4 ms·
It's a complete misnomer to try and frame this as a security issue, it's not about security, it's censorship. The government has no business saying what website
by Etheryte 3y ago
It's a complete misnomer to try and frame this as a security issue, it's not about security, it's censorship. The government has no business saying what websites you can read just as the government has no business saying which books you can read or which newspapers.
- hulitu 3y ago> The government has no business saying what websites you can read just as the government has no business saying which books you can read or which newspapers. This is, unfortunately, not true since some years.
- martin8412 3y agoThat was never true.
- chrisco255 3y agoNo, it's been true since forever and will remain true forever. If your government doesn't respect this right, it's time to get a new government.
- zarzavat 3y agoEvery government has its own special set of things that, for better or worse, it tries to wipe from the internet. 1. In the US it’s prostitution, copyright infringement, DRM circumvention, etc 2. In the UK it’s any “offensive” joke 3. In Germany it’s anything glorifying Nazism 4. In Russia it’s mentioning the War 5. In Thailand it’s Lese Majeste: anything said against the King 6. In Pakistan it’s blasphemy 7. In China it’s everything 8. In a large number of countries it’s anything that threatens the regime Which country on Earth has free speech?
- chrisco255 3y agoUnited States has freedom of speech as a constitutionally protected right. Prostitution is a commercial service within the realm of government regulation. Copyright laws are a mixed bag of nice and terrible, but it's still more than possible to express an idea derived from copyright material in a different way without verbotem duplication.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- henearkr 3y agoYet people will still have access to these websites if they want, so it makes more sense to have been designed to prevent accidental, unwilling, or unaware access.