This has never been about piracy. The dream of a big label contract for artists is becoming less and less valuable because its the label's job to promote and make the artist popular. The internet has made is so any Tom, Dick or Harry can post their music on YouTube and get a million hits. We are starting to see more of these "Laddy Gagga vs Snoop Dog" video clips, by combining the talent they are trying to entice both fan bases to buy the same album - just a tactic of desperation IMHOP.
Internet is making it so if live in Afghanistan and provided I have an internet link I can watch the latest episode of "Two and Half Men" and even if I'm not in the "legitimate" broadcast zone there's always tvduck.com. This again isn't about piracy directly its about control of the media, its about who sees what and when and how to cash in on that control.
All the internet is doing is making these lazy ass fat cats in Hollywood have to go out an earn their cash, instead of applying the same crappy formula to everything they touch and just expecting it to work.
Or some sort of ancient sudoku puzzle where if you get it wrong poison darts are shot at you or the room fills up with quicksand and you die instantly.
Looks like OpenLeaks is propped up by the Knight Foundation... http://www.knightfoundation.org/... I demand talking cars! Damn It! Where are the talking cars!
BEP used to make some really wonderful and soulful music, I.E Elephunk and prior was quite accomplished music. Though its a fairly typical formula these days.
good group/performer/band/whatever + lots of $$ = lifestyle change = less inspiration = poor art/music/etc
Making their millions means they are under contract to still cut music and since its only a contract and has become obligated the performer produces a mediocre result knowing its just for the money
Yeah but the editors at/. would know with a story like this the #commentlisting was going to be overly populated with such discourse.
Its not like/. attracts people with healthy sexual appetites, quite the opposite, considering most of them are buying plastic vagina molds of their favorite pornstar and calling it "their" girl.
I'll end saying that I have a little more faith in people than that. The US maybe run by tyrants and greed but countries like mine (Australia) its run by public servants mostly. Of course we have outside influences like unions, etc. but i stand by my initial assessment whereby not everyone is evil and greedy, people by nature I've found are pretty good at heart.
If we can clean up the internet so its something thats actually worth something, preserve it and treat it with a bit of respect instead of it being a tool to wastes lives, helps us get fat, enables us look at porn all day, encourages us to play idiot video games (Yes I'm talking about WOW), and helps build socially inept people then maybe anything you had to say to me held some weight.
Personally, and this is coming from the bottom of my heart here. If the internet suddenly stopped being this massive time wasting black hole of useless shit and was just used for commerce a tool, a means to provide a result then I'd be a happy person.
We let our kids get raised by this shit, we let our kids abuse this shit. We even condone disgusting behavior and sick self serving fantasies because of this shit. The shit I'm referring to is the box sitting on your desk.
We complain that we are getting to fat we complain that we are becoming lazy. Yet the people who do so are usually posting blog articles about it. Sitting at cafes with smartphones not talking to people and "if" they go out somewhere they have 3g and a laptop. The internet is a savage thing that needs to cleaned up and the "parasites" or "addicts" (both interchangeable IMHO) need to go to rehab.
The human race is becoming like Surrogates the movie or like Wall-E the movie. We see into those movies and laugh, the reality is its not sci-fi and its not in the future. Its now.
I suggest one thing to a guy like you. Go Out. Have a drink with some friends. And Get Laid. Then think that if you stick your kid on this international network of garbage for long enough he/she may never build the basic skills to even perform life actions.
When it comes to me, tearing it down and starting over is something that as a "free" and "happy" human being would APPROVE of. No political agenda here buddy!
Yeah yeah, what some nations want vs what other nations want. Lets not talk about this for second lets talk about whats best for everyone and then ask ourselves as people how do we get there?
The internet is an absolute mess. Can we agree on this? Its full of busted leaky pipes and over crowded suburbs. I.E the infrastructure of the internet is letting us down in the ways of progressing technology with many nations still relying on copper wires. IPv4 is being stretched sooo thin now, resulting in private networks being run within business to handle the shortage. And last but not least, companies act like vigilantes controlling their own slice of the internet any which way they want.
I'll tell you something, I stayed in remote Brazil for 3 months last year. I spent 1 of those months in a Favela (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favela) some of the people i was assoicated with were from UNICEF which recently visited Syria.
Do you know what the general consensus was about these sorts of places? which we all agreed on after simply tasting the lives of what these people endure? Lack of money leads to lack of infrastructure leads to lack of resources leads to lots of hardship and death. Infrastructure is only improved through Regulating it. You don't build roads without tolls just as you shouldn't run telecommunications with out them either. The internet is the 20th century equivalent to a world international Favela.
My question to you is, how do we turn it into Beverly Hills without any form of regulation? Companies which profit from it wont certainly do it unless they are forced too.
Here is a scenario. Taking the car analogy to new hights which i think people often forget to consider.
The roads (and not saying this is perfect but here's the process behind it all). You pay to have your car registered for use on public roads. That money then gets spent on providing better transport conditions. Tolls are implemented on highways because of their constant need of servicing. Certainly people complain about registration and tolls all the time but the truth is, its better than dirt and gravel so the ends justify the means.
The internet. Its broken and outdated; grossly over populated (running out of IPs); it's full of hijackers (e-theft); people advertise anything they want (spam everywhere); and most of it is vigilante run (ISP's, Google, anyone with the clout runs their bit of it the way they want). Put in regulation, it all gets tidied up, still can drive your car wherever you want even hot the thing up any which way you can but at least its far better than this atrocious mess we're having to deal with now.
Australia's NBN is supposed to pave the way for this process. Taking fiber to the residence and then simply allowing providers to offer data to individual homes. With IP6 enabling the use of individual IPs per unit within the residence would take it one step further.
No, not approval to publish sites. They couldn't do that. It would be self regulated like taxation is. Audits etc weed out the problem sites.
See you couldn't run the internet like Apple runs its app store for instance, thats ridiculas i could see your point there.
Self regulated is very flexible, people complain if the site breaks regulation. Heck we already have something like that in Google. Websites setup with black hat SEO techniques and within a few days after a complaint is issued that site gets removed from Googles index.
What the advantages are is problematic publishers would get removed. How many bullshit websites are there out there, domain placeholders stealing domains and running adsense on them. Javascript inserts which steal customer information. How about even fair use on domains? ICANN are terrible, other countries have legitimate use policies on their domains which.com should also have.
Google doesn't want regulation because they actually make money from the underground activities with adsense. Perhaps a lot of money.
Having a govt body which takes the responsibility off Google from them should be a good thing. Alas, their ties to bad websites is a financial benefit for them, not evil I ask?
Okay look at it from another angle. Electricians, Mechanics, DOCTORS, even Real Estate agents have regulation behind them. The internet? nothing...
You'll find these larger providers you speak of are already heavily regulated. To actually own IP classes and fiber is a little different than having a bunch of servers on the internet.
I'm a web developer / application developer by profession. I make a solid income from it and have been working in this arena for well over 7 years. Now, a perspective company is looking for a new website and companies like us provide quotes.
Solid businesses like us get told all the time that what we do isn't "worth" anything and their 16yr old son can make them a website with Frontpage. It's fine, we know its a bit of hogwash to get the sale price down.
People know that if they are expecting anything professional they need to pay for it but the stigma behind what we do is still demeans the industry. People who write websites went to university they worked hard to hold the qualifications they have.
Why are we the only ones out there that do no have a formal set of regulations to fall back on? Everyone else does.
Govt regulation wont kill the internet. It will just help them suss out the Wikileaks of the world when time demands it. Just like Paul Hogan and Wesly Snipes, they were big enough fish to bring down so the Tax office went after them.
The freedom of what the internet is about wont be affected at all. No sir.
Like it or not we live in a democracy where due process is supposed to benefit our lives not control it. No not perfect but it is what it is.
Regulation on the roads in effect saves lives. Regulation on the internet would make it more valuable to business and benefit alot of hardworking individuals.
The only people that wont benefit are? tell me who is going to lose out if we have a bit of rules behind what gets broadcasted? It doesnt stop extreme views it doesnt stop porn or even midget trannys wrestling in peanut butter if thats your sort of thing.
What it stops is. Dangerious publications which could threaten lives and cause wars. Great! sign me up and lock that Assange in a dark place for a long time. Where is my freedom? knowing that some sexually frustrated fame seeking moron might have his finger on the button of what could cause a war.
Govts are far from perfect but we as people have to put with the hands we are dealt. We can bitch and moan all we want about how horrible they are but without them where would we be? Taking comparision to Nazi Germany is a silly POV because if it were the case regulation on other things would already be at a loss, fact is, it isnt.
Consider the fact that regulation would eventuate in to a form of Duty. It doesn't matter what Google has to say Govts are desperate for extra revenue streams and ability to create more jobs - regulating the internet will do just that.
US govt, esp Obama isn't going to ignore this as a concept. Just watch protests half in size when people realize they could possibly be make a living policing the internet. Only the extremists will be present at the rallies the rest will see the practical advantage.
Is Assange a Journalist? Last time i looked at Wikileaks I didn't see a single news article written about a particular cable, all the site does is go "Here are the Cables".
The real whistle blower, the provider of the content, will be seeing the inside of a prison cell for the next 50 years. If anything Assange is that guy's "proxy". If Wikileaks was to post their own informational news pieces then extract relevant information from the cables. I could see this as a form of journalism but they are to lazy to do this.
Just as much as freedom of speech applies, its also abused, Wikileaks being the main culprit here. When does one simply shoot the messenger out of frustration? Because they get off scott free, while the guy who did the real grunt work, well, he's life is now over.
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
Regulation doesn't prohibit it. Only when regulation prohibits it then it's prohibited and when when civil liberties are denied the law needs to step in - I believe in freedom on speech as much as the next guy but I wont stick every piece of information in that category. I believe freedom of speech is not a preempted strike on people or govts but more so an expression of one's self opinions, precisely like what two strangers over the internet are doing right here and now with this discussion. A healthy debate with the freedom to say anything they want and having the pleasure of anyone else chiming in or even simply reading it.
Taxing websites gives permission for companies to broadcast information. It isn't censoring the content or even charging for it, the tax/duty would be for running a legitimate piece of technology over a standard broadcast medium (the internet).
Run an illegal broadcast service. I.E a bunch of dodgy mirrored servers across different nations without the correct licence or substantiated purpose then the personal details of the people purchasing those servers should get subpoenaed and things are unplugged and people get fined.
You cant run a police scanner from your car these days, if you do you'll get busted, fined and perhaps lose the privileged to drive. You can't hot your car up beyond what the Govt regulations abide too of course there is a lot of flexibility there but when it hits levels of the extreme you can have your car impounded.
You're pertaining to the activities in china as the experiment? I'm first to say the filtration concept isn't something that works, its simply a wireframe for a departmental and manual policy to be put in place, similar to say the US Customs and Border Protection depts.
Take illegal importing for example. Drugs are imported across borders everyday. The risk factor is high, many people get punished for the crime.
Or say taxation, plenty of people fudging their tax returns but its the only real big fish worth chasing.
I see a regulatory body established where licencing for websites would mean the creation of an internet police (no not perfect). The next time a Wikileaks issue appears online it will be easy for them to unplug.
Julian Assange would be treated like Wesley Snipes in this case but much worse. No need for chumped up sex charges to keep him occupied and no need to manipulate companies like visa/mastercard.
Pick a fight in a pub and get locked up, then claim that the police took away your civil liberties? Wikileaks may not of done something illegal today (like punch someone in the face) but the UN is discussing how to make it illegal.
Wikileaks opened a can of worms. If it was left unopened we would of enjoyed another 10 years of free internet. Now sufficed to say we'll be lucky to see 2 years of this free medium.
But yes if Wikileaks didn't happen the catalyst would of been something else but this particular reason makes for such a good excuse to regulate the internet. Even you'd have to admit it's been the best excuse to date. The evidence? its made a forum for the UN, before it was ministers and senators fighting to push a bill but now its world leaders, sadly the word "bipartisan" springs to mind.
The telecommuncations providers perhaps could become more liable, ISPS will hold more responsibility and it will trickle down to the individuals responsible for publicizing content.
Different licences for differnet teirs. Sites like Facebook even needing their own licence for running a social network.
The realities baring on the situation (amidst an economical crisis) is that such a structure could create many jobs such policing the internet, devising policy, and creating infrastructure. Not to mention the massive basin of revenue delivered via duty. This is right up the ally of public service and wont go unnoticed.
Slashdot Mirror
This has never been about piracy. The dream of a big label contract for artists is becoming less and less valuable because its the label's job to promote and make the artist popular. The internet has made is so any Tom, Dick or Harry can post their music on YouTube and get a million hits. We are starting to see more of these "Laddy Gagga vs Snoop Dog" video clips, by combining the talent they are trying to entice both fan bases to buy the same album - just a tactic of desperation IMHOP.
Internet is making it so if live in Afghanistan and provided I have an internet link I can watch the latest episode of "Two and Half Men" and even if I'm not in the "legitimate" broadcast zone there's always tvduck.com. This again isn't about piracy directly its about control of the media, its about who sees what and when and how to cash in on that control.
All the internet is doing is making these lazy ass fat cats in Hollywood have to go out an earn their cash, instead of applying the same crappy formula to everything they touch and just expecting it to work.
I for one am not feeling one bit sorry for them.
Sex with insects ... insectality? arthroality? arachnidality? what would be the proper terminology for this?
My concern is with the fact there is no "Add to Cart" button on their website. Someone needs to fix this ASAP!
Funny you say that, there is a blue patch right near the Triangle!!! Having said that there is an even bigger one in the Indian Ocean so I'd say no.
However .... The Indian Ocean is the purported to be location of the lost city of Atlantis so you never know :)
Or some sort of ancient sudoku puzzle where if you get it wrong poison darts are shot at you or the room fills up with quicksand and you die instantly.
Banks? Stocks? Sales?
Looks like OpenLeaks is propped up by the Knight Foundation ... http://www.knightfoundation.org/ ... I demand talking cars! Damn It! Where are the talking cars!
BEP used to make some really wonderful and soulful music, I.E Elephunk and prior was quite accomplished music. Though its a fairly typical formula these days.
good group/performer/band/whatever + lots of $$ = lifestyle change = less inspiration = poor art/music/etc
Making their millions means they are under contract to still cut music and since its only a contract and has become obligated the performer produces a mediocre result knowing its just for the money
Yeah but the editors at /. would know with a story like this the #commentlisting was going to be overly populated with such discourse.
Its not like /. attracts people with healthy sexual appetites, quite the opposite, considering most of them are buying plastic vagina molds of their favorite pornstar and calling it "their" girl.
We cant even get voice recognition to work because of tonal changes and ascents.
Recently an article was published talking about the human synapse which describes it far as more complex than original thought. See http://www.medicaldaily.com/news/20101117/3877/new-imaging-method-developed-at-stanford-reveals-stunning-details-of-brain-connections.htm
I recon we should start focusing creating LtCmdr Data before we progress on figuring out how to build Lore.
I'll end saying that I have a little more faith in people than that. The US maybe run by tyrants and greed but countries like mine (Australia) its run by public servants mostly. Of course we have outside influences like unions, etc. but i stand by my initial assessment whereby not everyone is evil and greedy, people by nature I've found are pretty good at heart.
If we can clean up the internet so its something thats actually worth something, preserve it and treat it with a bit of respect instead of it being a tool to wastes lives, helps us get fat, enables us look at porn all day, encourages us to play idiot video games (Yes I'm talking about WOW), and helps build socially inept people then maybe anything you had to say to me held some weight.
Personally, and this is coming from the bottom of my heart here. If the internet suddenly stopped being this massive time wasting black hole of useless shit and was just used for commerce a tool, a means to provide a result then I'd be a happy person.
We let our kids get raised by this shit, we let our kids abuse this shit. We even condone disgusting behavior and sick self serving fantasies because of this shit. The shit I'm referring to is the box sitting on your desk.
We complain that we are getting to fat we complain that we are becoming lazy. Yet the people who do so are usually posting blog articles about it. Sitting at cafes with smartphones not talking to people and "if" they go out somewhere they have 3g and a laptop. The internet is a savage thing that needs to cleaned up and the "parasites" or "addicts" (both interchangeable IMHO) need to go to rehab.
The human race is becoming like Surrogates the movie or like Wall-E the movie. We see into those movies and laugh, the reality is its not sci-fi and its not in the future. Its now.
I suggest one thing to a guy like you. Go Out. Have a drink with some friends. And Get Laid. Then think that if you stick your kid on this international network of garbage for long enough he/she may never build the basic skills to even perform life actions.
When it comes to me, tearing it down and starting over is something that as a "free" and "happy" human being would APPROVE of. No political agenda here buddy!
Yeah yeah, what some nations want vs what other nations want. Lets not talk about this for second lets talk about whats best for everyone and then ask ourselves as people how do we get there?
The internet is an absolute mess. Can we agree on this? Its full of busted leaky pipes and over crowded suburbs. I.E the infrastructure of the internet is letting us down in the ways of progressing technology with many nations still relying on copper wires. IPv4 is being stretched sooo thin now, resulting in private networks being run within business to handle the shortage. And last but not least, companies act like vigilantes controlling their own slice of the internet any which way they want.
I'll tell you something, I stayed in remote Brazil for 3 months last year. I spent 1 of those months in a Favela (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Favela) some of the people i was assoicated with were from UNICEF which recently visited Syria.
Do you know what the general consensus was about these sorts of places? which we all agreed on after simply tasting the lives of what these people endure? Lack of money leads to lack of infrastructure leads to lack of resources leads to lots of hardship and death. Infrastructure is only improved through Regulating it. You don't build roads without tolls just as you shouldn't run telecommunications with out them either. The internet is the 20th century equivalent to a world international Favela.
My question to you is, how do we turn it into Beverly Hills without any form of regulation? Companies which profit from it wont certainly do it unless they are forced too.
Because ..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAhIqX6lSCs
This guy being one of them ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99XpGCNCCMM
Here is a scenario. Taking the car analogy to new hights which i think people often forget to consider.
The roads (and not saying this is perfect but here's the process behind it all). You pay to have your car registered for use on public roads. That money then gets spent on providing better transport conditions. Tolls are implemented on highways because of their constant need of servicing. Certainly people complain about registration and tolls all the time but the truth is, its better than dirt and gravel so the ends justify the means.
The internet. Its broken and outdated; grossly over populated (running out of IPs); it's full of hijackers (e-theft); people advertise anything they want (spam everywhere); and most of it is vigilante run (ISP's, Google, anyone with the clout runs their bit of it the way they want). Put in regulation, it all gets tidied up, still can drive your car wherever you want even hot the thing up any which way you can but at least its far better than this atrocious mess we're having to deal with now.
Australia's NBN is supposed to pave the way for this process. Taking fiber to the residence and then simply allowing providers to offer data to individual homes. With IP6 enabling the use of individual IPs per unit within the residence would take it one step further.
No, not approval to publish sites. They couldn't do that. It would be self regulated like taxation is. Audits etc weed out the problem sites.
See you couldn't run the internet like Apple runs its app store for instance, thats ridiculas i could see your point there.
Self regulated is very flexible, people complain if the site breaks regulation. Heck we already have something like that in Google. Websites setup with black hat SEO techniques and within a few days after a complaint is issued that site gets removed from Googles index.
What the advantages are is problematic publishers would get removed. How many bullshit websites are there out there, domain placeholders stealing domains and running adsense on them. Javascript inserts which steal customer information. How about even fair use on domains? ICANN are terrible, other countries have legitimate use policies on their domains which .com should also have.
Google doesn't want regulation because they actually make money from the underground activities with adsense. Perhaps a lot of money.
Having a govt body which takes the responsibility off Google from them should be a good thing. Alas, their ties to bad websites is a financial benefit for them, not evil I ask?
Okay look at it from another angle. Electricians, Mechanics, DOCTORS, even Real Estate agents have regulation behind them. The internet? nothing...
You'll find these larger providers you speak of are already heavily regulated. To actually own IP classes and fiber is a little different than having a bunch of servers on the internet.
I'm a web developer / application developer by profession. I make a solid income from it and have been working in this arena for well over 7 years. Now, a perspective company is looking for a new website and companies like us provide quotes.
Solid businesses like us get told all the time that what we do isn't "worth" anything and their 16yr old son can make them a website with Frontpage. It's fine, we know its a bit of hogwash to get the sale price down.
People know that if they are expecting anything professional they need to pay for it but the stigma behind what we do is still demeans the industry. People who write websites went to university they worked hard to hold the qualifications they have.
Why are we the only ones out there that do no have a formal set of regulations to fall back on? Everyone else does.
Govt regulation wont kill the internet. It will just help them suss out the Wikileaks of the world when time demands it. Just like Paul Hogan and Wesly Snipes, they were big enough fish to bring down so the Tax office went after them.
The freedom of what the internet is about wont be affected at all. No sir.
Like it or not we live in a democracy where due process is supposed to benefit our lives not control it. No not perfect but it is what it is.
Regulation on the roads in effect saves lives. Regulation on the internet would make it more valuable to business and benefit alot of hardworking individuals.
The only people that wont benefit are? tell me who is going to lose out if we have a bit of rules behind what gets broadcasted? It doesnt stop extreme views it doesnt stop porn or even midget trannys wrestling in peanut butter if thats your sort of thing.
What it stops is. Dangerious publications which could threaten lives and cause wars. Great! sign me up and lock that Assange in a dark place for a long time. Where is my freedom? knowing that some sexually frustrated fame seeking moron might have his finger on the button of what could cause a war.
Govts are far from perfect but we as people have to put with the hands we are dealt. We can bitch and moan all we want about how horrible they are but without them where would we be? Taking comparision to Nazi Germany is a silly POV because if it were the case regulation on other things would already be at a loss, fact is, it isnt.
Consider the fact that regulation would eventuate in to a form of Duty. It doesn't matter what Google has to say Govts are desperate for extra revenue streams and ability to create more jobs - regulating the internet will do just that.
US govt, esp Obama isn't going to ignore this as a concept. Just watch protests half in size when people realize they could possibly be make a living policing the internet. Only the extremists will be present at the rallies the rest will see the practical advantage.
Is Assange a Journalist? Last time i looked at Wikileaks I didn't see a single news article written about a particular cable, all the site does is go "Here are the Cables".
The real whistle blower, the provider of the content, will be seeing the inside of a prison cell for the next 50 years. If anything Assange is that guy's "proxy". If Wikileaks was to post their own informational news pieces then extract relevant information from the cables. I could see this as a form of journalism but they are to lazy to do this.
Just as much as freedom of speech applies, its also abused, Wikileaks being the main culprit here. When does one simply shoot the messenger out of frustration? Because they get off scott free, while the guy who did the real grunt work, well, he's life is now over.
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press;
Regulation doesn't prohibit it. Only when regulation prohibits it then it's prohibited and when when civil liberties are denied the law needs to step in - I believe in freedom on speech as much as the next guy but I wont stick every piece of information in that category. I believe freedom of speech is not a preempted strike on people or govts but more so an expression of one's self opinions, precisely like what two strangers over the internet are doing right here and now with this discussion. A healthy debate with the freedom to say anything they want and having the pleasure of anyone else chiming in or even simply reading it.
Taxing websites gives permission for companies to broadcast information. It isn't censoring the content or even charging for it, the tax/duty would be for running a legitimate piece of technology over a standard broadcast medium (the internet).
Run an illegal broadcast service. I.E a bunch of dodgy mirrored servers across different nations without the correct licence or substantiated purpose then the personal details of the people purchasing those servers should get subpoenaed and things are unplugged and people get fined.
You cant run a police scanner from your car these days, if you do you'll get busted, fined and perhaps lose the privileged to drive. You can't hot your car up beyond what the Govt regulations abide too of course there is a lot of flexibility there but when it hits levels of the extreme you can have your car impounded.
You're pertaining to the activities in china as the experiment? I'm first to say the filtration concept isn't something that works, its simply a wireframe for a departmental and manual policy to be put in place, similar to say the US Customs and Border Protection depts.
Take illegal importing for example. Drugs are imported across borders everyday. The risk factor is high, many people get punished for the crime.
Or say taxation, plenty of people fudging their tax returns but its the only real big fish worth chasing.
I see a regulatory body established where licencing for websites would mean the creation of an internet police (no not perfect). The next time a Wikileaks issue appears online it will be easy for them to unplug.
Julian Assange would be treated like Wesley Snipes in this case but much worse. No need for chumped up sex charges to keep him occupied and no need to manipulate companies like visa/mastercard.
Pick a fight in a pub and get locked up, then claim that the police took away your civil liberties? Wikileaks may not of done something illegal today (like punch someone in the face) but the UN is discussing how to make it illegal.
Wikileaks opened a can of worms. If it was left unopened we would of enjoyed another 10 years of free internet. Now sufficed to say we'll be lucky to see 2 years of this free medium.
But yes if Wikileaks didn't happen the catalyst would of been something else but this particular reason makes for such a good excuse to regulate the internet. Even you'd have to admit it's been the best excuse to date. The evidence? its made a forum for the UN, before it was ministers and senators fighting to push a bill but now its world leaders, sadly the word "bipartisan" springs to mind.
Well see this would extend the process.
The telecommuncations providers perhaps could become more liable, ISPS will hold more responsibility and it will trickle down to the individuals responsible for publicizing content.
Different licences for differnet teirs. Sites like Facebook even needing their own licence for running a social network.
The realities baring on the situation (amidst an economical crisis) is that such a structure could create many jobs such policing the internet, devising policy, and creating infrastructure. Not to mention the massive basin of revenue delivered via duty. This is right up the ally of public service and wont go unnoticed.
Yes, but this is where self regulation comes in to play. I can issue false tax returns but i'm rolling the dice and taking my chances.
The regulation will come in a form of a Govt Duty which will be attached to the licence.
Sure i can drive my car without a licence but the same risk takes place.