Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

buzzfeed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 195 posts

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#161

Post by wfo »

discombobulate wrote: post #102

I'm not sure how long it's going to take for people to realise: the government is not your friend. They don't want to help you. They want to control you. You are their property. You are registered and you are farmed. Like animals. Ask them nicely to stop, and they well smile back and reply 'think of the children'. Behind their dead eyes are the schemes used to enrich themselves at your expense. Rule after rule applie…

And yet the alternative, large corporate interests with no bounds or regulations, is so, so much worse.

The government is chosen by the people. This is not Saudi Arabia. If people do not want May, if they care about being free, they will vote against her. If you care, you will organize people against her to stop this. If you work at an Internet company, you will push them to lobby against her in the coming election; destruction of the Internet will be bad for everyone. Wikipedia should block the UK and show a black page that tells them what is about to happen, then links them to register to vote. You can change the government instead of whining on the internet about dystopia.

A corporation, on the other hand, behaves exactly as you have described, and you will never have any recourse, because the people who own it own it.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#162

Post by nailer »

wfo wrote: post #157
nailer wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeremy Corbyn is similarly close to power and supports violence, particularly in the name of left causes, far more than the Conservatives. Here's a few choice examples: https://capx.co/there-is-no-moral-way-to-vote-labour-in-june... Edit: hi Momentum! If any of these are incorrect you're welcome to reply.

There has been a huge partially successful smear campaign against Corbyn, some written by reputable politicians, some like this so laughable and ridiculous that only the already convinced manage to read through the whole thing without rolling their eyes and closing it. It means people with power are afraid of him which is quite encouraging!

The article addresses the 'smear campaign' theories - that:

- the Labour front bench

- the Labour electorate

- the Guardian,

- Jewish groups

- Caitlin Moran

and anyone else opposed to this madness are all involved in some kind of organised conspiracy against Corbyn, quite well:

> Labour’s communications team lies about “the IRA thing”, claiming that Corbyn’s glorification of butchery should be seen as “helping the peace process”, as though the man who voted against the Anglo-Irish Agreement was secretly urging Gerry Adams to compromise.

Corbyn fighting against the trial of the Brighton bomber and voting against the Anglo-Irish Agreement are matters of record. As are his statements of support for:

- Hamas

- Hezbollah

- Fidel Castro

- Hugo Chavez

and other hard left groups who've attacked innocent people.

They're laughable, but more in a: "this man thinks he has a shot of running the UK". Thankfully we reject this kind of populism more than the US does and a large chunk of the left isn't participating in or voting for Labour until/unless he's gone.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#163

Post by pjc50 »

nailer wrote: post #146
_delirium wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One important difference is that Theresa May is leader of a major western country, while Berkeley students you saw in a video on the internet aren't. This makes one of them a much more pressing threat. True among people on the same "side" of the political spectrum too. The Tories' brand of authoritarian conservatism is much more dangerous than Westboro Baptist Church, for example. You can find Westboro advocating ple…

Jeremy Corbyn is similarly close to power and supports violence, particularly in the name of left causes, far more than the Conservatives. Here's a few choice examples: https://capx.co/there-is-no-moral-way-to-vote-labour-in-june... Edit: hi Momentum! If any of these are incorrect you're welcome to reply.

"CapX" is produced by the Center for Policy Studies, an opaque right wing think tank: https://www.desmog.uk/2017/02/08/opaque-and-deceptive-think-...

http://whofundsyou.org/org/centre-for-policy-studies

This is basically a propaganda organisation, not a news organisation. Not that the news is reliable either.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#164

Post by pjc50 »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #145
mattkevan wrote: post #41

As a British citizen, this makes me sick to my stomach. However, I'm probably in the minority. A few years ago I went to a debate about the Internet and how it affects families, and it was interesting and rather scary to hear people's attitudes. It seemed that a lot of people didn't fully understand what the Internet was, asking why it didn't have a watershed [1] like TV does. Despite good arguments being put forward…

ISPs could offer a web connection with a "watershed" or serve restricted services per device, which would have a similar effect. I use OpenDNS, loss of people use their ISPs blocking service, having that work on a watershed for a home router send reasonable. Don't see why it's such a ridiculous idea to you?

This already happens, as a result of the last "think of the children" initiative. UK ISPs are required to at least offer filtering to customers.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#165

Post by nailer »

pjc50 wrote: post #163
nailer wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jeremy Corbyn is similarly close to power and supports violence, particularly in the name of left causes, far more than the Conservatives. Here's a few choice examples: https://capx.co/there-is-no-moral-way-to-vote-labour-in-june... Edit: hi Momentum! If any of these are incorrect you're welcome to reply.

"CapX" is produced by the Center for Policy Studies, an opaque right wing think tank: https://www.desmog.uk/2017/02/08/opaque-and-deceptive-think-... http://whofundsyou.org/org/centre-for-policy-studies This is basically a propaganda organisation, not a news organisation. Not that the news is reliable either.

It's still an excellent compendium of verifiable data. I'm left leaning, but like the Labour front bench, the Labour voters, and the Guardian I have to stand against hard left extremism rather than support it. in which case, the LibDems and Greens are excellent choices.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#166

Post by ue_ »

nailer wrote: post #165
pjc50 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"CapX" is produced by the Center for Policy Studies, an opaque right wing think tank: https://www.desmog.uk/2017/02/08/opaque-and-deceptive-think-... http://whofundsyou.org/org/centre-for-policy-studies This is basically a propaganda organisation, not a news organisation. Not that the news is reliable either.

It's still an excellent compendium of verifiable data. I'm left leaning, but like the Labour front bench, the Labour voters, and the Guardian I have to stand against hard left extremism rather than support it. in which case, the LibDems and Greens are excellent choices.

What makes you think Corbyn is an "extremist"? If you think the Labour party, with its strong social democratic is extreme, what must you think of the Communist Party? Perhaps I'm in a minority, but I don't think Corbyn is left enough.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#167

Post by discombobulate »

wfo wrote: post #161
discombobulate wrote: post #102

I'm not sure how long it's going to take for people to realise: the government is not your friend. They don't want to help you. They want to control you. You are their property. You are registered and you are farmed. Like animals. Ask them nicely to stop, and they well smile back and reply 'think of the children'. Behind their dead eyes are the schemes used to enrich themselves at your expense. Rule after rule applie…

And yet the alternative, large corporate interests with no bounds or regulations, is so, so much worse. The government is chosen by the people. This is not Saudi Arabia. If people do not want May, if they care about being free, they will vote against her. If you care, you will organize people against her to stop this. If you work at an Internet company, you will push them to lobby against her in the coming election;…

> You can change the government instead of whining on the internet about dystopia.

Or I can take my human capital/money & move countries. Let people live in their own mess.

Or use tech to route around bullshit.

I want as little to do with politics as possible.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#168

Post by nailer »

ue_ wrote: post #166
nailer wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's still an excellent compendium of verifiable data. I'm left leaning, but like the Labour front bench, the Labour voters, and the Guardian I have to stand against hard left extremism rather than support it. in which case, the LibDems and Greens are excellent choices.

What makes you think Corbyn is an "extremist"? If you think the Labour party, with its strong social democratic is extreme, what must you think of the Communist Party? Perhaps I'm in a minority, but I don't think Corbyn is left enough.

For those who don't live in the UK, Corbyn (and Momentum, the hard left group which has recently taken over the Labour party in the UK) is well known to support various groups who commit political violence against non-military targets.

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#169

Post by pjc50 »

nailer wrote: post #168
ue_ wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think Corbyn is an "extremist"? If you think the Labour party, with its strong social democratic is extreme, what must you think of the Communist Party? Perhaps I'm in a minority, but I don't think Corbyn is left enough.

For those who don't live in the UK, Corbyn (and Momentum, the hard left group which has recently taken over the Labour party in the UK) is well known to support various groups who commit political violence against non-military targets.

The same is true of the Conservative party of course, if we count e.g. support of the government of Bahrain: http://www.dpglaw.co.uk/torture-victim-seeks-review-uk-train...

Re: Theresa May Wants To Regulate The Internet

#170

Post by rainforest »

sjclemmy wrote: post #127
rainforest wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They challenge the long-held idea that people on the internet are capable of dealing with things they don't like or the government wouldn't like them to see. They also remove the need for there to be a victim of a crime. I see a lot of discourse on the internet in the same way it happens in a pub. There are very little boundaries to the beliefs someone admits to sharing, and presence of a regulator to check that noth…

> They challenge the long-held idea that people on the internet are capable of dealing with things they don't like... However long-held those beliefs are, they pale into insignificance in the context of the nation state. The internet is not its own realm. It exists in the context of nation states. Nation states have laws that the people of the nation should obey or suffer the consequences. > ...the government wouldn'…

I think you're right to point out that the people in the UK deserve what their elected representatives bring upon them. As their manifesto points out, they want to be world leaders at bringing the internet into parity. As you say, prosecutions for publishing silly comments do happen as a consequence of this process.

I don't think anyone's surprised by the proposal, just part of the small minority who would rather not have the government intrude on their space. From a practical standpoint the legislation risks making social networks prohibitive to run, and will make it financially and/or legally intractable to do things like run forums or possibly any website that publishes news or has a comments section.

Any move by a government to regulate the internet will always be viewed through the lens of this minority as an infringement on a space where ideas should be free, controlled by an actor that shouldn't be trusted and can't be removed (i.e. no Second Amendment) if it's caught abusing its powers.

>> They also remove the need for there to be a victim of a crime. > Could you explain what you mean by this?

Online hate speech has been prosecuted when it was targeted at a dead person.

> I think a lot of people behave as though the discourse they engage in on social media is as if it is in the pub, but it is simply not the case. The existing laws regarding on-line communication encompass anything that is 'published' online and people do get prosecuted.

While true, this is an example where the line isn't concrete. If a pub is full of people being unpleasant or talking about things one doesn't want to hear, one can simply leave. Targeted abuse is different to being uncomfortable about topics one is voluntarily eavesdropping on.

Post reply on HN