Hundreds of Sites Blocked By Canadian ISP

An anonymous reader writes "Last week Slashdot reported on the blockage of a union website by Telus, a leading Canadian ISP. Since that story, the company has restored access but the fallout continues. The move may lead to new ISP regulations in Canada and a study by the OpenNet Initiative has found that by blocking the union site, Telus also blocked an additional 766 websites including a breast cancer fundraising site." From the article: "While there are a number of different ways to block access to Web sites, the method Telus chose to block the Voices for Change site -- blocking its IP address -- produced massive collateral filtering. Filtering by IP address is efficient since ISPs can quickly and effectively block access to the target site using their existing routing technology. Many ISPs already block certain IP addresses to combat spam and viruses. Large networks, like Telus, have mechanisms in place to block IP addresses almost instantaneously, simply by updating their routers with a "block list" of addresses. However, it is common for many different, unrelated Web sites to share the same IP address."

Comments

SPACE KUNG FU ON TEH SPOKE

[Anonymous Coward]

Re:Illegal, reckles, and dangerous.

[Anonymous Coward]

From the TripMaster Monkey Karma whoring methodology manual :

here is where you insert a quote from the particular article the forum is discussing.
Pay attention to include approx 1 or 2 paragraphs from the article emphasizing this text with italics (using html code) to denote that you copied it from the article and so give the appearance that you read and understand the article, this will impress the moderators more than single comments

Here is where you state your conclusion about the above quote, again giving the moderators the impression that you indeed read and understood what was being discussed/comented on, this along with this posts visual formatting structure will impress the moderators who will more likely give you moderation points over other posters who do not follow this structure.

insert
/-\SCII _/'IG
- - --- -- -

Re:If they want to do that its fine

[MasterSLATE]

Just to get you back on semantics, last time I checked, Canada is in America. North America, to be specific. So, RIAA technically can be Canada too. Next time, don't italicise the last A.

Re:i'm glad...

[demachina]

I'm glad I read Slashdot, they would never block IP addresses ..... oh wait ..... they do it all the time too, and if you are on an ISP which randomly assigns your IP address or have multiple customers routed through one server you get RANDOMLY blocked. Fortunately there is privoxy and tor which completely defeat this totally ineffective censorship

My Rant on Creationism - please use if you like it

[saskboy]

Creationism vs. Evolution
- The winner lives to spread its genes [or God will choose the winner, pending the outcome].

This term "creation science" refers to some people's mistaken belief that if you put the word "science" after "creationism", that it factualizes the idea that God created all existance down to your very own ribs. One creationist person claimed that scientists who theorize that advanced life was grown from simple organisms billions of years ago are essentially trying to fool us all and denying God the glory of modern creation. To them, the irrational theory is that nature found a way to evolve into higher life forms, by itself. Some creationists insist that God was required to "intelligently design humans, their eyeballs, and the rest. These people support an aggravating sect of creationism called "Intelligent Design". It's aggravating because it purports to be science, when it is in fact an argument against the scientific method. And less sophisticated creationists seek to mystify the already mysterious, by saying that evolution is a total sham. They come up with absurd analogies they claim disprove the likelyhood of evolution being possible. Never mind the evolutions seen in some species, and especially microorganisms within the past few generations of humans. The thing I've found their analogies most often lack, is a comprehension of the sheer magnitude of time involved for most visible evolutions to take place.
Here is one such misguided analogy:
cizzors (194 )"There's a big difference in evolving within a species and all species evolving from one glob of gunk.... Kind of like waiting for a rock to become a Rolex...... "
And my answer is the difference is called billions of years. 1 billion is 1000 millions. 1 million is 1000 thousands. A thousand years is a long time, and clearly your brain has trouble with it enough that you think you can comprehend the changes during it enough to rationalize away the possibility of dramatic evolutionary changes. Try loosening up that brain of yours, and realize that a 1000, 1000, thousands is a long long time for things to happen. And there have been four of those 1000, 1000, thousands since the earth was here.
Quit being so sure of literal interpretations of a 2000 year old religious book, and put some faith in the incomprehensible. Not everything can be understood by the human mind in the way that it exists in nature. The world is a big place, and time is even bigger. Show me someone who says they know every detail of everything in the world that ever existed, and I'll show you God [or someone who thinks they are God].
Why creationists bug me, is because they claim that because the details of evolution are so hard for them to comprehend, that the whole evolutionary model is no good. It's not at all surprising to me that evolutionary details are hard to comprehend, since it's a theory that for the most part puts details into a black box. It's rare that we get to peek into this box where the changes actually happen before our eyes, but when we do it is an exciting and enlightening time.
The proof that evolution is real is standing in front of a mirror when you look at one, and in museums where there are fossil records of early hominids. Clearly there were human-like beings before there were modern humans, and clearly there are humans now, so obviously [at least to me] the proof is in the pudding. The hypocrisy of saying evolution is a fantasy that ignores reality, is that the only alternative to evolution is that a mystical being or aliens plunked fully developed modern lifeforms on earth after there being billions of years of simpler life. To believe that, you must also ignore the similarities that ancient life such as trees, reptiles, and mammals have to their modern relatives.
cizzors (194 ) Jul-21-05 21:38PDT
If man evolved from apes,