5 ms·

>The online world SHOULD be a wild west, away from government reach, in my opinion. I would agree to an extent, but I think there are a few examples where the

>The online world SHOULD be a wild west, away from government reach, in my opinion. I would agree to an extent, but I think there are a few examples where the government should step in. Child porn being the biggest.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago
All of the things where this legitimately applies are things that aren't really happening on the internet. They're happening in some specific place. Are there pedophiles abusing children in your country? Then go arrest them. They won't be posting anything on the internet while they're in prison. Are there pedophiles abusing children in some other country? That is that country's problem, not yours. Nothing about the internet has to change in order to do this.
- vermilingua 5y ago
  > That is that country's problem, not yours. I agree in principle. However (China nonwithstanding) the internet knows no borders. Any one country not policing and arresting CP provides material for paedophiles in any other country. If consuming online CP increases the likelihood that paedophiles will go on to abuse children (as I suspect it would) then child abuse in another country is your problem.
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    > If consuming online CP increases the likelihood that paedophiles will go on to abuse children (as I suspect it would) then child abuse in another country is your problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_child_pornography_and_child_sexual_abuse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_child_por... TLDR: All we have are correlational studies that conflict with each other, and correlational studies are inherently dogshit regardless, so that hasn't been established at all. This seems identical to the argument that we need to do something about violent video games from other countries because they could cause someone to commit an act of violence in your country. It hasn't been established that this actually happens, but if someone does the bad thing in your country then they still go to prison. People are responsible for their own actions.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  >Are there pedophiles abusing children in your country? Then go arrest them. They won't be posting anything on the internet while they're in prison. And how do you stop the spread of the child porn already on the internet? Just leave it up since you can arrest people who make it or consume it? There are other things the government should probably stop as well. C&C servers for malware. What is your solution when the people involved in malware are in another country and that country isn't taking care of the problem?
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    > And how do you stop the spread of the child porn already on the internet? Just leave it up since you can arrest people who make it or consume it? Who is paying for bulletproof hosting of controversial materials when anyone producing or consuming it is in prison? > C&C servers for malware. What is your solution when the people involved in malware are in another country and that country isn't taking care of the problem? What's your solution? Hacking the C&C servers in violation of the laws of whatever country they're in? That already is the "wild west" solution. The alternative would be something like voluntary blocking by endpoints and firewalls, which nobody would have any reason not to use as long as the block list contains only things like this which nobody actually wants, and therefore doesn't require any government mandates.
    - _-david-_ 5y ago
      >Who is paying for bulletproof hosting of controversial materials when anyone producing or consuming it is in prison? Who said anything about bullet proof hosting? You just need to host in a country who isn't going to do anything about it. I'm going to go out on a limb and say there are some people producing and consuming it not in prison. You can try to arrest everyone involved but you will never get everybody. That was my point. If the solution is to just arrest people doing it then how do you stop the spread by people who didn't get caught? >What's your solution? Hacking the C&C servers in violation of the laws of whatever country they're in? That already is the "wild west" solution. Perhaps. If the country the server is hosted in isn't dealing with it, then maybe that is the best solution. I don't know, but this does feel like a thing for the government to be involved in. If the government hacks a server to bring it down is it really different than a more official way? >The alternative would be something like voluntary blocking by endpoints and firewalls, which nobody would have any reason not to use as long as the block list contains only things like this which nobody actually wants, and therefore doesn't require any government mandates. Who is doing this voluntary blocking? The average person couldn't handle it so it would have to be ISPs or the government. Many people don't have choices in their ISP so they could be stuck with an ISP not doing blocking.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
Eelongate 5y ago
Laws for that sort of thing already exist, so that's obviously not what they're talking about when they say "unmask trolls". It's clear these Australian politicians are authoritarians who are upset about people insulting them online.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  Of course laws already exist and the laws give the government the power to remove servers and other things like that. This means the current laws prevent the web from being the wild west. Just to be clear, I am against this law, but trying to say we should have the wild west seems like a bad idea.
  - Eelongate 5y ago
    > This means the current laws prevent the web from being the wild west. If you take 'wild west' to be pure anarchy free from any law, then sure. But I don't think that's what is actually meant, nor does it describe the real wild west, nor even the popular perception of the wild west. Pop-media depictions of the wild west are filled with sheriffs, bounty hunters, judges, etc. That wild west outlaws exist as a trope implies the existence of laws for these outlaws to violate. Utter absolute lawlessness is not the implication of 'wild west'.
    - _-david-_ 5y ago
      If there were governments (or pseudo governments) then what does wild west mean in this case? The OP was saying the internet should be the wild west without government interference. My understanding was government free area.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

AnthonyMouse 5y ago

All of the things where this legitimately applies are things that aren't really happening on the internet. They're happening in some specific place. Are there pedophiles abusing children in your country? Then go arrest them. They won't be posting anything on the internet while they're in prison. Are there pedophiles abusing children in some other country? That is that country's problem, not yours. Nothing about the internet has to change in order to do this.

vermilingua 5y ago
> That is that country's problem, not yours. I agree in principle. However (China nonwithstanding) the internet knows no borders. Any one country not policing and arresting CP provides material for paedophiles in any other country. If consuming online CP increases the likelihood that paedophiles will go on to abuse children (as I suspect it would) then child abuse in another country is your problem.
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  > If consuming online CP increases the likelihood that paedophiles will go on to abuse children (as I suspect it would) then child abuse in another country is your problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_child_pornography_and_child_sexual_abuse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_child_por... TLDR: All we have are correlational studies that conflict with each other, and correlational studies are inherently dogshit regardless, so that hasn't been established at all. This seems identical to the argument that we need to do something about violent video games from other countries because they could cause someone to commit an act of violence in your country. It hasn't been established that this actually happens, but if someone does the bad thing in your country then they still go to prison. People are responsible for their own actions.
_-david-_ 5y ago
>Are there pedophiles abusing children in your country? Then go arrest them. They won't be posting anything on the internet while they're in prison. And how do you stop the spread of the child porn already on the internet? Just leave it up since you can arrest people who make it or consume it? There are other things the government should probably stop as well. C&C servers for malware. What is your solution when the people involved in malware are in another country and that country isn't taking care of the problem?
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  > And how do you stop the spread of the child porn already on the internet? Just leave it up since you can arrest people who make it or consume it? Who is paying for bulletproof hosting of controversial materials when anyone producing or consuming it is in prison? > C&C servers for malware. What is your solution when the people involved in malware are in another country and that country isn't taking care of the problem? What's your solution? Hacking the C&C servers in violation of the laws of whatever country they're in? That already is the "wild west" solution. The alternative would be something like voluntary blocking by endpoints and firewalls, which nobody would have any reason not to use as long as the block list contains only things like this which nobody actually wants, and therefore doesn't require any government mandates.
  - _-david-_ 5y ago
    >Who is paying for bulletproof hosting of controversial materials when anyone producing or consuming it is in prison? Who said anything about bullet proof hosting? You just need to host in a country who isn't going to do anything about it. I'm going to go out on a limb and say there are some people producing and consuming it not in prison. You can try to arrest everyone involved but you will never get everybody. That was my point. If the solution is to just arrest people doing it then how do you stop the spread by people who didn't get caught? >What's your solution? Hacking the C&C servers in violation of the laws of whatever country they're in? That already is the "wild west" solution. Perhaps. If the country the server is hosted in isn't dealing with it, then maybe that is the best solution. I don't know, but this does feel like a thing for the government to be involved in. If the government hacks a server to bring it down is it really different than a more official way? >The alternative would be something like voluntary blocking by endpoints and firewalls, which nobody would have any reason not to use as long as the block list contains only things like this which nobody actually wants, and therefore doesn't require any government mandates. Who is doing this voluntary blocking? The average person couldn't handle it so it would have to be ISPs or the government. Many people don't have choices in their ISP so they could be stuck with an ISP not doing blocking.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

Eelongate 5y ago

Laws for that sort of thing already exist, so that's obviously not what they're talking about when they say "unmask trolls". It's clear these Australian politicians are authoritarians who are upset about people insulting them online.

_-david-_ 5y ago
Of course laws already exist and the laws give the government the power to remove servers and other things like that. This means the current laws prevent the web from being the wild west. Just to be clear, I am against this law, but trying to say we should have the wild west seems like a bad idea.
- Eelongate 5y ago
  > This means the current laws prevent the web from being the wild west. If you take 'wild west' to be pure anarchy free from any law, then sure. But I don't think that's what is actually meant, nor does it describe the real wild west, nor even the popular perception of the wild west. Pop-media depictions of the wild west are filled with sheriffs, bounty hunters, judges, etc. That wild west outlaws exist as a trope implies the existence of laws for these outlaws to violate. Utter absolute lawlessness is not the implication of 'wild west'.
  - _-david-_ 5y ago
    If there were governments (or pseudo governments) then what does wild west mean in this case? The OP was saying the internet should be the wild west without government interference. My understanding was government free area.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]