WS literature, as much as i hate it, he's well entitled to.
it is necessary to forget history. To forget history it is necessary to hide history.
There is no reset button in life; however, there are bonus levels.
Being of German descent I can see where the German government would want to limit materials such as Nazi materials, and hate sites. My grandfather, to the day he died, held a deep seated hatred of Hitler and the Nazis. The mere sight of a swastika would turn him into a borderline raving lunatic from a (for a German) mild mannered old man. For the older population of Germany it's simply something they do not wish to be reminded of. For the younger it's something the older generation doesn't wish them to fall into. It's almost a unique form of hatred for that time of history... there are those that hate it for what the Nazis did to their country and its citizens, and those that hate that time in history because Germany lost. Eventually time will pass, and that time in history can be looked back on in an almost clinical way, but it's not that time just yet.
As for the rest of the things they want to block... most of that stuff is just plain illegal.
Steve's Computer Service, Hobbs, NM
Forbidden in Germany and restricting the freedom of speech are child pornography, certain other types of pornography (like bestiality), right wing extremist "hate" sites, incitement to commit crimes, race discrimination, treasonable conduct as an agent for sabotage purposes, glorification of violence, or offence against the law for the protection of the youth. For example, the game Wolfenstein 3D - a predecessor to Doom - was censored in Germany because of Nazi imagery. So were certain punk music albums popular with German teens.
At least the German google isn't suppressing that story from above.
Regarding the forced Prostitute thing, I invite you to check out snopes: http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp It's BS.
I think he tried to eliminate only the Gypsies and the Jews (the other peoples we supposed to live as slaves of 'arian', German people). He killed more Jews than Gypsies only because the Jews happened to be more numerous than the Gypsies in Central Europe.
A strange thing, Gypsies are from North India and Pakistan, most anthropologists and historians agree that they are 'arian'(Jews are semitic, not arian). Then why did Hitler hate the Gypsies?
That story seems to turn up completely changed every time...
1. You need to turn down every single job offer for one year first.
2. This still only means you get no unemployment benefits anymore.
3. You'd still get social welfare.
4. Forcing anyone to perform sexual services on someone else is still illegal despite what the tabloids say.
5. The easy way out is of course showing up dressed so they wouldn't want to employ you.
How? Everyone will be ignorant of it, and that almost guarantees the resurrection of the same kind of rigid idealized society which justified the atrocities committed in the name of Germany, the 'aryan race' (I bet people in India get tickled by that notion), and Socialism. People who don't fully know their history are doomed to repeat its mistakes.
Thank goodness for "the company of single attractive women"! Where would we be without it?
I don't know where I'd be with it yet. You low-UID guys must get all the chicks. Maybe I should order one of those books I saw advertised in Tales from the Crypt.
All I want is a freaking edit button! *sob*
BTW - the telegraph is a tabloid? Hey, what do I know from over here in the states...
Disclaimer: I think government censorship is wrong, and it makes me sad that major search engines are complying with it. BUT they are businesses, not governments, and they aren't blocking access to the sites, just making them harder to find.
= 5 even without google.de
A determined neo-Nazi or researcher of neo-Nazis will no doubt be able to find sites like http://www.whitepridehosting.com/ and http://www.whiterevolution.com/topsites/in.php?id
On to my real point:
If the content filtered out from the search results is really illegal, the authorities should go after those who put the contents online.
Therein lies the glory of the Internet.
Most likely, contemporary German neo-Nazis know that their content is illegal in Germany. It isn't as if these laws are only discussed in the context of the Internet. So they probably host their sites in places where the content is not illegal, like the US.
Raise your hand if you think a US neo-Nazi web hosting provider is going to take down a German-language neo-Nazi domain, not to mention all the other neo-Nazi domains they host, just because the German government asks.
The German gov't can't arrest the host provider if they aren't in Germany unless they can persuade the host country to extradite the person. And in the US, the First Amendment makes that pretty darn unlikely. (Now if the host provider can be considered a terrorist under the PATRIOT act, that's a whole other issue......)
Liza
These opinions are my own. My employer is not aware of them, does not endorse them, and is not responsible for them.
The "founding fathers&mothers" did not install the Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Schriften. Neither did they install the Freiwillige Selbstkontrolle Multimedia-Diensteanbieter. Instead, they wrote a constitution which in article 5 plainly says "(1) Everybody has the right to [...] unhindered access to information from commonly available sources [...] Censorship does not happen". These are the actual words of the German constitution (modulo my rough translation)
Much like in the USA (where there are numerous Supreme Court decisions on the subject), the government may restrict this right under very specific circumstances. Again, article 5: "(2) These rights are limited by the general legislation, the laws for protection of the youth and the right of personal honor."
The personal honor provision allows the government to outlaw libel, the youth protection clause allows it to restrict access to adult material. Note that there is no Nazi speech clause there (as would be expected if your statements were true). In fact, i doubt that the ominous "general legislation" clause in paragraph (2) covers the banning of swastikas and such, but since no Nazi has ever tried to challenge this at Germany's Bundesverfassungsgericht, we have yet to find out.
The disturbing trend behind the recent attempts to declare unwanted information illegal is that we seem to think that bad things will go away if we don't talk about them. They won't.
And the Weimar Republic did not die because Nazis were allowed to speak. It died because there weren't enough Democrats around to answer them.
And we all know how well they regulate themselves. Anything for higher ratings. And Janet's floppy boob got exactly that. Higher ratings and interest.
Actually, no it did not. The "boob" was unplanned and unscripted, thus no one knew it was coming. Well, maybe some behind the scenes did, but that can't translate into higher ratings unless they get the word out, which they did not.
My point is, the people who saw Janet's boob were already watching the Super Bowl. Nobody tuned in just to see Janet's boob, because it was live and unexpected. If the network had been advertising, "Watch the Half Time Show to see Janet Jackson's Boob!", then yes, it could be argued that it resulted in more ratings. But ratings are an instantaneous thing. The people who were already watching saw it, and those who weren't didn't.
You might try to make a case about all the Tivo replays, but that doesn't translate into higher ratings; at least, not of the kind networks can parlay into increased ad revenue.
Like woodworking? Build your own picture frames.
So; does this mean that instead of going to google.de or yahoo.de, that Germans must now go to google.com or yahoo.com in order to obtain complete search results?
So, if extreme right-wing views are censored, why does google.de not censor "www.godhatesfags.com"? This site is as right wing as they come. Interesting quote from www.godhatesfags.com: "Unconfirmed numbers of Swedes are dead as a result of the tsunamis which ravaged Thailand and the other lush resorts of that region, and thousands more are unaccounted for, either still rotting in the tropical conditions or buried, as they deserve, as asses in mass graves (see Jeremiah 22:19). Scarcely a family in Sweden has been untouched by the devastation. Bible preachers say, THANK GOD for it all!"
With this and some story a while back that certain countries wanted to have an full European Swastika ban i think we'll keep our distance in the UK. Censorship is not cool.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
TFA is wrong, there is NSFL (No Such F*cking Law) that prohibits "incitement to commit a crime" in Germany.
Fair enough. If TFA is wrong, then the entire discussion based on TFA is moot.
However, my point regarding speech stands. Banning speech is dangerous, even specific speech as obnoxious as [insert thing most vile to you here], as many unanticipated things can be made to fit the parameters of said banned speech depending on what [insert favorite powers-that-be here] want to silence.
This happens on occasion in the US, where there is very little speech that is banned outright (childporn being one, and it has had its issues. I've unfortunately lost the link to the case where an innocent, but unlikable, person was arrested and tried for childporn because of two files on his hard drive that he didn't realize were under 17. Happened in the mid-late 90's IIRC). The more specific the law, the better, but it remains a fundamentally ineffective way to address the problem.
So you've banned right wing jackasses. Believe me, with the jerks running the US right now I sometimes wish we could ban them here as well. I am extremely sympathetic with the sensitivities and desire to tell these destructive vile people to f*ck off and die, and muzzle their filthy mouths. But whose to say what comes next? Communists promoting an economic system we disagree with? Critics of Islam? How about critics of Islam's treatment of women? Or the treatment of women by the Catholic church? Once you deem it appropriate to ban one set of political speech, you open the door to banning all kinds of political speech. It may not happen this decade, or even this century, but by opening the door you can rest assured that, at some point, it will, because at some point it will behoove the interests of whatever powers are in place to do so, and the option will be available.
Despite the current trough in American politics, history has shown by and large that countering bad speech with good speech is far more effective than running the bad speech underground. Not just in protecting our civil liberties, but in addressing and solving the issue such hateful speech brings up. As another pointed out, if someone's a racist jackass, better that everyone know they are a racist jackass and can present counterarguments showing that said jackass is in fact an ass, than in silencing him, or more accurately, driving his speech underground where there is no counterargument.
A publicly despised jackass will have little or no influence on others. An underground leader of a movement that has not been publicly demonstrated to be an idiot can wield uncomfortable power. Censorship facilitates the latter, while open discussion will generally move an outspoken person in the latter group into the former, where they can do little real harm beyond offending our sensibilities.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
That happens when the fingers do the spelling. Should read: ...or the blood isn't red.
Purple and green are the most popular colors in German versions btw ;)
I don't read replies by ACs.
In Germany e.g. Kerry would fall into the the right wing of your conservatives.
while (!asleep()) sheep++
And in the interest of open competition, this self-regulation group should publish the forbidden sites in an open RSS feed so that any search engine can use it! If there's a match, don't show the user!
I for one would subscribe to that feed.
Right-wing hate speech has been banned in this form since Germany exists in its current form, and noone has been 'next', and it doesn't look like anyone will be. It works.
"Um, no. In certain states you can't purchase or sell certain pornography. You are allowed to own and view it though."
You sir, are flat wrong. In Oklahoma, it is illegal to "possess" pornography. Paraphasing, pornography is defined as penetraion (oral and other). I am not, sure, however, what the new definition of "possession" is, given the new online world.
But I do know that porno mags and vids fall under this. That's why you CAN NOT BUY hardcore porn in Oklahoma (and why, coincidentally, there are XXX stores on the major interstates, just over the Okla border into Texas)
And in Texas, "sexual stimulation" devices are not allowed. Therefore, everyone just sells their dildos and whatnot as "adult novelty use only". See a recent story about a Cleburne, TX woman who was arrested for hosting passion parties at her home. The police setup a sting to nab this dangerous deviant for selling vibrators (no joke, but I wish I had the link).
"Isn't it often said, those that don't learn from the past are destined to repeat it?"
Please don't be so hard on slashdot editors. Dups are a way of life.
Need Mercedes parts ?
Maybe they could make hate criminals wear some distinctive badge so everyone knows who they are, or have 're-education centers' for them. The haters could redeem themselves through work.
[100% ISO 646 Compliant]
SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.
This isn't about not being able to search for "Adolf Hitler" - which you will still be able to do, you just won't see some URLs. This is all about searching for "Jew" and not getting mostly revisionist history pages that the Nazi-Blogosphere has Google-bombed to the top.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
search for "Adolf Hitler" (with the quoations) is not banned. Whereas adolf hitler (with no quotations) is banned.
a stupid half-assed "solution" easy to circumvent
furthermore, I find it extremely disturbing that one shouldn't be able to search for Adolf Hitler and read about his crimes
that's asking for history to repeat
Personally, I blame Microsoft.
Really. They're furious at the showing of the original idiot-proof user interface that puts theirs to shame...
Ceterum censeo subscriptionem esse delendam.
But, as I've read about it...it is difficult to find a book store freely selling copies of Mein Kampf....wouldn't it be better to be able to buy and read the whole thing on your own and make your own judgement based on that, rather than possibly carefully selected passages?
The story behind the publication of Mein Kampf is relatively simple. You are allowed to buy or sell the book in Germany. However, the copyright nowadays lies with the state of Bavaria which does not feel like printing new copies. Therefore, it's hard to get by copies (well, they're readily available as text files on the Net, but I mean actual books). IIRC the book becomes public domain 70 years after the death of its author. With Hitler, that'll be 2015.
For 'ze Germans among /. readers it might be nice to link to the actual source and not a translation.
Thanks you very much
Free Manning, jail Obama.
I am absolutely amazed at the number of neo-nazis who read this site. The only people who would be affected by this ruling would be those people looking for hate-speech. There is enough of this which you come accross during routine searches. I fully support any hate-crime legislation because the fact of the matter is that people who enjoy this hate-speech are the ones who go out and commit hate-crimes. My people suffered immensely at the hands of the German Nazis. Their press and media were filled with hate-speech and propaganda. People certainly are affected by the media and thoughts of others around them. Proof of this point is the RE-SELECTION of the a**-wipe GW Bush. They flooded the media with propaganda, and won as a result of it. The Bush admin is taking pages from Nazi propaganda leader Goebbles {sp?}, i.e. the BIG LIE. Now I don't support censorship, but self-censorship is a great idea. One must act responsibly, as demonstrated by the cretinous professor who claimed that my brother, a victim of 9/11, deserved to die. He certainly has a right to say it, but he didn't care about the people who he hurt. He is a terrorist in my opinion, and I would personally punch his lights out if he crossed my path. I don't aim to intimidate him, but he hurt me and my family, and I think he should be hurt too.
Hitler and the Nazi's were very evil. We cannot make them go away by censorship, but we can prevent others from being hurt by watching what we say.
Michael A. Uman
Sr Software Engineer
softwaremagic.net
She wants to know why her wardrobe malfunction set off such huge amounts of hysteria and resulted in FCC legal action against CBS.
The point is that one man's meat (pun intented) is another man's poison. In this case, it's a woman's nipples on the one hand and Nazi hate media and kiddie porn on the other.
You decide which form of censorship is worse.
The article makes it look a little like .de search engines were controlling themselves so the government and/or EU won't think they have to.
It will be interesting to see whether the "Google.com in English" link will disappear, or whether google.com/ncr, google.com/webhp, or requesting the search results page straight from the address bar will start redirecting to google.de (the google.com homepage does, though I strongly doubt that's more than plain "user-friendliness" at work there.)