Slashdot Mirror
Saudi Arabia Bans Facebook
gandhi_2 sends in a brief Associated Press piece on Saudi Arabia's blocking of Facebook. "An official with Saudi Arabia's communications authority says it has blocked Facebook because the popular social networking website doesn't conform with the kingdom's conservative values. ... He says Facebook's content had 'crossed a line' with the kingdom's conservative morals, but that blocking the site is a temporary measure." Some reports indicate that at least some individual Facebook pages can be reached from inside the kingdom. There hasn't been an official announcement; the source noted above requested anonymity. Earlier this year when Pakistan and Bangladesh banned Facebook, it was over particular content — cartoons of Mohammed — and the Saudi ban may prove similar once more details emerge.
... and nothing of value was lost.
(in either direction, IMO)
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Ya, until they can either blackmail or threaten FB into compliance.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Yet more proof that religious folk are vulnerable to the creation of oppressive sociopolitical groups.
Half right The US props up the Saudi Arabian theocracy because an oppressed Saudi Arabia is a Saudi Arabia which delivers energy and military supremacy to the US without anyone having the chance to question it.
But Facebook isn't dangerous any more than cannabis is dangerous. That said, ban it and you'll remind the locals of your power while lazy foreigners wave their arms abourt over a loud but minor detail. It's the opposite strategy to giving US citizens guns and making them think they're well defended against a tyranny, but the effect is the same: do something irrelevant for distraction.
Meanwhile, you continue imposing your will.
The atheists that created soviet Russia
Karl Marxk == Mohammed
Das kapital == Quran
Marxist are atheists in a technical sense, but they display the same amount of blind fanaticism as religious people.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40166219/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/
Why? Who knows. Does it really matter?
Well, I live in one of those internet black holes, myself. Tunisia. In Tunisia, Youtube, Dailymotion, and many sites were, since 2007, blocked due to "offensive" content (read: politically dissident). What that caused was two things, mainly: More dissidence, and the banalisation of proxies. Right now kids in elementary schools know how to fiddle with proxies and DNS settings to get around the blockade, and despite the govt's sincere efforts, we still watch our vids on youtube (http://www.tekiano.com/net/web-2-0/2-7-1719/youtube-15eme-site-le-plus-visite-en-tunisie.html French blog, sorry). At some point, FB was blocked too, but this nearly caused a riot (Yes, people didn't riot because of a tax increase but they started getting angry when they couldn't play Farmville). This, of course, tought our gov't one thing: being all official about blocking FB is an open invitation to a riot. Thus, they decided to do it diferently and now they block Tunisian IPs from certain pages with... delicate content. (this, I guess, was done hand to hand with Facebook's teams). I do not expect the Saudi gov't to hold on their bloackade for too long, they should play it the smooth way and learn rom their fellow retarded govts.
Like
If enithin kan gow rong it whil. (Murfey)
everyone,
I am a saudi who lives in saudi and here is my point of the story.
Saudi's (communications and information technology) has a solution of the shelf that blocks pornographic sites automatically (we got VPN so dont worry we get our pr0ns).
This solution keeps its own database and that external database messes up sometimes and blocks stuff that should be blocked. google and secondlife were blocked before and were unblocked. Further more, political website and radical islamic websites are blocked as requested by the government for national security.
facebook's url that was blocked today was (www.facebook.com/home.php) but if you use (www.facebook.com) it works perfectly. so it apparent that the blocking was due to a mess up in the database of the off the shelf solution.
any questions? :D
>> all these backwards countries
Yeah, and the US government, media and public - all - just love wikileaks, eh? Kudos to hypocrisy.
I seem to be able to get to wikileaks from the US.
I seem to be able to make up my own mind about what I can and can not read.
If there can be so few "True Atheists", then it seems most people want a "Religion". Whether it one of the popular religions, or worship of the Great Communist Leader, or "Gaia", or "The Best Team in the world, and I'm willing to bash anyone who says otherwise", they just have a need to be part of a Greater Thing.
;) ), and then religion emerged and more importantly _outcompeted_ atheism.
Arguably atheism was the initial state (unless you believe the ancestors of humans and primates had religion too which would be interesting
So as long as humans remain humans, plain atheism doesn't look like it would become a large majority. The "substrate" and environment has to change significantly. But I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.
Even if God etc doesn't exist, as long as the placebo effect exists (and remains significant), certain types of religions will outcompete atheism over the long run. Because strict atheism will pose no net benefits[1], whereas certain religions would produce benefits via the placebo effect. So as long as the net benefits outweigh the costs of a religion, adherents as a whole would benefit more from that religion than from atheism.
Some religions have/had very high costs of course, but not all. Plus the costs and benefits have to be taken across the group as a whole, because some religions while costing a few individuals a lot (their entire lives in fact), would benefit the group more overall.
[1] I believe most atheists would say atheism is a result not a cause, producing benefits is not applicable - it's just what happens when you hold a certain world view.
Not to mention portraits of the prophets everywhere, worship rituals, religious processions (with mandatory attendance), holy scripture and a priest class.
The last part is even funnier if you consider that the primary claimed benefit of communism was a "class-less society".
The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
Today I've discovered that The Pirate Bay website is blocked in Italy. Previously the italian providers were forced to configure the DNS to resolve it as 127.0.0.1, but that was easy to circumvent. Now, the IP is totally unreacheable from Italy. To look at TPB one has to use a proxy, a tunnel, etc.
A similar measure is in force for unauthorized gambling sites.
I don't gamble and I don't care too much for torrents, but the very idea that my government decides which sites I can visit and which I cannot sends a cold shiver down my spine.
First off, a little disclaimer:
Westerners often tend to conflate Wahhabism with Islam, but that is a critical mistake that undermines any clear understanding of the Middle East and Islam itself. The movement has taken Islam from being an unquestioned powerhouse of intellectual and cultural innovation to being perceived as a force of stagnation. Islam is not the problem, the cultural baggage that it is presently burdened with is the issue. Wahhabism itself is only a few centuries old, and in that time it has deeply undermined the perception of Islam in the Western world, and undermined the social, intellectual and economic development of those countries where it has taken root.
It's why women went from being the closest advisors to the Prophet himself, to being deeply despised and treated as subhuman in certain corners of the Islamic world. The najib, the bourqua, the many, many restrictions on women - these came from outside of Islam, and were integrated into the narrative of what Islam is about. Many in the West fail to understand that Wahhabism and the myriad of ancient tribal customs that were given an opportunity for resurgence are not found in the Qu'ran.
One can find the seeds of Wahhabism. The passages and the bits of text that would inspire such an interpretation, but to say it is a legitimate part of Islam would be false. (Wahhabists would strongly disagree. ;) )
But Wahhabism is a factor that must be dealt with regardless of how legitimate it is. So here we find ourselves looking at its biggest proponent - and it's largest victim - Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia has siphoned its oil wealth off to fund the lifestyle of countless princes vaguely related to the royal family, while the rest of the young-skewing country faces unemployment and poverty.
The ruling class has tried to embrace the radical Wahhabist interpretation of Islam and use it as a uniting force in the country, while accumulating for itself the material pleasures of modernity purchased with the natural resources of the nation. It hasn't really worked. It's resulted in the aforementioned elites living the high life, while the impoverished masses watch the encroachment of western culture they are taught to despise.
It's a nation ruled by oppression and undermined with a deep-seated cognitive dissonance regarding technology, culture, religion and how it all interacts on a moral and practical level.
It's a climate that is intellectually bankrupt, as it crushes new ideas while longing for the modernity it simultaneously craves / despises. It wants to mesh 16th century mores with 21st century technology. So far it has operated under the illusion that such things are possible, as the country has simply purchased what it desires from the West. But it doesn't develop much of anything on its own. The culture of Wahhabism silences innovation. It creates an environment where fear, oppression, absolutely pathological misogyny are entrenched in the social and legal fabric of the nation.
Saudi Arabia has tried to improve its position by having students study overseas, but they quickly become deeply alienated from the world that stands so far apart from the one they come from. Ideally, the men (and they are almost always men) would return with new ideas and new perspectives. But they so often end up bitter radicals. They see how their nation is widely perceived as a backwards ocean of sand that is valued for its oil and little else. Furthermore, the Western world they encounter is full of temptations they have been groomed to hate, but the promise of economic prosperity they cannot hope to find at home.
The home they return to is a stifling environment of institutionalized corruption (the name Saudi Arabia literally means "Arabia that belongs to the House of Saud"), intellectual stagnation where new ideas are deeply frowned upon, and constant reminders of the morally corrupt world they've left behind.
What hope is there for a country like that?
Even if they didn't come back a
Censorship might not be as bad as a crazy religion allowing something and then using it to spy on and persecute people. Would you want someone you care about to be surfing around on Facebook while in Saudi Arabia? When a country gets that screwed up they probably figure they might as well just start censoring everything that might prick on a religious sensibility, just for public safety's sake. We take similar measures ourselves when we drape chain link fencing across cliff faces on roadsides in our own attempts to keep stones from raining down on people.
I'm sure the citizens of Turkey, Malaysia, Morocco, Bangladesh etc etc not to mention lots of moderate muslims happily living in the west would be very surprised to hear that. It's about as convincing as equating all christians with the Spanish inquisition.
I've travelled extensively in Morocco and Turkey (just returned from another journey through the former a week ago) and have got into innumerable discussions with the locals about religion. It is true that those countries are not Wahhabi. However, people who feel that Islam is a key part of their identity and who strive to practice it in their lives do agree with many of the problematic aspects of fundamentalist Islam. They do not believe that other religions or no religion at all should be permitted, and they want the state to silence opponents of Islam.
Turkey especially is tilting towards a situation like in Egypt where a secular state is hanging on to life even as the population goes towards a Muslim Brotherhood-like ideology. My secular friends, representative the ever-decreasing portion of the population who think that Atatürk's attempts to diminish Islam's power were a good thing, are now looking to emigrate so they aren't here when the revolution goes down.
Two caveats:
1) It's not as simple as saying, "Commies are atheists, so all the bad stuff communists did was because of atheism." History shows that Soviet authorities used religion as necessary to keep power. There is also evidence of government officials baptizing their children in spite of their government's lip service to atheism.
2) If Christians are not to be held accountable for the use of their beliefs to justify crimes against humanity (children's crusade, quoting the bible to justify slavery, a million others), why are atheists responsible for actions committed in the name of atheism?
Tyranny of this sort should be rewarded in the manner exemplified by Hassan-i Sabbh. But the people of Saudi Arabia won't rebel against this bullshit in any meaningful way, so it's not my concern.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
Hey, if it's good enough for the Southeastern US...
Oddly enough, except for the difference in religion, they essentially hate the same things. They both hate:
1. Religious freedom
2. Freedom of speech
3. Intelligence and free thought
4. Creativity
5. "Elites" which are anyone who has half a brain in their head and uses it (as opposed to actual elites like the Saudi "royal" family which uses their inherited wealth to oppress people).
Similar to the upcoming US election results
Oddly enough, except for the difference in religion, they essentially hate the same things. They both hate:
1. Religious freedom
2. Freedom of speech
3. Intelligence and free thought
4. Creativity
5. "Elites" which are anyone who has half a brain in their head and uses it (as opposed to actual elites like the Saudi "royal" family which uses their inherited wealth to oppress people).
That is a very 4. Creative and 3. Intelligent stereotype. You sound like one of those "stick up your ass" elite types though.. the ones with half a brain and using it.
Blah, seriously man.. that sort of talk makes you sound worse than the group you are trying to pick on. The guy you replied to made a good joke. You put genuine thought into yours and boxed up an entire region to fit an outlandish stereotype that only exists in your imagination. Seriously, they both also hate cold winters!
http://soylentnews.org/~tibman
Because Saudi Arabia would be a liberal paradise if it weren't for US support?
Given that Afghanistan and Iran were some of the most liberal and progressive societies in the region before the US, UK and USSR fucked them over for oil and a military pissing-match, that may well have been the case. Had those nations not been destroyed, they may have had a significant positive influence in the region.
A lot of progressive movements in the nations around Israel, which were fairly strong early in the century, were also abandoned when the violence (enabled to a great extent by US and UK military aid) really took off.
It is, of course, entirely possible that the tyranny we see today would have emerged on its own without any foreign intervention, but that doesn't negate the fact that most of the tyrannical regimes in the region are directly traceable to Western sponsorship.
I'm starting to think that blaming the US is a religion in and of itself for some folks. I swear, I could say "looks like it might rain tonight"...
The US has done a lot of good and it's done a lot of evil in the world. If you're well and truly sick of it, move to Eastern Europe for a bit, where everything is Russia's fault in pretty much exactly the way that you describe.
What any of that has to do with cloud is rather beyond me. I personally blame bad weather on arctic lichen, Australian butterflies, and the eldest of all living men named Henry :)