Slashdot Mirror
Web Censorship Proposed For Norway
Aqwis writes "A Norwegian Web filtering system (link in Norwegian), comparable to the Great Firewall of China, has been proposed to the Norwegian legislature. It would, if enacted, block all Web sites and servers that contain hate material (racial hate, pro-Nazi sites, hate towards the government, etc.), most kinds of pornography (not only child pornography), foreign gambling sites, and sites that share copyrighted or other material that it is not legal to share (such as most BitTorrent sites and services such as LimeWire). Reactions have been mixed; however they are mostly negative."
If we block any obscene content, our people will become fine, upstanding citizens. And don't tell me to RTFA, because it's in Norwegian.
This will work as well as the chinese one...
So people won't be able to read my blog about how a moose bit my sister once?
Can't stop the Beta? Time to evacuate to ##altslashdot at webchat.freenode.net - Slashcott in effect.
that the supply of idiots eager to babysit me and legislate morality isn't only confined to the US and China.
Uhh, what has President Fjord got to do with Norway?
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
but it's in NORWEGIAN!
Grammar Nazi
Before you get your Slashdot panties in a twist and get offended, note, I'm a libertarian (note the case) and can't stand the damned conservatives. They are as bad as our liberals, just intolerant of other things. With these two, we can't say a damned thing.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
Yet another poor deluded soul, given the choice of only left or right, he lashes out at whichever he's told by his peers to hate.
Norway censor porn? You're kidding, right?
Table-ized A.I.
Here starts the slipperly slope of freedom of speech to criticize the government.
I agree. The Internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a big kringle. It's a series of fjords.
If we block any obscene content, our people will become fine, upstanding citizens. And don't tell me to RTFA, because it's in Norwegian.
It's a well known fact that Norwegian blue content is easily blocked. As a matter of fact, the only reason it even shows up on the internet is because it's been nailed there.
Wizard Needs Food, Badly
In the U.S., you say somethings and you get yourself fired, thrown out of office, ridden out on a rail, decertified what have you:
This post will be censored in Norway, but so will anyone who tries to argue the opposite of any one of these points. Is that freedom?
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
It was only a matter of time before a Western nation tried this. It is interesting that the press are not censored but instead adhere to self-imposed commandments of caution ("Vær Varsom-plakaten"). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway#Politics So now they wouldn't be blocking their own people from saying things but preventing any outside thoughts that were found disagreeable to find their way in. Or will this also go to cover the "hate towards the government" expressed by Norwegians themselves? And just how will such things like "hate towards the government" be determined? Will any discussion of a dislike of the governments actions be blocked, or will it be limited to blatant hate that threatens bombs and assignations? Lets just hope the US never tries that, or have they already?
There's a thoughtful comment based on a complete view of the facts of the situation if I've ever seen one.
If you'd RTNorwegianA, it says quite clearly that this is merely a suggestion by a panel at a cybercrime law enforcement agency, and has seemingly been universally panned by politicians, media, and the populace alike.
Tore - The Norwegian Guy.
toresbe
First, there is another government that thinks they can regulate the Internet. We know that is stupid, but more importantly, they believe they can regulate the dissemination of hate speech. We might as well ban megaphones now. Worse than regulating the Internet, this is an attempt (seemingly) to regulate thought and speech. Can we all agree on how that will work out. Next thing you know Reporters Without Borders will be reporting on this story.
There is way too much in the world to worry about besides what people view on the Internet. Lets not forget that it is the parents responsibility to ensure their kids don't torture animals, bully other kids, and learn a set of spiritual values.
I am (mostly) a libertarian, but despite political leanings, I cannot fathom any political faction believing that it is their responsibility to remove all possible danger from the lives of citizens as to provide a blanket of security and safety for them. When ANY government feels this is their responsibility, it is high time to execute that government and move on to the next version.
This is not so much an example of stupid government as it is a call for the citizens of that country to impeach and behead the leaders of that government... in any order that seems appropriate at the time.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
I will defend your right to be offended, as long as I can be offended by your offense, and I can say what I damn well feel, even I have to further defend you being offended by what I say...ad infinitum.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
Terrorists can't threaten a country's freedom and democracy. Only lawmakers and voters can do that.
Unless I'm mistaken, Norway was the third or so country to be linked up to Internet, and has always been ahead of most other countries, both with understanding technology and using it for the benefit of the people. It would be a shame if Norway now is caught up in the neocon puritanism enough to implement something like this. Let's hope it's just a proposal from some radicals that won't have a chance of ever passing their house? senate?
This post will be censored in Norway
...doesn't. How's that PATRIOT act working out for y'all?
That's so clueless I'm going to go ahead and assume you're an American here. I'm also going to point out that Norway consistently ranks in the top five in various agencies' ratings of press and speech freedom. The United States
toresbe
Actually, you have some of this wrong. Censoring for pornography and language is a conservative/neocon thing. Censoring for offensive ideas/language is a liberal thing. At least, thats the break down in the U.S.
Between the two camps, we are losing our freedoms.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
THE INTERNET- so funny they banned it in Norway.
is nothing but a synonymn for selfishness
if you understand what is wrong with selfishness, you understand what is wrong with libertarianism
the only people who take libertarianism seriously are earnest philosophy majors in college with no real world experience, and 40 and 50 year olds behind on their alimony payments
yes, liberals and conservatives are always trying to tell you what to do
because they care. smothering you is a side effect of caring. of course that can do damage, but not as much damage as libertarianism can do to society
because at least they care about something besides themselves
libertarianism is a political philosophy based upon an incomplete understanding of human nature. in many ways, it is the mirror image of communism, with equal flaws as to communism, in mirror reverse
communism ignores selfishness and embraces altruism, and is therefore critically flawed from the start
libertarianism ignores altruism and embraces selfishness, and is therefore critically flawed from the start
because human nature has both altruistic and selfish components at the same time, and any political philosophy that fails to take stock of this basic human nature is automatically doomed. a valid political philosophy must fit human nature like a glove, or it deemphasizes or overly emphasizes some aspect of human nature that becomes that political idea's downfall when attempted in reality
no one will ever take libertarianism seriously, it is permanent fringe
or maybe it will be taken seriously someday. but whatever society does that, will reap pain and poverty in the same way that societies that embraced communism reaped poverty and pain
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
"Another government passing an idiotic and unenforcable law!"
Ummm I take it you didn't RTFA.
This is a proposal from a 6 member panel at the bottom end of the Norwegian Government. Thankfully, it's still unlikely the actual Norwegian parliament will even look at a bill based on the proposal (since it isn't yet even in bill form!!!), let alone make a law based upon it.
Two major problems have occurred here:
1) People should RTFA before posting!!!
2) Slashdot should stop people from submitting extremely misleading summaries. (and FireHose just makes the situation 10x worse due to point 1).
Yeah .. because it's of course very sound reasoning to generalize from one story about a policy under discussion in a single European (non-EU) country to a "US vs. Europe" comparison.
is that if you watch a man fall, you will not stop to help him up. that if a man is dying of sepsis, you will not buy him 79 cents in antibiotics, that if a man is smart but can't afford an education, then you will deny him a future. etc
of course, it is absurd for me to suggest that altruism and selfishness cannot coexist at the same time, in the same person, in the same society. this is, in fact, what most modern western societies are like: capitalism with social safety nets, or socialism with a capitalist engine. but notice how the agenda of libertarians is to remove those social safety nets. that's interesting
what would happen without those social safety nets? you honestly can't imagine how they might be necessary, how they might, in fact, help you by removing the attractiveness of criminal acts that are sought after by the desperate? that is as actually cheaper to pay for the social safety nets then to pay for eventual negative effects of a growing poor underclass?
oh: you thought libertarianism would do anything except shrink the middle class?
sorry: selfishness compounds interest. what i mean by that is that, in a libertarian society, given a few generations, all power and money would be centralized in a handful of ultrarich. of course, libertarians say that their political philosophy is all about the little middle class man making it on his own, unburdened by the intrusions of a busy body government. what they don't understand is how their livelihood relies so much on those government hand outs, indirectly, they can't fathom seeing the worth for paying. this doesn't make a libertarian wiser, this makes him more shortsighted
the only people who gain from libertarianism is not the hardy backwoods souls. it is the ultrarich in the penthouses of the urban centers. it is amazing how libertarians cannot understand how selfishness concentrates wealth into societies of rich and poor, and destroys the middle class. the little middle class guy in the woods who supports libertarianism supports the impoverishment of his children and grandchildren so that the ultrarich can get even richer
which makes perfect sense, right? selfishness only cares about yourself... not the next generation
there is nothing wrong with what ayn rand said about the many and varied benefits of selfishness. but there is everything wrong with thinking that those positive aspects of selfishness, in a vacuum of altruistic efforts and benefits, does anything but consume that which it creates, and then some
life is balancing act on so many principles. when it comes to altruism and selfishness, especially
you must have equal parts both concepts in your political philosophy, or you have a political philosophy that only impoverishes and makes miserable
understand why both altruism and selfishness must be expressed in your political philosophy, or understand nothing at all
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Hate: Any text we don't like!
If indeed they make a friggin' firewall between "us and them", you've got to remember Norway is the home
of many hackers *with attitude*. I'd expect circumvention mechanisms to be ready on the first day.
That is, if the politicians are actually drunk enough to let this pass.
Ok! I am Norwegian and I just want it t be known that a _minority_ within this commiitee, which is composed of old and wery conservative people, is proposing this bill and just to inform you, there is no chanse in hell that this will ever make it past the Storting (Congress).
It is a shame that when a a comittee is called upon to make a statement on something like the internet there are never any young people included. I am now 22 years old, internet has been a part of my life since I was 10 (and even more so for my 11 years old sister). I can tell these old guys and researchers so much about online culture, society, human interaction and etiqette that they will never ever get to know or learn because internet will always be something "new" and foreign in their life, not something that has been there from the beginning.
When in danger, whewn in doubt! Run in circles, scream and shout!
The Liberal Party of Norway is currently a small-sized party in opposition, together with the conservatives (check out what sort of ladies can be in politics in Norway: how many milliseconds would she last anywhere else?) and Christian democrats. The thing most closely resembling the Republicans is the Progress party, a hate-spewing propaganda machine for the lesser mentally developed (yes, there is statistics showing Progress voters are less schooled than average; and yes, they actually bought the WMD bull back in 2003).
Current government is headed by the Labour party, the Socialist Left party (more or less like Labour, only more environment-focused and anti-NATO, and generally more left-leaning) and the Centre party (farmers).
I would not agree on the opportunity of using a link to Dagbladet to explain this issue (ok most people do not read Norwegian anyway), as Dagbladet is a low-quality tabloid focusing on flashy headlines. This article from Aftenposten indicates that censorship is a mindretallforslag, i.e. a minority proposition. The majority of the Datakrimutvalget (Authority for computer crime) actually voted against this proposal.
Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
Oh dear, the attempts to control what travels through the Internet and into our brains. Is that what's hurting us? Can we put one ounce (28.349523 grams) of this effort towards nailing the bot nets, spam generators and Internet pirates with Phishing schemes instead of policing our minds? Maybe policing our minds is easier than the hard work of really fixing a dozen Chinese hosts throwing the dictionary at my servers all day long or absorbing 80% of the Internet's bandwidth with noise. Fix that, lawmakers.
Yes, policing used to be easier when the library and the magazine stand contents were all that needed control, but the Internet is a massive book store with all the books thrown on the floor and a frantic mob running through it with snow shovels. Forget it. There's no organization and any effort to control that will fail.
Most of the stuff on
Take off every 'sig' !!
We were the first, actually, using a Honeywell 316 TIP as the node. The node name was NORSAR-TIP, and we used a 2.4Kbit satellite link. 20 minutes later, London was on the ARPAnet, through us.
toresbe
Forget Norway!
Boobies and people fsucking = The source of life. Racism and violence = A source of death.
On the Monty Python front - the Norwegians (initially) banned the film "Life of Brian". So in Sweden it was advertised as "the movie that is so funny, it was banned in Norway".
(Sorry about my English, I am Norwegian)
Your English isn't bad because you're Norwegian, it's bad because you're an idiot.
You know, where the current administration are fighting private schools to avoid thoughts that are not socialistic enough.
No, it's to avoid religious nutcase schools like Liberty University and the like in the US. And it's a good thing, too. And the recent school reforms are as unsocialistic as they get.
Where the state takes most of what you earn by direct and hidden taxes.
The Norwegian populace doesn't exactly seem to be starving.
Where the state has their own media house to spew out their propaganda financed by anyone owning a TV,
Ehhh... NRK is not controlled by the state. It has complete editorial freedom, both in theory and practice, and is frequently critical of the government. NRK is BTW an excellent TV network, and is worth every penny.
and it for a while was illegal to watch TV that was not controlled by it.
Yes, it's called a TV license. It's a very common thing around Europe, and is more strictly enforced other places than here. It's a yearly fee you pay for owning a TV. I don't know what you mean by "controlled"... It's still illegal to own a TV without paying the license.
toresbe
...the interwebs censor you!
Stuff like the PATRIOT Act, Guantanamo and the like are horrible and should be gotten rid of, but speaking in relative terms they really aren't that bad.
I don't know enough about the PATRIOT act to speak for or against it, but I'm sorry, no: Guantanamo Bay is absolutely inexcusable. It really is that bad.
We're still an extraordinarily free society...
Actually, you're far below par for the course in Europe. You do seem to enjoy talking about it the loudest, though.
toresbe
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Look, you make some very good points, and I commend you for them, but god is your post hard to read. Maybe it is just me, but I find it downright painful; everything just runs together forcing me to read it more slowly than normal. A few extra seconds using the shift key and punctuation would save many minutes of total time of readers who are slowed down trying to read it. Actually, your post is a great example of the selfishness you talk about: to save a little inconvenience on your end, you disregard the inconvenience to possibly hundreds of readers, with a negative net gain overall.
Suggestion: if you really can't be bothered to use the shift key, use the CAPS LOCK instead. That way the letters in your post will be bigger and easier to read, and you will get your point across more emphatically. Yes, I'm being sarcastic, but that is exactly how your post looks to me, except s/uppercase/lowercase/.
I don't know if you're trying to make some kind of "statement" with your "style," but IMHO it really detracts from the content of your post. Sorry.
Ah... yet another "progressive" /. poster. If a person wants to go to a private "religious nutcase school like Liberty University," what exactly is your problem with that. The only thing that I can imagine is that you are upset by institutions which you probably don't have any connection to. It seems you would take away the choice of attending such a place because it is against your beliefs.
"The Norwegian populace doesn't exactly seem to be starving." And anyone who is not starving should give as much money as possible to the government, right? Everyone reading this should be aware that if you are not starving, you need to write a check to your government immediately. Just empty your bank account 'cause we all know that bureaucracy is synonymous with efficiency.
Don't worry about the mule, just load the wagon.