napster is certainly not the whole internet. just an example of how commerce is driving the internet developments and not the government.
what if child porn becomes freely available on the internet? should governments recognize the futility of trying to restrict it and give up?
again, regulation is not about not being able to 100% restrict things, but about raising the costs and barriers to access.
*you* might be able to find any MP3 on the web, props to you, but out of 100, how many of the other 99 will? most people are not as computer savvy as the average slashdot reader, and have even a hard time double clicking the 'My Computer' icon.
If you have read my post carefully you'd see that I am trying to prove the idiocracy of your post by reversing it.
Besides, Bush Jr. *is* imposing his 'tyranny' on the rest of the world more than the chinese leaders. See Kyoto as the best example. This however, is pretty arguable I admit. But the fact alone that it is arguable says alot.
ps. in case you still don't understand: i am not saying Bush Jr. should be shot, because I rephrased your post. just showing the ignorancy of the posting.
indeed, there is a whole bunch of other alternatives for Napster. but they all don't match Napster's ease of use and wide user base. When one of the alternatives does catch up, like Gnutella might do, the music industry will just shift its attention to the next.
We are getting a bit off-topic here. My point is:
regulation is not about the one or two people that despite the filter can access what is deemed undesirable content. Regulation is about raising the barriers and costs to access.
Saying that filters are no use because you can use a proxy is saying that law against selling licquor to minors is no use because you can have a fake ID. It is not about the 1 or 2 people from the 100, but about the 99 from the 100.
And just to be clear: I don't like what the chinese government is doing.
Probably that the Chinese filter will have some code in it to help track people who say negative things online about the regime. Then there's a knock at the door late at night, followed by a swift "trial" and then it's off to the firing squad or the gulag
Excuse me, but 'probably' isn't a really strong argument. On what facts is your argument based on? Have you actually seen the code or help write it?
Have you ever checked the news forums at the People's Daily? I bet you don't, because you would be surprised at how many posts there criticize the government being too corrupt. Oh in case you don't know: the People's Daily is *the* official newspaper/news website.
and about the firing squad: last time I checked, in Texas they still have a death penalty.
The best thing for China and the world would be if the leadership of the PRC were to be lined up against a wall and have large caliber bullets blasted through their brains. That is the only thing that will ever free the Chinese people from tyranny and the rest of the world from their leaders' insanity.
The best thing for the rest of the world would be if the leadership of the USA were to be lined up against a wall and have large calibur bullets blasted through their brains. That is the only thing that will ever free the American people from tyranny and the rest of the world from their leaders' insanity.
Some arguments could be made for the last paragraph as well. Bush Jr. isn't exactly the brightest of people and he definitely is imposing his tyranny on the rest of the world more than the chinese leaders currently are doing.
and what are these socalled 'far more powerful laws of the information revolution'?
you mean those powers that Napster gave us, and those same powers the music industry would have no chance in controlling? last time i heard, they are putting layers and layers on the original Napster to control it and doing a pretty good job at that.
i think you have no idea what you are talking about.
Come on people, am I the only one that is not naive?
The chinese government certainly is not the only government practising Censorship. Almost every other wired country does, they only don't call it censorship but call it 'regulation' instead.
Tell me, what is the difference between the chinese government installing a filter in the internet cafes 'to protect kids' and the u.s. government installing filters in the libraries 'to protect children'.??
what difference is there between what the Germany recording companies are trying to impose and the Chinese government? Blocking sites via ISPs, a "negative list" of websites..
Slashdot Mirror
what if child porn becomes freely available on the internet? should governments recognize the futility of trying to restrict it and give up?
again, regulation is not about not being able to 100% restrict things, but about raising the costs and barriers to access.
*you* might be able to find any MP3 on the web, props to you, but out of 100, how many of the other 99 will? most people are not as computer savvy as the average slashdot reader, and have even a hard time double clicking the 'My Computer' icon.
Besides, Bush Jr. *is* imposing his 'tyranny' on the rest of the world more than the chinese leaders. See Kyoto as the best example. This however, is pretty arguable I admit. But the fact alone that it is arguable says alot.
ps. in case you still don't understand: i am not saying Bush Jr. should be shot, because I rephrased your post. just showing the ignorancy of the posting.
We are getting a bit off-topic here. My point is: regulation is not about the one or two people that despite the filter can access what is deemed undesirable content. Regulation is about raising the barriers and costs to access.
Saying that filters are no use because you can use a proxy is saying that law against selling licquor to minors is no use because you can have a fake ID. It is not about the 1 or 2 people from the 100, but about the 99 from the 100.
And just to be clear: I don't like what the chinese government is doing.
Excuse me, but 'probably' isn't a really strong argument. On what facts is your argument based on? Have you actually seen the code or help write it?
Have you ever checked the news forums at the People's Daily? I bet you don't, because you would be surprised at how many posts there criticize the government being too corrupt. Oh in case you don't know: the People's Daily is *the* official newspaper/news website.
and about the firing squad: last time I checked, in Texas they still have a death penalty.
Try Myanmar. One state ISP.
The best thing for the rest of the world would be if the leadership of the USA were to be lined up against a wall and have large calibur bullets blasted through their brains. That is the only thing that will ever free the American people from tyranny and the rest of the world from their leaders' insanity.
Some arguments could be made for the last paragraph as well. Bush Jr. isn't exactly the brightest of people and he definitely is imposing his tyranny on the rest of the world more than the chinese leaders currently are doing.
so there. :P
Oh please, democracry is that good? what about the australian democracy? so why do they censor the internet there as well?
please give some arguments on why 'Democracy' (with a capital D) is in your opinion 'the greatest form of government on Earth'.
just because you say so, or just because you heard it from everybody else, doesn't meant it is true.
you mean those powers that Napster gave us, and those same powers the music industry would have no chance in controlling? last time i heard, they are putting layers and layers on the original Napster to control it and doing a pretty good job at that.
i think you have no idea what you are talking about.
cheers, lok
The chinese government certainly is not the only government practising Censorship. Almost every other wired country does, they only don't call it censorship but call it 'regulation' instead.
Tell me, what is the difference between the chinese government installing a filter in the internet cafes 'to protect kids' and the u.s. government installing filters in the libraries 'to protect children'.??
You might want to check on my article on why Proxy Servers are not useful against content regulation.
what difference is there between what the Germany recording companies are trying to impose and the Chinese government? Blocking sites via ISPs, a "negative list" of websites ..