Slashdot Mirror
Cameron Says People Radicalized By Free Speech; UK ISPs Agree To Censor Button
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Techdirt: A few years ago, we mocked then Senator Joe Lieberman's request that internet companies put "report this content as terrorist content" buttons on various types of online content. The plan went nowhere, because it's a really bad idea, prone to massive abuse. Yet, over in the UK, some apparently think it's such a grand idea that they're actually moving forward with it. This isn't a huge surprise — the current UK government has been going on for quite some time about banning "extremist" content, and just recently ramped up such efforts. And now it appears that a bunch of big UK broadband access providers have agreed to play along: The UK's major Internet service providers – BT, Virgin, Sky and Talk Talk – have this week committed to host a public reporting button for terrorist material online, similar to the reporting button which allows the public to report child sexual exploitation. They have also agreed to ensure that terrorist and extremist material is captured by their filters to prevent children and young people coming across radicalising material.
A lot of people are going to complain about the freedom of speech or expression, but that's a pretty American thing. Most countries have limited freedoms of speech, the UK included. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F... I wish more countries had absolutely protected speech, but somehow things that are "offensive" to any ONE person are vilified. I'm sure a lot of people would have wanted to censor MLK Jr. and others, it's not just terrorists and nazi's that use freedom from opression to get their points heard. It seems a lot of people forget that.
Make this such an onerous burden that the ISPs are forced to either withdraw their support, or just censor everything that is flagged without checking it. To do this, report everything that is remotely political as "extremist" and "radicalizing". When the politicians themselves are the targets of their bad law, they just might take a hint.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Has there ever been a censorship campaign without some allegedly noble objective? I certainly can't remember anyone standing up and saying "Yeah, it's forbidden because we are basically evil like that." There is always a threat to the children, social order, national security, etc.
Nice work, Airstrip One.
Here we are on a site where strangers can rate what we say, potentially burying it where others won't get the chance to read it, and we're complaining that governments are vaguely coming around to the same idea? Aww, come on now, haven't we gotten this pattern yet? Legislators are always going to be years behind everybody else in leveraging tech, and will always try to apply it on a broader scale. Do I need to start listing all the sites that have user moderation, post or content scoring, or "report" buttons?
Obviously, because there are so many websites that make it work, there are ways to make it work. Whether it will be abused by consumers (including trolls, shills, marketers, etc etc) to the point of uselessness depends entirely upon the implementation. Whether it will be abused by politicians to control the ideas we're exposed to ultimately depends upon the same thing it always has: whether we keep talking to each other.
The concept we have all gotten used to by now is that we have the right to speak, but not a right to be heard. Again, the fact that you're here means that you've already accepted that. People just don't trust governments to do the same, and site owners may not want the government doing it for them. Obviously there are other options, so it's just a matter of making the right tools.
Have you ever used a "webrep" browser plugin? Personally, I think it would be refreshing and useful to have one that works.
The real problem to solve is why children and young people feel the need to become radicalized. Censoring websites will not prevent children and young people from becoming radicalized, indeed, it may even have unintentional consequences.
Who cares? The majority wants this and more. When you consider what those people eat, you'd still think the war was on, and good food was being rationed. Britain leads the way. The US will soon follow. They want the same thing.
This is actually quite a good idea. Though without a troll army, you won't be doing much.
Still, I guess a browser add-on could be made that would automatically report any page you visit that contains certain keywords (politicians' names, hint hint) as extremist and radicalizing. Reporting shouldn't be a hassle, after all.
Ignore this signature. By order.
Actually fixing the problem would hurt too many vested interests.
I write sci-fi for metalheads
I literally get sick to my stomach every time I see these kinds of proposals. I know us turning into a police state is not the goal of radical Islam, but having us live in fear is and which this will promulgate as a constant reminder.
We use to want to defeat authoritarian regimes by being a beacon of freedom that their citizens aspired to – thus defeating them without having to have boots on the ground. It worked well against the Soviet Union and given enough time will work against radical Islam, that is if we don’t turn into something their people don’t admire and aspire to be.
Just quit playing their game, seriously, leave things alone to sort themselves out. I’m not completely isolationist, groups like ISIS certainly deserve a thumping. I’m not blind that some intervention is called for in extreme cases.
How about we get to UN to quit backsliding on basic freedoms, instead of worrying about the sensitivities of religions? How about to be full fledged member of the UN your people have to have freedom of speech and religion? Political systems and economic systems are up to whoever is in charge, but quit letting theocracies to get a pass on human rights. Do this and within a generation religious radicalism will be a thing of the past.
Letter To Iran
You know - things like objecting to government regulation, complaining about government spying, making a request for public information, suing the government, that kind of thing.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Shouldn't there also be `Racist' and `Sexist' "public reporting buttons" as well?
Did I actually just type that?
Holy shit.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Yes it's called a ballot. You tick the box every few years and you get a lying, scumbag politician.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Well, on the good side, this would probably silence religious speech.
Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
the last few major "acts of terrorism" in britain have been by a gent named Pavlo, a Ukranian man with a distinctive axe to grind against Muslims. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... the 2007 glasgow attack was stretched as a "terror ramming attack" of all things, and in 2008 an individual with a history of mental problems who had 'recently converted to islam' attempted to bomb a cafe.
When governments pass antiterrorism laws, its amusing to see their concern for children or the welfare of the youth as Terrorism in the strategic sense does not serve to undermine the citizenry but their government. Events like disclosing sensitive government information related to, in the case of the states, the wholesale slaughter of a crew of journalists by a helicopter team and an ensuing coverup for example are acts of terrorism as they directly challenge and discredit the government as an agent acting genuinely in the best interests of its citizenry. Lastly, it remains to be said that Terrorists arent a toggle switch. In most cases these individuals have been pushed to desparation over many years until theyre left determined with nothing to lose. For example, the secret drone strike that killed a man or womans family may be met with a seemingly random and disproportionate retaliation 12 years later as theyve joined a support group of terrorists equally affected by these strikes and ignored by their respective governments.
Britain and most western governments hate terrorism because it is an effective means of wearing down psychologically and emotionally one or more governments political policies in a means that cannot be bargained away or ignored. it inspires political churn in the state, distrust and apathy in the citizenry, and ultimately a further push from policies such as dominionism. It can also be argued that miring large nations in protracted, endless war is both an effective catharsis for an exploited people as well as deterrent against future distatesful foreign policy in the resultant return of wounded troops whom while perfectly alive, serve as a tangible reminder of the govenments complete lack of prudence and judgement again and again.
Good people go to bed earlier.
It would likely silence the speech you just made too.
If you think silencing speech you do not like or agree with is proper, you need to consider how long it would take to silence yourself. I'm sure there are people who do not agree with you.
Oh I would not be too sure of that. Just wait until some bright spark thinks to start a campaign to click the button to report an MP's speech as "extremist" and "radicalising". Someone more cynical than I might even suggest that this is part of the government's plan to deal with UKIP....
Lets see... who's the most responsible for bombing the largest number of innocent civilians in Britain?
Parliament of course.
So get clicking folks. We need to stop the government from spreading it's propaganda and continuing it's 300 year terror campaign.
I thought that was the Luftwaffe?
Free speech may lead to more consequences since the times of Reagan, but free speech itself is still alive and well.
Really? The US makes a lot of noise about free speech but this law only restricts the US government. If you exercise your "right" you can end up fired, refused services and/or prosecuted for minor crimes to silence you. There is no concept that someone providing a public service has a duty not to discriminate based on your political views. Hence there is no real freedom of speech: if you say something loudly enough which the big corporations disagree with then expect to end up jobless, homeless and penniless...but hey at least your aren't in prison so it's all good, right?
Hey, it could work in the people's favor though. What if thousands went on a campaign to click the "terr'ist" button on all the articles having to do with Cameron himself?
Get married and soon you will long for the good old days when your buttons were pushed only once a day.
Yes, this. I was going to suggest a campaign to overload their system with false positives but come to think of it this idea is pretty extremist and it is radicalising me into abusing their censorship system, so maybe it wouldn't be a *false* positive after all.
Remember when BT got lambasted as they intercepted all their user's web page requests using Phorm to be able to track users and insert their own ads into web pages? There was a big backlash with everybody saying a web page should be allowed to travel from a web server to a web browser unmolested. It's no surprise they will jump at an excuse to be able to intercept all their users web pages and manipulate the content before it arrives at the web browser. Sets a great precedent for them.
It would be interesting to see transcripts of Cameron's speech as it's hard to believe he is as idiotic as he has been made out to be. His quote that we must "deal with the Internet" doesn't mean anything as radical as a report button on web pages. Though his quote "We must not allow the internet to be an ungoverned space" is bound to make him a hate figure globally online. I've no idea how his PR man let that slip past. "Just because you are online does not mean you are immune from the law" would have been much better.
Phillip.
Property for sale in Nice, France
The people only want it because they're only fed misleading propaganda. Once again, this just shows that the ignorant masses are ignorant and gullible and incredibly easy to manipulate.
Is the U.K. currently experiencing a prison occupancy shortage by any chance?
"How many protest reportings of my representative's speech as radical does it take to get to the center of a London* state prison, Mr. Owl?"
"ONLY ONE." [bars slam]
* everybody knows London is the only city in the U.K. anyway
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
...when the old Soviet era jokes start fitting the western world. Want some samples? These are original jokes that were told in or about the Soviet Union. All I really did was to switch names and places (and translate those that had no English translation yet).
Don't think.
If you think, don't speak.
If you think and speak, don't write.
If you think, speak and write, don't sign.
If you think, speak, write and sign, don't be surprised.
(this one is actually more funny in Russian because it's far more terse and laconic)
Every morning a man would come up to the newspaper stand, and buy a copy of USA Today, look at the front page and then toss it angrily into the nearby bin. The newspaper-seller was intrigued. "Excuse me," he said to the man, "Every morning you buy a copy of USA Today from me and chuck it in the bin without even unfolding it. What do you buy it for?" "I'm only interested in the front page,' replied the man. "I'm looking out for an obituary." - "But you don't get obituaries on the front page!" - "I assure you, this one will be on the front page.
A man was arrested for an assassination attempt on the president. "You didn't really want to kill the president, right?", asks the judge, "You're an ex-marine sniper with hundreds of confirmed victories, and missed from just 300 yards?" "Well, to be honest, it was my intention to kill him, but the people around me distracted me". "Oh, they tried to dissuade you and protect the president with their life?" "Not quite, they kept nudging me, yelling 'shoot, dammit, shoot!'"
We are the most progressive country in the world. Yesterday we already had it better than we'll have it tomorrow!
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “Is it possible to make ends meet on salary alone?”
We’re answering: “We don't know, we never tried.”
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “We are told that the economic upturn is already seen at the horizon.” Then, what is a horizon?”
We’re answering: “Horizon is an imaginary line which moves away each time you approach it.”
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “What to do if a man you don't know takes a seat at your table in a pub and starts to sigh?”
We’re answering: “Immediately demand to stop the defeatist propaganda.”
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “Is it possible to export our system to Switzerland?”
We’re answering: “It's possible, but why? Did Switzerland really do something wrong to you?”
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “Why some people say that Afghans love the Americans and hate the Russians?”
We’re answering: “Because Americans helped Afghanistan to get rid of the Russians, but the Russians didn't."
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “What is the easiest way to explain the meaning of the word ‘democracy’?”
We’re answering: “Judging from our foreign policy, by means of weapons."
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “What is the duration of the workday in America?”
We’re answering: “Of course, it's an eight-hour workday: from eight am to eight pm.”
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “What is an exchange of opinions?”
We’re answering: “When you walk into your boss's office with your opinion and walk out with his.”
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “Can a son of a middle manager become a CEO?”
We’re answering: “No, because every CEO also has a son.”
This is Armenian Radio; our listeners asked us: “Is it true that there are two kinds of people serving as senators, as congressmen and as members of the Supreme Court?”
We’re answering: “Yes, it is a true. One kind is those not capable of anything at all, and
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
He almost lost the Scotland gamble. And of course there will be a second Referendum in a couple of years which will end in a divorce. He leads the UK out of the EU sinking the British finance sector. He also wants to cancel the European human rights treaty. And he censors the internet and spies on everyone.
He mostly acts like a child. He is angry or has tears in his eyes. And then he lies to the British and then the EU is the cause of all problems according to Cameron. He is an upper class classisist with a big ego and no intellect. And I am very sorry for the UK, but he will ruin it for most of them.
*Ahem* Fuck you, David Cameron! We kicked your ass off this continent once over this issue and we'll do it again! And also Avatar was nothing both soft core furry porn! So there!
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I can think of various things that should be itemised as nasty. I am all for letting crazies speak but I would like them and everyone else to know how many people think they are dodgy,
"What type of things" you might ask "would I want to identify as hateful?"
You could start with our most hate filled politics. We have little as far right as you guys but there ae simple acronyms for some of the worst - ECDL, BNP, UKIP and the like. Their right to say things should not be restricted but everyone going to their sites should receive a reminder whenever they go to their web sites that these people are to be examined very carefully as some of them are completely nuts and even the mildest of them may well be the bunch of "fruitcases" that they were described as!
If there was a "Really Crazy" button that we could report groups from those to Home Secretaries who want to mess us up, that would be really useful...
I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
It's not even controversial that the FBI coordinated a crackdown on Occupy. http://www.theguardian.com/com...
The FBI even knew of possible assassination plots via rooftop sniper fire, and not only would they not act on these obvious acts of terrorism--the FBI has tried only to hide public knowledge of these plans. http://www.democracynow.org/20...
The entire HBGary scandal came about due to the Chamber of Commerce (which shouldn't be a part of government to begin with) cooperating with Bank of America through a middleman to target activists and occupy figureheads.
Furthermore, the government has been paying trolls to trash both OWS and the tea party on various sites. But it's too early for you to hear about that in mainstream news (even though the Intercept broke the story of government-paid trolls earlier this year: https://firstlook.org/theinter...)
So the idea that the government hasn't tried to suppress occupy is BULLSHIT.
"Sorry Bill, too much terrorist, aristocrat-killing propaganda in your plays. Lock him in the tower, mates."
Might as well piss on their graves.
Not for Muslims. UK seems to have two separate standards: one for Muslims, one for everybody else.
Muslim preach hate in the streets all the time. Muslims are allowed to offend anybody. Nobody is allowed to offend Muslims.