5 ms·

Remember when they said filtering would just be for porn? And then just for pirates and porn? Now coming to you based on being an extremist in the eyes of gov

Remember when they said filtering would just be for porn? And then just for pirates and porn? Now coming to you based on being an extremist in the eyes of government!

DanBC 13y ago
This is a different filter-attempt than the porn filter. As the article says that can be turned off. This is more in line with the piracy filters, but implemented by government not the courts after private cases. The big brother spokesperson suggests that if content is to be blocked it should be after a court order. I'd prefer for most of it not to be blocked. > Last October, Prime Minister David Cameron condemned Facebook's decision to allow videos showing people being decapitated back on its pages. That was a weird decision, especially when they had earlier been deleting images of breast feeding women.
- DerpDerpDerp 13y ago
  My point was more general than about a specific blocking methodology: that people who were defending specific blocks all pointed out how they would be targeted, but the social acceptance of one seems to encourage people to try for more.
  - DanBC 13y ago
    But there have always been calls to block those three things. Sinn Fein members used to have their voices dubbed in news broadcasts because of UK law and that was in the 1980s. Material useful for terrorism has been illegal for some time. This article talks about not just keeping those videos illegal but blocking them from entering the country. That's not a new thing. The UK has been preventing plenty of material from entering the country if they can. The UK has censored some forms of pornography for many years, and people importing magazines would have had them removed. This "slippery slope" argument fails not because there isn't a slippery slope, but because we're so far down it already and have been for years.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- oakwhiz 13y ago
  Just wait until they use the fact that you turned off the filter against you.
- acqq 13y ago
  Regarding the material on the Facebook and co, since such material is behind SSL inside of a widely used sites, the government will request the certificates to be able to do the protection.
dobbsbob 13y ago
and soon critics of the regime will also need to be filtered to combat "foreign hosted slander".

Remember when they said filtering would just be for porn? And then just for pirates and porn? Now coming to you based on being an extremist in the eyes of government!

DanBC 13y ago

This is a different filter-attempt than the porn filter. As the article says that can be turned off. This is more in line with the piracy filters, but implemented by government not the courts after private cases. The big brother spokesperson suggests that if content is to be blocked it should be after a court order. I'd prefer for most of it not to be blocked. > Last October, Prime Minister David Cameron condemned Facebook's decision to allow videos showing people being decapitated back on its pages. That was a weird decision, especially when they had earlier been deleting images of breast feeding women.

DerpDerpDerp 13y ago
My point was more general than about a specific blocking methodology: that people who were defending specific blocks all pointed out how they would be targeted, but the social acceptance of one seems to encourage people to try for more.
- DanBC 13y ago
  But there have always been calls to block those three things. Sinn Fein members used to have their voices dubbed in news broadcasts because of UK law and that was in the 1980s. Material useful for terrorism has been illegal for some time. This article talks about not just keeping those videos illegal but blocking them from entering the country. That's not a new thing. The UK has been preventing plenty of material from entering the country if they can. The UK has censored some forms of pornography for many years, and people importing magazines would have had them removed. This "slippery slope" argument fails not because there isn't a slippery slope, but because we're so far down it already and have been for years.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
oakwhiz 13y ago
Just wait until they use the fact that you turned off the filter against you.
acqq 13y ago
Regarding the material on the Facebook and co, since such material is behind SSL inside of a widely used sites, the government will request the certificates to be able to do the protection.

dobbsbob 13y ago

and soon critics of the regime will also need to be filtered to combat "foreign hosted slander".