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

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

privateinternetaccess.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 305 posts

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

#181

Post by Taniwha »

I think that the main thing missing here is that the NZ ISPs started blocking access to the snuff film within hours of the terrorist's slaughter, the government started making proclamations days later.

The snuff film fetishists started passing it around within minutes of it being broadcast, if anything one can argue that the ISPs started too late.

Remember by NZ law something like this snuf film is created 'obscene', the censor just confirms that it is, you're legally responsible for not breaking the law by copying it, or publishing it from that first moment that it exists ... and so are our ISPs, these laws were written for film, transient copies caused by their customers accessing the illegal content puts them at legal risk, all they can do is to refuse to let people access the places which could put them (the ISPs) at risk

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

#182

Post by hackerman12345 »

beachy wrote: post #36
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…

Almost everyone in NZ that I've talked to, which includes a few gun owners, has been in broad agreement with the moves to ban MSSA weapons - cheering for it is probably a good assessment. I cannot fathom how anyone could call that Orwellian, it feels more like plain common sense.

"Guns are too dangerous, give them to us or we'll shoot you and take them from your cold, dead hands" might be a little bit totalitarian.

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

#183

Post by oska »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #89
aphextron wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Which aspects of the New Zealand government's response do you object to? Namely the banning of the manifesto. Blocking images of violence is one thing. But making the leap to blocking ideas is on a whole other level. I’m all for de-platforming. No one should be forced to host your vile content, legal or not. But for the government of your country to ban a specific string of characters as a criminal matter is terrify…

Why is banning a string of characters terrifying, but not a string of bits?

In my opinion aphextron was being overly reductionist in describing the manifesto as just a string of characters.

The manifesto was a presentation of a political viewpoint (and perhaps a call to action - I don't know, I haven't read it). The manifesto qualifies as speech.

The video was a record of a criminal act of great violence. I wouldn't classify the video as speech. (In contrast, a fictional portrayal of the same acts but made with actors and no-one dying would be speech).

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

#184

Post by myrandomcomment »

doldge wrote: post #151
myrandomcomment wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hate speech, is protected speech in my mind, no matter how abhorrent. The founding fathers of the USA had a reason for the 1st amendment. You milage may vary in your location, but at the end of the day, censorship of speech is very very slipper slope. This type of speech needs to be countered by education and by people standing up and saying "we will not listen", not a bureaucrat. Allowing the government to censor wh…

that's a very American stance to take. I don't mean that as an insult; I mean that Americans value individual liberty above all else. That isn't the case in NZ; Most of the population trusts the government and value's collective good above individual liberty, the policies and responses to events like these are born out of our culture and focus on those values. It's apples & oranges with the US culture of valuing indi…

Individual liberty is a huge part of it, however it is not the final arbitrator of society. It is an act of the individual that inspires change. One person can make a difference and change to course of history. They do so by having the ability to speak freely, or baring that the ability to speak and then except the consequences of that speech, in order to insure change (MLK, Ghandi, etc.) Regulated speech can lead to a dictatorship. Look at the Nazis or the USSR. The first thing to go is the right to disagree without threat of imprisonment or worse. I do understand that you trust this government (I have visited NZ a number of times and I am a huge rugby fan). But that is this government. It is not a good idea to set the precedent on the limitation of speech as it can be used in the future to limit it by those that do not have the ideals of the government you currently support. The regulation of speech is a slippery slope. Only the collected efforts of the people can counter those that speak hate. Making it illegal only strengthens those that hate, giving them another boogie man for their own cause. Yes, I am being an idealist. Oh, for what it is worth, half of my family is Muslim and they share my thoughts on this. That half came here because of the limits on their freedom.

Bin Laden was directly responsible for the planning and support for attacks on the USA and others. Wikipedia is a good place to start with links to items, including transcripts etc.

I emotional agree it is hard to trust the masses to do the right thing, never the less, we have to. It’s the only way. Everything else leads to opression.

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

#185

Post by sdwisely »

XorNot wrote: post #136
jjcm wrote: post #109

The problem with censoring and banning the information outright (in the case of NZ) is that it gives power to the manifesto. So much of what Jacinda Ardern said after the shooting was about denying the person a platform: "We, in New Zealand, will give him nothing. Not even his name." "He sought many things from his act of terror, but one was notoriety, and that is why you will never hear me mention his name." And yet…

No they haven't. What they're doing is preventing the spread of radicalization to vulnerable demographics. They're breaking up the ability of alt-right groups to try and rally around it. You don't get to shoot a bunch of people and have your manifesto spread far and wide. You get forgotten. And your manifesto gets banned. Because who cares what you had to say - it's irrelevant. As to the video: go extract release for…

that last paragraph is something I've naively never given much thought and you're right.

The rise of facist groups has really made me realize how disproportionate 'free speech' can be.

The first example that comes to mind is police presence at protests against them. If 100 of them show up and 1000 counter protestors show up then the onus is on the police to protect their protest.

The minorities targeted by these hate groups are at a disadvantage in so many ways, they are more likely targets of the police, they are more likely to already have convictions so the risks are higher in the legal system. They are much more likely to be killed by the police.

free speech is not necessarily a level playing field and these groups are both aware and weaponize that.

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

#186

Post by Taniwha »

erentz wrote: post #43
huntie wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ISPs aren't banning sites for kicks. New Zealanders have been arrested for distributing the video.

Note the bans on some of those NZ ISPs started before the video was classified as objectionable. So they’re not banning them to prevent their customers from facing charges. They’re doing it for other poorly explained reasons that aren’t legally required.

Under NZ law the snuff film was 'objectionable' from the moment it was created, the censor's job is essentially to just confirm that - the ISPs are not only stopping the film from being passed around by snuff fetishists but also protecting their own arses from potential legal issues if any of their customers access the illegal content

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

#187

Post by sintaxi »

XorNot wrote: post #136
jjcm wrote: post #109

The problem with censoring and banning the information outright (in the case of NZ) is that it gives power to the manifesto. So much of what Jacinda Ardern said after the shooting was about denying the person a platform: "We, in New Zealand, will give him nothing. Not even his name." "He sought many things from his act of terror, but one was notoriety, and that is why you will never hear me mention his name." And yet…

No they haven't. What they're doing is preventing the spread of radicalization to vulnerable demographics. They're breaking up the ability of alt-right groups to try and rally around it. You don't get to shoot a bunch of people and have your manifesto spread far and wide. You get forgotten. And your manifesto gets banned. Because who cares what you had to say - it's irrelevant. As to the video: go extract release for…

Preventing radicalization is a presumption without supporting evidence.

The New Zealand authorities have essentially made it illegal to disagree that that the video and manifesto is valid justification for taking away rights and freedoms because informed disagreement would require to view the content which is punishable with a sentence up to 14 years. Do you really not see the problem here?

If the video and manifesto is used as justification to take rights a privileges away from the citizens of New Zealand then its only reasonable that the citizens have the right to scrutinize their governments actions by viewing and sharing video and manifesto. Accountability is still necessary regardless how unpleasant it may be.

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

#188

Post by Taniwha »

int_19h wrote: post #112
erentz wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

With respect to their semi-auto ban, I think the most questionable part of it was where the executive unilaterally banned them via Order in Council, so as to not wait for the legislative process (which is still ongoing). I'm frankly amazed that any modern democracy grants its executive an authority to outright promulgate binding legislation like that.

They didn't ban them they changed the license requirements to own them, something that they can do legally by regulation under the current law

The ban will be done in parliament over then next week or so, looks like 95%+ of the currently elected MPs will vote for the change, all major parties in parliament, left and right, have publicly said that they agree with the changes.

Remember that less than one person in 15 in NZ has a gun license, and even fewer own semi-automatics, it's a small minority affected by this change, it's not all that controversial (in NZ)

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

#189

Post by sintaxi »

sdwisely wrote: post #185
XorNot wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No they haven't. What they're doing is preventing the spread of radicalization to vulnerable demographics. They're breaking up the ability of alt-right groups to try and rally around it. You don't get to shoot a bunch of people and have your manifesto spread far and wide. You get forgotten. And your manifesto gets banned. Because who cares what you had to say - it's irrelevant. As to the video: go extract release for…

that last paragraph is something I've naively never given much thought and you're right. The rise of facist groups has really made me realize how disproportionate 'free speech' can be. The first example that comes to mind is police presence at protests against them. If 100 of them show up and 1000 counter protestors show up then the onus is on the police to protect their protest. The minorities targeted by these hate…

The manifesto includes direct calls to violence. So promoting and spreading the manifesto in that way should be a crime. However, reading and sharing the material for informing ones self should be seen as right that one has - especially since it is being used as justification to take rights and freedoms away.

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

#190

Post by beachy »

hackerman12345 wrote: post #182
beachy wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Almost everyone in NZ that I've talked to, which includes a few gun owners, has been in broad agreement with the moves to ban MSSA weapons - cheering for it is probably a good assessment. I cannot fathom how anyone could call that Orwellian, it feels more like plain common sense.

"Guns are too dangerous, give them to us or we'll shoot you and take them from your cold, dead hands" might be a little bit totalitarian.

Attitudes are different in NZ from the US. There is no right to bear arms, and self defense is not a valid reason to hold a firearm licence. An overwhelming majority of people believe that military style weapons have no place in society, and that those guns - though not all guns - are too dangerous, and that accordingly yes, you must hand them over.
Post reply on HN