Slashdot Mirror
German Parliament Enacts Internet Censorship Law
TheTinyToon writes that by a vote of 389 to 128, "the proposed censorship law to block child porn has been passed by the German government. Not surprisingly, a member of the conservative party (CDU) announced plans to also check if the law could be extended to include so-called 'killer games' like Counterstrike, only two hours after the law was passed. More [in German] on netzpolitik.org."
"Once the legislation passes, police officials will have to draw up a list of web sites that feature child pornography and send the list to all telecommunications companies." Might as well just make the list public knowledge. Anyone with the inclination to view the material will be able to find it easier with any list made.
I've got 101 mod points and you can't have them!
If you still needed proof that our political system is crap, this is it.
The vast majority of politicians who voted "yes" on this topic could not even explain the base technologies if you asked them. Nor do they understand how their censorship law works, or what its consequences are. Despite having this pointed out to them repeatedly.
It's becoming rapidly clear, especially with the economic crisis happening at the same time, that we're ruled by people who're simply not good at ruling, nor much else for that matter. Their expertise is in politics, i.e. getting into power, not in anything that matters once you are in power.
If anyone shoots them all, I'll be there to applaud. And yes, I write that with my name on it. These people have nothing to lose and they act like it. While I'm not for violence, I'm starting to believe that at least the danger of violence and personal consequences is required or else our politicians will destroy us all - or, if you think about climate change, kill us all.
Funny how it takes but weeks to throw billions at mismanaged banks, but it's taken years and no end in sight to agree on matters vital to the survival of the damn planet.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
In this news, we see the real issue: That the slippery slope of making some information illegal is too steep. The primary issue that free global flow of information will do is dramatically reduce the need for centralized government power at the country level, in many ways. If people allow their governments to start making some information illegal, even for good reasons, then the norm of censorship will be accepted and expanded.
Frankly, the main driver behind making such images illegal seems to be that we don't have the resources or the effort to catch people who actually harm children - so instead they make the next closest thing police *can* find illegal. This is lazy police work.
I believe that a free and open society would work best if there were no restrictions on *access* to information once it is available. Laws would only restrict behaviors: The bits are not the issue, human behavior is. Thus, no image or stream of bits would ever be illegal (as I see it), only *actions* that people take that directly result in harm to other people. This would make the job of police much harder, yes, but the benefits become obvious quickly when reading this news.
What is the deal with these people? What is their major problem with video games? Did their digital mothers get spawn camped and teabagged when they were children?
As far as I can tell, this is political incompetence and not a general feeling in the population. Gemany is smaller (80 million) and hence has about one quarter the school shootings that the US has (caveat: this is my personal pet theory). The politicians have zero understanding or idea on why these happen and blame something else that they do not understand at all, namely violent videogames. The general population does not care either way, so this is a topic politicians use to give the appearance of "doing something".
Incidentially, for the left wing leaders (SPD), this law could well be the beginning of their demise. There was a public petition against it with something like 135'000 signatures, which is very, very impressive. The way the government (left-right coalition) just ignored all expert testimony and all citicism could well loose them the younger generations completely.
Incidentially, ignoring all experts and all criticism is becoming a trend for the german government. A very dangerous trend with one stupid law being followed by the next. Especially the Internet is something these people are not using and do not understand at all. There are many that have web-pages printed out for them by their secretaries and that is the level they are acting on.
As to the nature of these "blocks": They will be DNS redirections, i.e. trivially easy to bypass. There is already one court decision freeing an ISP from doing such a block for other illegal content (3rd Reich propaganda, I believe), because the court found these blocks to be ineffectve. It appears it took the judge less than 10 Minutes to find out how to circumvent such blocks and he was not impressed.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
"The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation"
I'll leave you to guess who I'm quoting.
You're quoting Daniel Lapin. This is an excerpt from an essay of his which pretends to be a letter sent from the dead by Hitler to Julius Streicher.
It builds on Hitler's advocacy in Mein Kampf that the sick / handicapped should be deemed unfit for procreation:
[The state] must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. It must see to it that only the healthy beget children; that there is only one disgrace: despite one's own sickness and deficiencies, to bring children into the world, and one highest honor: to renounce doing so.
As such, the Hitler-attributable part of the quote is wildly out of context. But this fictional letter does a great job of pointing out where this "think of the children" is going.
The golden era is over. We're all doomed.
The exact reverse can be argued. Due to the empowerment the internet has given to Joe Public, the enabling technologies which continue to come to market and the explosion in independent self expression Governments around the world are panicking into passing legislation which they hope will get the Genie back in the bottle. But frankly, they're pissing in the wind. Human ingenuity will win out over the nay sayers maybe for the first time in history because the development of tools is in OUR hands and the infrastructure is essentially beyond the control of individual governments.
So: Go child porn?
Sure, the only people it will 'deter' is the stupid first time viewers, and it will probably still let through 90%, so it'll be pointless, but it's hardly as though there is a hard-an-fast distinction between 'censorship' and 'things you're by law required not to look at or enjoy'. The only difference is that in this case you're afraid of the "what else"... Sure, it's possible to say that you think the threat is overblown, or even that you just don't care enough about systematic exploitation of minors to want to risk "free speech" abridgment, but it's hardly as though you really are able, willing and interested in "saying" everything you could
The things you talk about, and consider important whenever the right to "free speech" is brought up, are the things that society allows you to talk about, after all. I still see very few people who are willing to openly discuss their private or sexual lives with others, even though there is no 'real'/'obvious' reason not to want to talk about it at all (in a non-lame/infantile manner). Especially considering the fact that statistically, people are still unsatisfied with these lives, and education, or sharing experiences, tips and tricks, would certainly obviate or alleviate some of these problems/complaints.
Yet still people consider this a "private" matter, feel uncomfortable, and are afraid that their spouse will immediately be poached upon or will want to 'try out' others as soon as the subject is discussed openly (or somesuch. We humans have such active imaginations, especially when it comes to thinking up scenarios about what might go wrong when we change some rule or other. They're much like that CDU politician at that, although most just come up with these rationalizations after the fact, because they "just don't feel comfortable" even thinking about it.)
Anyway, the problem isn't that certain modes of "speech" are being disallowed or prosecuted for when done online, (because that also happens offline) the problem is that cultural conservatives exist, who generally don't believe in looking at effect studies before passing judgment on whatever it is they perceive as a danger.
Luckily these people die to be replaced by other conservatives who are trying to conserve a slightly later rule set (the one that they grew up with, rather than their parents, allowing us to change the topics of debate at least once or a few times per generation. Reactionaries, luckily, are few and far between, and most of the time far off the mark when it comes to being "accurate" in their portrayal of earlier 'values'.
This takes a while to explain.
In Germany, too, there were killing sprees in schools. And just like everywhere, people were scrambling to find a reason.
Well, if you ask me, when you look for reasons, look where the sprees happen: In schools. Would you go to a school if you went on a rampage with the goal to kill people? I'd use the subway on a monday morning. Or the shopping mall right before Christmas. WAY more people to mow down.
They were not rampages. That was simply and plainly acts of revenge. Revenge for years of bullying, revenge for years of (preceived or real) favorism of teachers, revenge for being outcast, revenge for being picked on.
But you can't blame the kids that bullied, mobbed and picked on him. They were killed! Accusing kids that were shot is political suicide.
So you need a scapegoat. Without one, people keep looking for a reason. If you can present one, you have a reason and people stop looking.
So, what could we use? We need something our voters don't understand, won't miss if we outlaw it, and it would be nice if it's something their kids do and they don't approve of.
And since the music industry has the better lobbyists...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
The way the government (left-right coalition) just ignored all expert testimony and all citicism could well loose them the younger generations completely.
It already did. So, by politician logic, they stopped caring about us at all.
The SPD (one of the two major parties) recently formed a technical consulting committee which helped the party leaders understand Internet and other modern technologies, and helped them campaign in these new mediums, etc.
Most of the committee walked out on them in disgust after yesterday's vote.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org