ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent • Hacker News Board

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#61

Post by spondyl » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 1:56 AM UTC

While not an official statement, this forum post from a Spark employee is worth a read: https://www.geekzone.co.nz/forums.asp?forumid=184&topicid=24...

---

I am NOT officially empowered to talk about this but I want to shut down any conjecture right now.

No actions of Spark taken now or over the next 24 hours or so should be considered representative of policy. They may turn out to be temporary, they may even with hindsight not be considered the best move. However the number of direct links going around to certain sites and threads where some truly horrific and almost certainly illegal material was being hosted met a threshold for immediate and extraordinary action. We're killing the DNS entries for a couple of sites.

I should note that this had approval from the highest levels, and we're not the only ISP doing this.

Right now is where we all get a chance to demonstrate our humanity in the face of a terrible tragedy. Reach out and help people. I know many people in Chch and around the country that are in shock. I know I am - and I know there are hundreds or thousands of people that are directly massively impacted by this today.

At some point in the near future we'll evaluate what to roll back. But not today.

Cheers - Neil Gardner

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#62

Post by huntie » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 1:57 AM UTC

rbg246 wrote: post #42

huntie wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, I agree that the US has an incarceration problem. We're certainly not perfect, and I think much of the problem is due to the US's drug problem. Regardless, comparing incarceration to slavery is disingenuous as slavery requires no wrongdoing whereas incarceration should require wrongdoing. As for my comparison of disallowing hate speech to slavery, it is a very valid comparison. The two are morally reprehensibl…

I don't see any problem with a government who is freely elected enacting laws that disallow hate speech. To assist with balancing these rights and restrictions there is an independent judiciary and court system that moderates these laws and works out whether they have gone too far.

[flagged]

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#63

Post by amanzi » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 1:58 AM UTC

huntie wrote: post #57

dangerbird2 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> limiting free speech is wrong Enabling the spread of terrorist propaganda, like the blocked websites have been doing by hosting the Christchurch shooting video. You'd better believe if websites like Twitter and Youtube didn't self-censor ISIS propaganda like they did in 2014, many countries would be having their ISPs block those sites.

Twitter's censorship was wrong, and those countries and ISPs censorship would have been wrong as well. Free speech is a human right and censorship is immoral.

Twitter (and Facebook and any other online site) has Terms of Use policies that all customers must abide by if you want to use their platform. If you don't follow their rules, they can remove your content or your account. That is their right since it's their platform and you agreed to their rules when you signed up. If you don't like their policies you have the freedom to not use their platforms.

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#64

Post by mnm1 » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 1:59 AM UTC

So just like after 9/11 in the US, the terrorists win. They scare the powers that be into making life worse for an entire country's citizens. I guess people never learn from history. Both corporations and the government end up doing the terrorists' bidding while thinking they are protecting people. The people have no say. I bet the shooters are laughing from their cells just like al quada did from its caves. Terrorism all around. I'm sure this is just the beginning just like 9/11 was just the beginning of a terror campaign mostly waged by our own government here in the US.

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#65

Post by jen729w » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 2:01 AM UTC

shard972 wrote: post #58

sebthedev wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which aspects of the New Zealand government's response do you object to? Off the top of my head, the government has: used the existing regulatory system to temporarily halt sales of the sort weapons used in the terrorist attack; introduced legislation into parliament to permanently halt sales of the sort of weapons used in the attack, which will proceed through the regular legislative process; announced plans to inve…

Maybe putting a teen in jail, now facing 10 years for sharing the video with an edgy comment.

Do you have a reputable source for this? All I can find is from fringe sites.

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#66

Post by marcus_holmes » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 2:01 AM UTC

legostormtroopr wrote: post #56

doesnt_know wrote: post #12

Not everyone holds the same absolute views on freedom of speech as those drawn up in the American constitution. There is also plenty of opposing views of a "constitutionally limited government" that seems to be at the heart of American culture. Frankly, it's pretty disturbing how many Americans are unable to comprehend that their way isn't the "only way" that can be valid. The New Zealand Bill of Rights provides free…

> "Racial disharmony is illegal." Why? Why should racial disharmony be illegal? It sucks when people don't like you, maybe they have good reasons, maybe not - but legislating "harmony" just sounds wrong. Also, why are people allowed to loudly proclaim "white people are evil" loudly, and broadly, without issues - isn't that also racial disharmony?

Why? because Australia and NZ have large immigrant populations (in fact, are large immigrant populations) that contain many races. Racial disharmony causes huge problems, and creates the real possibility of violence, mayhem and bloodshed. As reasonable societies, these things are seen as bad and to be avoided. Consequently, actions that will create racial disharmony are illegal.

You can hate on whoever you like, but you can't grab a megaphone, head down to the mall, and encourage other people to hate the same people that you do. I don't know about you, but that seems like a pretty benign restriction to me...

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#67

Post by crumpets » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 2:02 AM UTC

erentz wrote: post #28

aphextron wrote: post #3

The government of New Zealand’s entire response to the shooting incident, as well as the public’s cheering for it, is the most disturbing Orwellian thing I’ve ever seen. The level of authoritarian curbing of freedoms that has seemingly happened overnight at the stroke of a pen should seriously concern anyone who values constitutionally limited government. I’m all for the debate, but as an American it’s unimaginable t…

> the most disturbing Orwellian thing I’ve ever seen. The level of authoritarian curbing of freedoms that has seemingly happened overnight at the stroke of a pen should seriously concern anyone who values constitutionally limited government. Woah hold the hyperbole. I want to give you the benefit of the doubt. What actions specifically are you even referring to? The change in gun laws? Australia banned semi-automatic…

>a far more representative and democratic parliament that any US government due to the use of proportional representation.

any US government? Do you understand that many state-level governments are proportionally representative?

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#68

Post by jen729w » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 2:03 AM UTC

legostormtroopr wrote: post #56

doesnt_know wrote: post #12

Not everyone holds the same absolute views on freedom of speech as those drawn up in the American constitution. There is also plenty of opposing views of a "constitutionally limited government" that seems to be at the heart of American culture. Frankly, it's pretty disturbing how many Americans are unable to comprehend that their way isn't the "only way" that can be valid. The New Zealand Bill of Rights provides free…

> "Racial disharmony is illegal." Why? Why should racial disharmony be illegal? It sucks when people don't like you, maybe they have good reasons, maybe not - but legislating "harmony" just sounds wrong. Also, why are people allowed to loudly proclaim "white people are evil" loudly, and broadly, without issues - isn't that also racial disharmony?

> Also, why are people allowed to loudly proclaim "white people are evil" loudly, and broadly, without issues

Source? And I don’t mean calling the individual(s) in this case evil – which they are practically by definition – I mean broadly painting “white people” as being evil.

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#69

Post by baconhigh » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 2:04 AM UTC

All the sites in the article were hosting illegal (in NZ) content - they were temporarily blocked till the video (of a terrorist killing innocent people) was taken down.

Nobody needs to see that.

It's not about free speech.

The sites in question are used to spread hate, racism, violence and bigotry.

Why are we tolerating this kind of media in our lives? Why are we letting people upload this?

It is not free speech. It is targeted hate.

Re: ISPs in AU and NZ start censoring the internet without legal precedent

#70

Post by Jason_Genova » Sun, Mar 24, 2019, 2:04 AM UTC

doldge wrote: post #53

Jason_Genova wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, the meat of what I thought interesting was the initial email. I thought it was concerning that the NZ police were looking to get IP/email addresses of people merely conversing about the attacker. The rest of the thread is just funny because the police respond in the best way possible to the site operator's freakout.

in what world is that concerning? They've been trying to discern if there was a cell of people around who harbour the same intent as this man, or if he was acting alone. New Zealand, a sovereign nation, has every right to request that information. The email was simply a case of whether the maintainer of the site would respond reasonably to a request from the NZ judicial system, or whether they would need to subpeona…

Wow I just checked the thread, most seem to be "online memesters" but there also seem to be some really bad people on there. I didn't understand the nature of the site. I'll remove my opening post - thanks for pointing this out.

However, the fact that NZ police are looking for personal information of the site members, especially since the site is hosted outside NZ and by a non-NZ citizen still doesn't sit well with me.

>If that maintainer of that site is serving content to New Zealand, that it seems reasonable that he should be beholden to NZ laws.

On what planet is this reasonable? If I set up a website accessible to the world, I should be beholden to the laws of all the lands? Am I misinterpreting?