Slashdot Mirror
UN Council: Seriously, Nations, Stop Switching Off the Internet! (article19.org)
An anonymous reader writes:
"The United Nations officially condemned the practice of countries shutting down access to the internet at a meeting of the Human Rights Council on Friday," reports the Register newspaper, saying Friday's resolution "effectively extends human rights held offline to the internet," including freedom of expression. "The resolution is a much-needed response to increased pressure on freedom of expression online in all parts of the world," said Thomas Hughes, Executive Director of Article 19, a long-standing British human rights group which had pushed for the resolution. "From impunity for the killings of bloggers to laws criminalizing legitimate dissent on social media, basic human rights principles are being disregarded to impose greater controls over the information we see and share online."
Thirteen countries, including Russia and China, had unsuccessfully urged the deletion of the text guaranteeing internet access, and Article 19 says the new resolution even commits states to address "security concerns on the Internet in accordance with their obligations to protect freedom of expression, privacy and other human rights online." But they also called the resolution a missed opportunity to urge states to strengthen protections on anonymity and encryption, and to clarify the boundaries between state and private ICT actors.
Thirteen countries, including Russia and China, had unsuccessfully urged the deletion of the text guaranteeing internet access, and Article 19 says the new resolution even commits states to address "security concerns on the Internet in accordance with their obligations to protect freedom of expression, privacy and other human rights online." But they also called the resolution a missed opportunity to urge states to strengthen protections on anonymity and encryption, and to clarify the boundaries between state and private ICT actors.
How many times does the UN have to prove that it's irrelevant, and that nobody gives a fuck what it thinks or wants?
There is a big difference between blogger murders and suspension of telecommunications in a particular area during an emergency. I wonder what meanings the Russians and Chinese see in that resolution. After all, as a Gartner analyst wrote, there is no equivalent concept of "privacy" in the Chinese language.
You mean 'de facto genocide by Israel' i suppose, given the actual facts on the ground.
And yes UN has done nothing concrete against Israel's crimes, proving its total inability to confront brutish racist criminal regimes like Isreal, North Korea, etc, either powerful in themselves or are protected by powerful states.
It's funny, how on one hand, Israel is doing genocide, and on the other hand, we've been occupying palestine for 40 years now. Are we really that slow in genociding? Or maybe you're just stretching the definition of genocide?
Don't get me wrong, we are occupying land that is not ours and seriously messing up palestinian lives, but they are living, which is well... what genocide would have stopped.
So, did this great idea come from Cuba, or Venezuela, or Saudi Arabia, or another paragon of human rights? I mean, I'm all for openness on the Internet and everything, but would it not be more important for people to have the vote (for real, not in some sham election), not have to worry about being disappeared because they oppose the government, or even to be treated like actual, I don't know, human beings (like women in Saudi Arabia)? But hey, the UNHRC condemned turning off people's Internet! So all these other human rights abuses that have been going on for decades must be already resolved, right?
I hope everybody is as cynical as me. The worlds spies rely on the internet more than the worlds activists. Lets be honest. Where did the FBI get a list of people to "visit" prior to the upcoming GOP convention. Would that list have existed without an active internet to mine?
It's a sunny and too warm holiday weekend by the Beach
If your article has a cute title, I instantly lose respect for everyone involved. Be professional if you want to be taken seriously.
It's great how we as a society keep passing a ton of laws that make us feel good or urge them but nothing stops them from disabling access or interfering with access to prevent it from being effective.
It's like a recent steam game issue. during the summer sale someone used a DMCA to pull someones game off steam, without giving them a chance to fight it. They were able to fight it I believe but in the end the damage was done by missing out a big chunk of steam sales.
No one pays any consequences for tripping you even if they determine the trip was a foul and invalid. So they'll keep doing it.
Israel should hurry up and finish the job so the leftist whiners finally shut the fuck up.
Some countries lobbied against the declaration, so it's not a universal statement. What I'd like to see is a list of things that all countries agree on, without coercion, just for informational purposes. Don't sugarcoat it. If that list is empty, I want to know. "It is wrong to kill people" is not on that list, but not being killed is a human right, so what good is that human right if it's essentially wishful thinking? Tell me what we actually agree on. The entire lot, not just a few countries which feel they can speak for everyone.
Sure, like everything else from the UNO this will be more honored in the breech than the observance. Don't you think the bureaucrats and diplomats know this? But if they say nothing, then by implication, depriving access becomes legitimate government policy.
What really happens is the depriving internet access becomes more grounds for sanctions and other measures that are desired for other reasons.
Racist!
No. Wait. Muslims have declared war on israel.
Antiracist!
No. Wait. Jews have been killing muslims for 1400 years and christians for 2000 years.
Antiantiracist! How dare you take someone's side!
There are only so many sternly worded letters in a red envelope that can be ignored. Sooner or later some oppressive regime leader is bound to read one, if only accidentally.
Without ad hoc/mesh networking the "internet" will never be secure, or private. You don't acquire those things through politics. You need the irresistible force of technology. The cops behave better when they know they are on camera. So let's turn this whole "spying" thing around. Never give the state the advantage.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
It seems to me that the UN Human Rights Council doesn't grasp that as long as people are dependant on others, there will always be someone subjegating people. As people become more dependant on others, the centralized power becomes because if the government can control XYZ then they can cause societies to grind to a halt. If they really want to improve the situation of all people then they should be pushing projects that could give people the ability to be autonomous through technology. Governments are terrified of a lack of centralized control because then the people can tell their governments to fuck off. If you want people to be free of tyrants then they have to obtain freedom to go it alone.
What people need are automated and decentralized manufacturing and agriculture to create a post-scarcity economy.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
RIP EditorDavid
May the Lord avenge you.
Jesuit Vatican and Jesuit CIA scaring everybody at threat of harm to themselves/family into allowing a total surveillance country. Even global because the info goes multi-national thanks to many many many fucking FBI moles and even a few CIA moles.
So they take taxpayer money which really is literally not money but a debt instrument (-$20 (actual: 69.5) Trillion in your account how much money do you have? They use it to take your guns, set up camera world and spy and store all of your life details telling you it is to protect you from harm. Meanwhile they terrorize other countries and every time they blame it on somebody over in bumfucked Egypt they say they have to set up more cameras at home and your guns need fingerprint scanners on them and shit.
GTFO CIA. Do not say Barack Obama is just finding this out either.
Israel is not doing any 'de facto genocide' and the facts on the ground don't support that either. Live in your fantasy world.
If effectiveness is any criteria of judging existence of genocides then there has been no genocides in modern times.
Given all the Holocaust survivors for instance, millions of them, that too was no genocide huh?
I suppose deniers like you think just because there are millions of Holocaust survivors, that "facts on the ground" don't support that was a genocide too.
Since when did the right to internet access take priority over the right to safe drinking water?
There's free wifi wherever I look. Hell, the phone box down the road from me has it.
Water fountain? There's a public recreation area I can see from my bedroom. I've been all over it. Not one single water fountain. There's a cafe at the far end which is open for like three weeks in August, that's it. Even they don't offer water.
Something is very, very wrong here.
Political debates have me rolling my eyes so much I think I got optical whiplash. I should sue. - Foamy The Squirrel
...did you forget the part when you said 'modern times'?
Please feel free to link to ANY information indicating how Israel is committing genocide, as that requires you to point to them murdering people who are trying to mind their own business, I am sure that it will be a long wait.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
/me drops a pea in your beer.
Did you perhaps mean pee that means to urinate instead of pea that is a small green fruit?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?