Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#2Normally I am fiercely against content blocking, but Facebook and Twitter are not. Probably the safest provider for kids on the planet right now.
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#3Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#4Local news websites are just the absolute worst.
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#5> 'Because Twitter and Facebook are private companies, their bans on the President do not violate the First Amendment, which protects speech from being limited by the government.'
Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies.
Completely changes the meaning of everything that is said or written about these 'companies', when you understand this.
There's a reason China blocks FB, and it has nothing to do with "censorship." Yes, it is really about protecting their citizens from data mining by foreign intelligence agencies.
I think this ISP's action is a good first step, but they don't go far enough. What people really need right now is a new-age Information Service which is not an "internet service provider" at all, or is only such in the loosest sense of the term; a service that gathers up useful data and information from the internet and other sources also, datamining and collating it and presenting in a convenient form for the customer, minus all the ads, Javascript, malware, etc. Sort of like a CompuServe/AOL/DMOZ/BBS renaissance. Limited direct access could be provided to certain whitelisted internet sites, with the vast majority of the cruft excluded.
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#6> 'Because Twitter and Facebook are private companies, their bans on the President do not violate the First Amendment, which protects speech from being limited by the government.' Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies. Completely changes the meaning of everything that is said or written about these 'companies', when you understand this. There's a reason China…
"Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies."
That sounds nuts. You don't have any evidence, do you?
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#7> 'Because Twitter and Facebook are private companies, their bans on the President do not violate the First Amendment, which protects speech from being limited by the government.' Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies. Completely changes the meaning of everything that is said or written about these 'companies', when you understand this. There's a reason China…
"Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies." That sounds nuts. You don't have any evidence, do you?
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#8> 'Because Twitter and Facebook are private companies, their bans on the President do not violate the First Amendment, which protects speech from being limited by the government.' Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies. Completely changes the meaning of everything that is said or written about these 'companies', when you understand this. There's a reason China…
"Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies." That sounds nuts. You don't have any evidence, do you?
"Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies."
Only "product of" expression may be questionable. Probably much effective to infiltrate big companies after take off.
But, may anyone reasonably assume that centralized data has any protection against intelligence agencies at the end of the day?
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies." That sounds nuts. You don't have any evidence, do you?
"Actually, Facebook and Twitter, just like Google et al, are the product of intelligence agencies." Only "product of" expression may be questionable. Probably much effective to infiltrate big companies after take off. But, may anyone reasonably assume that centralized data has any protection against intelligence agencies at the end of the day?
> But, may anyone reasonably assume that centralized data has any protection against intelligence agencies at the end of the day?
To save myself from vague, inchoate paranoia about them I prefer to concretize such speculation. What is and is not possible?
General rule: don't give anyone data you care about keeping secret or private unless you have a clear understanding of their security procedures.
I assume any data I hand over to any organization is available to anyone else, particularly a mafia or government, unless extraordinary, auditable measures are taken: e2e encryption, open-source, 2fa, etc and the organization has an incentive to keep its clients data safe and/or secret. I trust my personal bank to keep my data safe from the mafia, but I also trust that it will hand over data to law enforcement if warranted. I doubt the NSA has a dashboard that can just look up my spending habits but maybe? I'm not really worried about their looking at my grocery bills, personally, more the effect of unlimited surveillance on society as a whole
Re: Idaho internet provider blocks Facebook, Twitter
#10Just to get this straight... the punishment for facebook and Twitter censoring speech is to censor facebook and Twitter?