Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Wed Oct 04, 2017 7:44 am

This column is archived at: http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2017/1004.shtml

Have UK authorities got their priorities just a little wrong when they propose handing out 15-year prison terms for reading stuff that might be deemed "terrorist material" online? Why is this thought-crime deserving of a harsher punishment than the actual crime of killing someone with a motor-vehicle -- as happens thousands of times every year on UK roads?

And what about Sci-Hub? Is it evil (as the publishers claim) or is it a service to the scientific community (as many scientists and students claim)? Will court-ordered censorship of the site be a good or a bad thing -- and will it set a nasty precedent for future sites that upset some corporation or another?
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2728
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby Muscular Jam » Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:52 am

Sci-hub added to my search bar, thanks very much :-)
Muscular Jam
 
Posts: 112
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2017 4:09 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:37 am

Thumbs up for the Streisand effect!
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2728
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby phill » Wed Oct 04, 2017 10:37 am

yup
i had to look up 403 when i used the ip #
but a simple search gave a usable ip address

ty
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby Muz » Wed Oct 04, 2017 11:53 am

aardvark_admin wrote:Have UK authorities got their priorities just a little wrong when they propose handing out 15-year prison terms for reading stuff that might be deemed "terrorist material" online?


I've always believed that news agencies are the biggest promoters of terrorism by the simple act of their over the top attention to each and every terrorist event. The continual re-hashing of each incident, the photos, the survivor phone videos and the "live reporter on-site" all help promote the terrorist message and aid the recruitment drive for new idiots to replace the ones who have just blown themselves up.

So, judging by the 15 yr sentence for reading the wrong stuff, surely it stands to reason that the 5th estate gets at least 25 yrs for encouraging it?
Muz
 
Posts: 21
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 10:15 am

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby goosemoose » Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:22 pm

aardvark_admin wrote:Have UK authorities got their priorities just a little wrong when they propose handing out 15-year prison terms for reading stuff that might be deemed "terrorist material" online?

This will obviously include the arms contracts and emails that go between the UK Government and one of the biggest funders of terrorism, Saudi Arabia. Or does the legislation only really mean online, as in on the world wide web?
goosemoose
 
Posts: 507
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 1:05 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby phill » Wed Oct 04, 2017 12:59 pm

call me a doubter
but
isnt terrorism the best slight of mind the govts have ever had
only in full on international wars have they been able to enact the level of draconian legislations as seen in the last few decades
but the trouble with wars is they eventually go away forcing a return to freedoms for the crap
this terrorism thing is the gift that just keeps on giving .. and you never have to admit victory
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Wed Oct 04, 2017 2:02 pm

You are so right Phill. Drones are also mana from heaven when it comes to restricting the rights of the public.

Have you noticed that the media has been hyping up the "risk" associated with drones yet has all-but-ignored the collision between a drone and a US Army Blackhawk helicopter that saw virtually no damage sustained?

Didn't fit the agenda perhaps?

Sigh!
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2728
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby phill » Wed Oct 04, 2017 3:04 pm

did you notice stuff stopped taking .. err constructive critique posts on their condemnation of fake news article ?

you have to wonder if they are all given a book of do's and dont's

and what to think about different subjects

surely not all editors can agree so conformaly without some form of guidance
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: Time to burn the Net? (4 Oct, 2017)

Postby phill » Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:45 pm

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/artic ... d=11929506

where reality faces the myths
check the bottom of the page
( ,,,,,,,, ....... A E I O U use em sparingly theres probably not enough )
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm


Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 3 guests

cron