Slashdot Mirror


UK Government Crowd-Sourcing Censorship

angry tapir writes "The UK public can report 'terrorism-related' Web sites to authorities for removal from the Internet under a new program launched by the British government. The program is a way in which the government is seeking to enforce the Terrorism Acts of 2000 and 2006. These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists, and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts."

46 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. Me! Me! by Thanshin · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hereby report "slashdot.org".

  2. "Removal from the internet"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good luck with that.

    No, seriously, all the best to those making a grand attempt to remove something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more. I imagine you'll have many fun years of failure.

    1. Re:"Removal from the internet"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I tipped them off about 4chan.org and their constant hate speech. Unfortunately, the process seems anonymous, so I'm now the number one suspect.

    2. Re:"Removal from the internet"? by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder how many things are removed from the Internet that we simply don't get to hear about...

      Sure, there are high-profile cases in which it backfires and causes the offending material to be spread far and wide, but I'd be willing to bet that that happens in a tiny minority of the cases, and that in the rest, almost no-one not directly involved ever even knows.

    3. Re:"Removal from the internet"? by jimicus · · Score: 3, Informative

      Good luck with that.

      No, seriously, all the best to those making a grand attempt to remove something from the internet without just causing it to be spread around even more. I imagine you'll have many fun years of failure.

      Actually, for all practical purposes they can do exactly this. It transpires that for all practical purposes we have a Great Firewall of Britain - and very few people were aware it even existed until recently:

      http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/12/07/brit_isps_censor_wikipedia/

      How it's implemented depends on your ISP. One or two put up an error page saying "Sorry, you can't look at this" - but most simply block the TCP connection in the first place so it appears to a casual observer like the site in question is down.

    4. Re:"Removal from the internet"? by VShael · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I wonder how many things are removed from the Internet that we simply don't get to hear about...

      Good question. There are websites, such as The Memory Hole, which specifically try to maintain records of things which perhaps the powerful controlling interests of mainstream media would like to scrub from history. Like Benazir Bhutto's confirmation that Bin Laden was dead. Or the Pentagon admitting that it targeted civilian water supplies in Iraq. Or Israel claiming to reprimand two top army officers for ordering the Jan. 15 attack on the UN compound in Gaza last year that used white phosphorus shells, but actually not disciplining them at all. That sort of thing, of which there is plenty. Project Censored does a yearly round up of the most important stories ignored by the mainstream media.

      There are the things which disappear because no one gives a crap. (My old Geocities website)

    5. Re:"Removal from the internet"? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Note that it's not a government-mandated censor, it's opt-in by ISPs and run by a non-government organisation (the Internet Watch Foundation, which seems to have no mandate and no accountability). Some ISPs don't opt in, so you get full uncensored access, although the large ones do.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    6. Re:"Removal from the internet"? by mSparks43 · · Score: 2, Funny
  3. What is considered "terrorism-related"? by thijsh · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Scaring large groups of the population by threatening to report them for a terrorism-related fate of certain doom could in itself be considered an act of terrorism... Maybe not by the standards of the 2000 and 2006 laws, but surely by the future 2012 law am I required to proactively report your attempted terrorism on "slashdot.org".

    1. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by LingNoi · · Score: 4, Funny

      By that time everyone would be on IPv6 and their site won't work.. https://reporting.direct.gov.uk/bin/url_checker.php?url=ipv6.google.com

    2. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by Chief+Camel+Breeder · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Following the links in TFA leads to a goverment web-page listing one-line descriptions of things they consider illegal. But their definitions are broken. They include this:

      web pages that show pictures, videos or descriptions of violence against anyone due to their race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or gender identity

      That would be...news sites? Maybe we should all report news.bbc.co.uk?

    3. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by thijsh · · Score: 2, Funny

      sexual orientation or gender identity

      Hmmm... does "Slashdot reader" also constitute a 'sexual orientation and/or gender identity'? :-)

      My non-scientific list of common gender-identities in least-to-most discriminated order:
      - Heterosexuals
      - Hot lesbians
      - Bisexual women
      - Metrosexuals
      - Feminist lesbians
      - Homosexuals (male)
      - Bisexual males
      - Fetishists / 'Deviant' sexuals
      - Slashdot reader (virgins)

      Since roughly 50% of the population sexually discriminates against the average Slashdot reader you have reached the bottom of the list... Please report anyone that deserves to suffer for this grave injustice. ;-)

    4. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by Dan541 · · Score: 2, Informative

      An act of terrorism is anything the government doesn't like. What ever you do don't threaten to blow up an airport on twitter.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    5. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by HungryHobo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So, who wants to flood this system to the point that it starts impacting everyone and gets removed?
      I'm thinking of something like this:

      Google for terms like "armed resistance" "bomb made from" "nerve gas" "freedom" "oppression" "kill" "opposition" "freedom of speech"

      then some setup where we run through the first few hundred thousand google results, grab the domain names and use some PHP script to serve up bite sized portions that random Slashdoters can copy paste into the form for submitting "terrorist" web pages.
      I'm thinking we could drown the system in noise.

      Or am I supporting the terrorists now?

    6. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not originally it didn't - ask the Glaswegian Muslim girl that was arrested and imprisoned under the 42 day detention crap for writing a poem. Apparently anything they find threatening counts as well as actual threats.

    7. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, but you're potentially advocating committing a crime under the Computer Misuse Act by encouraging people to launch a DDoS attack against the site...

    8. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by davester666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Google has already been reported for returning results a terrorist would find useful.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    9. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by mikael · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There was a newspaper article on this topic. Apparently a person can be categorized as being male/female/hermaphrodite in three different categories; genetically, physically and psychologically. Going by those rules, you would end up having
      a cube type diagram with 27 different types (a bit like the nationstates cube for types of country).

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    10. Re:What is considered "terrorism-related"? by Golddess · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Except that's not what GP is advocating at all. The site will remain up, but the people reading through everything that's submitted will have enormous amounts of noise to sift through.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
  4. Catch 22 by netpixie · · Score: 5, Funny

    Citizen: "Ossifer, I've looked at this website and it is terism"
    Plod: "So you admit to looking at terism? Go directly to Belmarsh. Do not pass go"

  5. US and UK government are melding by mykos · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Always a horrifying thought, being reported by your neighbors.

        I work with an elderly West German lady. She was telling me that her East German friends had grown a lifetime of distrust for just about everyone. Some East Germans that grew up steeped in this mindset still keep new friends at arm's length, even today.

    Also, the story reminded me of this gem:
    There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/

    1. Re:US and UK government are melding by VShael · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Tagged this story as "stasi"

  6. I'd like to report New Labour's web site by VShael · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Because they scare the sh*t out of me, and I'm pretty sure they're doing it to influence my vote.

    1. Re:I'd like to report New Labour's web site by coofercat · · Score: 2

      This might not be such a stupid idea as you might think.

      1) Report any and every website you can find, Labour.org.uk, conservatives.com, bbc.co.uk, itv.com, amazon.co.uk, ebay.co.uk, etc etc
      2) Repeat, but using tinyurl and other link squashers, proxies, caches, and any other form of URL mangling
      3) ???
      4) Collapse!

      There's a recaptcha on the submission page, which is a shame, otherwise I'd have had a script running already. Perhaps I should set up a "recaptcha for pr0n" or more appropriate perhaps, "recaptcha for terrorist information" ;-)

      Mind you, given this is our government, there's probably a way to submit without the recaptcha, and probably a way to download the IPs of every submitter, but that's another story.

  7. Wrong URL. by onion2k · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sure that should be http://ministry_of_love.direct.gov.uk/ .

    (If you've not read Orwell: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Love )

  8. Report your friends, family and neighbours... by mayhem79 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What worries me is the term: 'intended to be useful to terrorists'; this is so broad a definition, in theory anything could be deemed as useful to terrorist. For example, how to fly a plane, how to drive a car, self defense techniques. It also concerns me what implications to freedoms this may have on non-violent polictical protest sites i.e. any site that may critise a governments policy. I am a UK citizen and am becoming increasingly worried as my freedoms are being slowly litigated for my 'own good' to combat terrorism. Reminds me of a joke on Red Dwarf: 'Report your friends, family and neighbours... wonderful prizes to be won.'

  9. One day they'll have to confront it head on by MikeRT · · Score: 4, Interesting

    These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists, and ban glorifying terrorism or urging people to commit terrorist acts.

    I would hazard to guess based on the media reports that Britain's radical Muslim problem is only topped by the Netherlands (where prominent critics of Islam have been routinely murdered or credibly threatened with murder). There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia.

    The British government is going to have to start rounding up the radical clerics and deporting them. Hell, banish them from the United Kingdom altogether. The problem is, they know they'll inflame a lot of anti-British sentiment if they do that. Then they'll have to either start cracking skulls left and right or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques, deport them and put a marker on them that permanently marks them as a ne'erdoweller who has no business ever setting foot on British soil again.

    The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt. The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily.

    The political correctness of the British government is not doing genuine moderate Muslims any good because it's creating an environment where the extremists can thrive under "diversity" and the native population can be slowly radicalized against the entire immigrant population starting from the working class up (IIRC, the British working class were the primary support behind the BNP when it recently won a small, but worrisome amount of the vote for the first time).

    1. Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "The British government is going to have to start rounding up the radical clerics and deporting them. Hell, banish them from the United Kingdom altogether. The problem is, they know they'll inflame a lot of anti-British sentiment if they do that. Then they'll have to either start cracking skulls left and right or start en masse rounding up and deporting the Muslims who go to those mosques, deport them and put a marker on them that permanently marks them as a ne'erdoweller who has no business ever setting foot on British soil again."

      Yes...yes! Maybe we could make them wear yellow crescents!

      "The British National Party is getting support now precisely because the common man in Britain can see what the elites can't: you can't have two nations living inside the same country, especially when one nation is composed of hostile immigrants who won't adapt. The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily."

      Could we cut them out by some kind of economic sanctions based on religious belief? Maybe just prevent them from owning businesses and stuff. Or deport them! Do you know if this plan has ever been tried before?

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    2. Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on by FourthAge · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's a very difficult problem, and the response of the three major parties is "Denial". All three say "Immigration and Islamisation are not a problem. We will not even consider them as issues. P.S. You are a racist." I see you have already been called a Nazi for posting this.

      Which is ironic, because your post is a warning about the Nazis in their BNP form. The National Socialists recognise and acknowledge the issues that the main parties do not. They are capitalising on the refusal of the main parties to talk about the issues.

      I think it is obvious now that the multiculturalism policy of the UK government has been a complete disaster. It's created ghettos. Entire cities like Birmingham and Bradford are divided by ethnic groupings. It's encouraged fear and hatred between the groups, fueling terrorism. It's exactly what should never have happened.

      Immigrants should have been welcomed into Britain provided that they were willing to merge into the existing culture and society, as many immigrants are. But instead, they were encouraged to be separate from the existing societies. Ghettos were created, and any concern about the ghettoisation process was dismissed by the UK Establishment as "racism", even though the concerns were well-founded. And it's not just the UK. The same problems exist in France for the same reason.

      It is time to abandon cultural relativism, the idea that each culture - each approach to life - is just as valid as any other. It is simply nonsense. Some cultures are inherently better than others. Absolute comparisons are possible and useful.

      The UK Establishment tells us that such comparisons are "racist" - but why? What is racist about comparing one society and another? Racism is discrimination based on ethnic grouping, not discrimination based on social structure or cultural values.

      It is our duty to discriminate against the values and culture of dark age theocracies. We must not allow the civilisation we have built to be undermined by Sharia and the Middle Eastern dictatorships. The only way to do that is to stick up for what we have, and that means we must all be able to acknowledge that our ways are better.

      --
      The tao of democracy: the government you can vote for is not the real government.
    3. Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on by ultranova · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes...yes! Maybe we could make them wear yellow crescents!

      Nice strawman. Do you realize that you just validated the grandparent's point? He talks about deporting immigrants who've expressed hostility towards their host culture, some to the point of committing crimes, even murder, and you come out and call him a nazi. That gives him the option of either giving up - which, in his view, results in his nation getting destroyed - or moving towards more radical methods.

      Congratulations. You've prevented the matter from being discussed in a calm and reasonable manner, thus making sure that anyone concerned has little choice but to radicalize. Well done.

      Could we cut them out by some kind of economic sanctions based on religious belief? Maybe just prevent them from owning businesses and stuff. Or deport them! Do you know if this plan has ever been tried before?

      Yes, I'm pretty sure that hostile immigrants have been deported before. Are these hostile immigrants? Who knows, you cut the discussion short in favour of shouting "Nazi nazi nazi", so now I'll just have to assume the worst or risk my country. Again, congratulations. Pat yourself on the back.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    4. Re:One day they'll have to confront it head on by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Nice strawman. Do you realize that you just validated the grandparent's point? He talks about deporting immigrants who've expressed hostility towards their host culture, some to the point of committing crimes, even murder, and you come out and call him a nazi. That gives him the option of either giving up - which, in his view, results in his nation getting destroyed - or moving towards more radical methods."

      No, no he doesn't. He says:

      "The British government has two choices: either solve it now by harshly cutting out any part of the Muslim population that looks even remotely likely it sympathizes with Islamists, or face the prospect that in 20 years as demographics shift, a group like the BNP will stage a coup and take matters into its own hands militarily."

      How is that immigrants? It's limited by religion only. He also states that:

      "There was even a survey done of the British Muslim population that said that about 40% of the young Muslims in the country want to live under Sharia."

      So how is this not advocating deporting 40% of the population?

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
  10. New title by Arancaytar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This is a wonderful idea. Let's call the volunteer participants in this program Inoffizielle Mitarbeiter .

  11. Did you read the footnote? by Johnny+Fusion · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Apparently, owning a copy of The Anarchist's Cookbook is a jailable offense. I therefore should report amazon.co.uk who sells it. And since its not limited to british sites, I am pretty sure I read on wikipedia the mechanics on how thermonuclear weapons work. At least 1940s/1950s era weapons. In a world where information is criminal, only criminals will have information.

    --
    There are two kinds of fool. One says, This is old, and therefore good. And one says, This is new, and therefore better.
  12. Re:Unclear summary by cheesewire · · Score: 2, Informative

    Not quite, from TFA:

    People can report Web sites on Direct.co.uk by filling out a Web-based form. The form includes categories to describe what's on the Web site, such as "terrorist training material" or "hate crimes."

    So when we find some .co.uk site with instructions on how to take down our infrastructure, we can report it. Although it then goes onto say while basically a good idea, few people who come across actually useful info will know what to do with it, followed by some lawyer quoted with this little gem:

    "I don't think the police anticipate a huge number of submissions."

    Now the form seems to have been publicized, maybe he'll be proved wrong?

  13. Sorted by robably · · Score: 5, Interesting

    These laws make it illegal to have or to share information intended to be useful to terrorists

    Check

    ban glorifying terrorism

    Check

    or urging people to commit terrorist acts.

    and check.

  14. tube by muckracer · · Score: 3, Funny

    So I reported the Subway (The Tube in the UK) schedules as being dramatically helpful to terrorists. Not only to target the subway itself but they might use it to get to their unrelated targets. Coming to think of it, let's shut down all Internet access cuz who knows what them terrorists will use it for...

  15. Website Captcha Fail by LingNoi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The worse part about this site is that they have recaptcha on it but verify the request in javascript.

    Hence you can stick this request on your spam bot...

    https://reporting.direct.gov.uk/bin/submitter.php?report_type=1&report_url=reporting.direct.gov.uk&report_desc=GeorgeOrwellWasRight

  16. You really can't say "beware of slipery slope"... by Pecisk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...after you're already slipping, can you?

    This will a) provide nothing b) will destroy a lot c) won't cure paranoia

    Dear God help us.

    --
    user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
  17. In all seriousness... by Grundlefleck · · Score: 4, Funny
    FTFA:

    Content deemed illegal by the U.K. includes videos of beheadings, messages that encourage racial or terrorist violence and chat forums revolving around hate crimes, according to information on Direct.co.uk.

    (emphasis mine)

    YouTube comments, anyone?

    --
    I accept I know nothing. Insulting my ignorance is wasted on me.
  18. Re:Unclear summary by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The British government isn't actually stupid enough to...

    There is no true sentence which starts this way.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  19. Please, for the love of Dog by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Could everyone stop it with the "ooh, X is useful to Terrorists, let's ban that!!1!" comments?

    I'm as uncomfortable about some of the ramifications of this law as anyone else here, but the key phrase you're all ignoring is intended to be.

    Wikipedia, the Tube, etc - all useful to terrorists, not intended to be useful to terrorists, not illegal.

    A site enabling people to donate money, time, etc to terrorist causes - useful to terrorists, intended to be useful to terrorists, illegal.

    Now please, by all means rail against the possible civil liberties violations, potential for misuse and abuse, etc, but let's not rewrite the law so it says something other than what it does. Doing so, and complaining about things that are not covered by it only harms otherwise legitimate complaints and concerns and makes those working against it look foolish and thus easier to dismiss.

  20. This just in... by The+Cornishman · · Score: 2, Funny

    King George III is dead. Some time ago. Sorry to break it to you so harshly.

  21. One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter by gnarlin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter.

    --
    A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver.
  22. The IWF by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Don't give them ideas! ;)

    But yes - there's the Internet Watch Foundation (which also crowd sources its censorship - their website has a big red button for you to report stuff), which censors blocked webpages for about 95% of UK users (a few ISPs have yet to implement it, but the Government wants it to be mandatory for all). Allegedly it's only for "potential" child pr0n, but we know from the Wikipedia-censorship episode just how broadly they interpret that.

    For anything else, it seems the Government is so far preferring to take down the source, and/or criminalise possession of the material.

  23. It is Government mandated by mdwh2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Government have repeatedly told the ISPs that if they don't do it "voluntarily", they'll pass a law forcing them to do it. And from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7904607.stm , Home Office Minister Alan Campbell said: "Currently in the UK, 95% of consumer broadband connections are covered by blocking. The government is currently looking at ways to progress the final 5%."

    Yes, they're so far "only" at 95%, but that just means they're not all the way there yet. It is Government mandated though.

    It's the worst of both worlds. We're being forced into it by the Government, but because it's handled by a non-Government entity, there's no oversight or right of appeal, and the Government just say "Oh it's nothing to do with us, the ISPs 'chose' to do this".

  24. If we outlaw knoledge... by VortexCortex · · Score: 2, Informative

    ...only outlaws will have knowledge.

    Maps are arguably the most useful source of information for terrorists.
    How else can they get their bombs to the correct location in a foreign land?

    Explosives can be used by terrorists to harm innocent people.

    Chemistry describes how chemicals react...to create explosions.

    Physics describes how force is applied...during an explosion.

    Math is used extensively to solve formulas...in both Chemistry and Physics.

    Words are used to represent information...that describes how to make bombs.

    Paper is used to convey language...which could describe terrorist actions.

    Food is an important resource...that helps all terrorists survive!

    You don't want to help the terrorists do you?
    Then, you understand why we're removing all of your surplus food items, writing utensils, books, maps, televisions, and home computers.
    Do you have a license for those vocal cords?