Helpful Information
 
 
Category: Geek News and Humour
Should the internet be censored? (beware)

** Notice this message is quite graphic in regards material which should/should not be censored, if it's in poor taste I apologise in advance, please don't read if you're squeemish **

Having just found a website full to the brim of video and imagery of executions, murder, accidental death, suicide, brutality, violence, mutilation and mutation... a series dedicated to babies...

If your mother, father, brother, sister, commited suicide, was killed in an accident or murdered would you want the uncensored pictures all over the internet?

I'm somewhat sickened, less by the content, but that someone goes hunting for the content, pays for hosting. And that a host allows such content on their servers.

It begs the question; should the internet, through regulation of hosts and ISP's be censored against such content?

Hi mouse

I think that a full-scale debate is pointless because the kind of sick people who like that kind of thing are never going to change, nor admit who they are if there is anyone like that here. So it's going to be pretty one-sided as far as debates go, because I believe everyone I know on these forums at least would agree with you.

I am pretty sure that I know the site that you mean - about a year ago I went through a phase where I was pretty much into "funny movies" - what I mean is, clips such as bloopers where you see people having harmless falls and things - the kind you get on tv and laugh at. I searched the net and found loads - but then I came across a handful of sites that, although they had some funny content, they also had stuff that I thought was borderline, and the occasional far-out clip.

One that stands out to me was a movie of someone's finger being cut off with a chisel. I have no idea if it was real and I don't want to know. It had a humorous title and I was expecting a funny clip - what I saw kinda put me off looking any further, in case amongst the innocent ones I found some real horrors.

I think we all know that there is some evil stuff around on the net (and evil is not a word I use very often) however we like to ignore it and live out cosy lives. But occasionally you stumble across something that sickens you, like you have just done.

Like I say, I think I know the site you mean. I got as far as the homepage and thankfully there were no pictures on it. I spent perhaps 30 seconds scanning the homepage with my bile rising and then I had to stop. It kinda shook me for a couple of weeks - there were people talking about the 'latest greatest series of autopsy pics' etc. and although I am not ignorant to the existance of 'snuff', like you say it is another thing entirely to realise that there are people who look for and collect this kind of material, and create places where others like them can come and fester.

I tend to believe in freedom of speech, and even on this issue I am truely not sure about the censorship thing - or even if it is really do-able - but in my eyes there is no need for this kind of filth and I can't see why any host would tolerate it, hence I come down strongly on the side of censorship. At what price innocence? Sell your soul for a few more dollars? Charge a little more to stifle your conscience?

I would definitely object to pictures of loved ones being used in such a way - I think anyone would, perhaps even the people who look at that stuff would not feel the same way if it was their spouse or sibling or parent or child in the photos.

As a webhost with many hundreds of sites as my responsibility, I have on occasion had to shut a site down due to innappropriate material. As a point of interest, I allow pornography to be hosted however only if requested in advance and only if the client checks out. I have nothing against porn however there is a lot of sick stuff around that I want nothing to do with. I say this so that people will realise that I am a pretty much normal kind of guy with average opinions about most things - I'm not a religious zealot or anything and I believe very much in freedom of expression and freedom of speech. However there comes a point where, even if it can fall under the category of free speech, you just know something is WRONG, and it is these things such as you have mentioned, and child porn etc. which are truely evil and I think they should ALL be illegal, and actively censored and enforced.

It is interesting that in the UK newspapers in recent months there has been mention of a German doctor who does 'live' autopsies - that is, in front of a public audience. Why would anyone want to go to such a thing? It baffles me, yet obviously some people must like it.

All in all, people can try all the censorship they want but there will still be an underground of this kind of stuff. It will still go on. All we can really do is keep away from it and moan about it enough to have most of it removed.

::] krycek [::

I was unaware that such a site existed mouse. Upon running a search on google I found some of the most sickening things I've ever seen..

I agree totally with krycek!

Originally posted by Mhtml
I was unaware that such a site existed mouse. Upon running a search on google I found some of the most sickening things I've ever seen..

I agree totally with krycek!

thanks, but... don't search. :( just, don't :(

::] krycek [::

I just read the descriptions ;).. I'm not terribly squeemish but from what those descriptions read I don't think I could look at that stuff.

Originally posted by Mhtml
I just read the descriptions ;).. I'm not terribly squeemish but from what those descriptions read I don't think I could look at that stuff.

...agreed.

::] krycek [::

I obviously agree that there is some pretty messed up stuff out there, but I'm completely against censoring it. We've all seen some of it at one time or another. I can't imagine spending my time and money running such a site but who are any of us to say that it is wrong? If you don't like it don't watch it!

I made the decision to read this post despite your warning. Likewise people should use their individual judgement when viewing questionable content on the internet. This does bring up the issue of how to keep children away from such content however. By no means do I believe that children should be exposed to things like this, but I saw all of the "Faces of Death" movies when I was younger (unknown to my parents) and I still turned out to be a stable person.

So I say let such (legal) content go uncensored. Child pornography is an obvious exception.

Originally posted by webmarkart
I obviously agree that there is some pretty messed up stuff out there, but I'm completely against censoring it. We've all seen some of it at one time or another. I can't imagine spending my time and money running such a site but who are any of us to say that it is wrong? If you don't like it don't watch it!

I made the decision to read this post despite your warning. Likewise people should use their individual judgement when viewing questionable content on the internet. This does bring up the issue of how to keep children away from such content however. By no means do I believe that children should be exposed to things like this, but I saw all of the "Faces of Death" movies when I was younger (unknown to my parents) and I still turned out to be a stable person.

So I say let such (legal) content go uncensored. Child pornography is an obvious exception.

The concept of child porn sickens me in much the same way as this kind of stuff that mouse brought forward for discussion. I am usually very supportive of freedom of speech, however I cannot ignore my conscience, which tells me very clearly what is right and wrong.

I am not one for trying to impose my own code of morality on others, but I see no need for this kind of stuff - it is sick and twisted, and nothing but. As such, I have no choice but to support censorship.

As for seeing it: hopefully parents bring up their children in a protective way, yes. I am expecting my first child soon and I would be horrified to think that he/she would be able to view such material. But more importantly is the values that the child is taught. If they know right and wrong for themselves, then they can deal with any moral situation and should know when to turn away.

Let me ask another question. How would YOU define right and wrong? What about hurting someone - is it right to go out and murder? Rape? Inflict injury? A moral person (such as I am sure you are) would say, no, this is not right. This is a crime. Therefore, what is there to distinguish the doing-of-the-action, and the watching-and-taking-pleasure-from-the-action?

I am not saying that both are equally bad. But both are wrong, in my eyes. Surely a mother who's child has died would be further traumatise to know that autopsy photos of her child were on an Internet site, with sickos getting some kind of kicks from them...? In which case, there does not seem to be any moral grounds on which to defend your point of view.

Freedom of speech and expression are basic rights up until the point at which they start to infringe on the rights of others. It is based on this that I made my own decision in favour of censorship.

::] krycek [::

As I said before... legal

I guess I will be the one to argue that a morbid curiosity in death is natural. I've seen my fair share of these videos/pics on the web and I am definitely disturbed by quite a bit of it! The caveat to freedom of speech is:

Your freedom stops where it interferes with someone elses.

No one makes you go to these sites right? There are a lot of weird people with all sorts of fetishes out there and I am not one of them but there is no way I would support you or anyone else telling me what I can and can't view regardless of what you think of it.

I agree that the web shouldn't be censored; everyone has a right to freedom of expression, and freedom of information. But equally, I believe that certain content should be unavailable to certain groups of people; children, to take an obvious example, should not be able to access harrowing images of torture and execution.

However, the are two clear problems. One is defining "harrowing"; at what point does content become unsuitable? The second is enforcing rules; we can't stop 15-year olds drinking in pubs, what chance do we have of stopping them swapping porn in chatrooms?

I'm going to be idealistic - legislature has no business trying to control or influence what people do. Nothing should be censored; the very idea of censorship is rooted in a moral paradox - one person (a censor) has to look at something in order to tell the rest of us we can't.

How do we, bottom line, stop this kind of thing? We can't. We simply make individual choices. I've never killed anyone; that's my choice; if everyone makes the same choice, there is no murder.

Child pornography is particularly sickening, but all pornography is abuse at some level. The existence of pornography reveals a societal malaise that will not go away just because the symptoms are hidden.

Originally posted by webmarkart

Your freedom stops where it interferes with someone elses.


what about when u innocently click on a link and get a gazillion 'sick' popups? i do believe that if it's my choice to not view such things then their popping up unwanted in my face is interfering with my freedom.

i'm all for censorship -- to a reasonable extent. of course it's hard to implement, because as someone just said, there will always be that underground stuff. it won't go away because symptons are hidden, but there won't be so much of it. but with such things being at least less accessible to view, there would obviously be less influence on young minds. webmarkat, you may have grown up stable, but are all kids like you were?

also, the censor having to look at things in order that the rest of us can't is not a moral 'paradox'. just choose someone who's not squeemish or something. these 'paradoxes' exist everywhere. what does the law do with wild serial killers? they often have to kill so that someone else won't kill others. that's actually quite simple to understand. it discourages possible other killers and eliminates a specific dangerous person from society.
killing and censorship are degrees apart but the basic rule is the same. when there is less of it and there's action to keep it down as much as possible, then there is also less future possibility for more of it and its consequences.

Originally posted by brothercake
The existence of pornography reveals a societal malaise that will not go away just because the symptoms are hidden. I disagree. It's my theory that users of pornography - the sick content I referer to in my first post too - start off on something fairly light and get desensitised so look for something more. I think porn gets more extreme to cater for hardened 'users' (no pun intended) who need more of a kick, I think this is where real abuse comes into play; rape, child abuse etc. I think internet pornography corrupts rather than simply being a reflection on a section of society.

Originally posted by mouse
I think internet pornography corrupts rather than simply being a reflection on a section of society.

right. so do i.

i have the stance that if you dont like it, dont view it. Simple.

I do however object to pop-ups and links that mislead you. :mad:

The problem with "if you don't like it don't look at it" is that not everyone has the emotional maturity to know what they can handle (very young children). And sometimes we're not given the choice - if we're gonna have censorship, I move to include political speeches as one of the things you have to be over (18|21) to view.

I think censorship's true purpose should be to protect children, and nothing else.

But as much as my earlier statement may have been a little naive, I still maintain that censorship can only ever be like a plaster - it patches the hole, but it doesn't solve the underlying problems, so new holes will always appear.

The ultimate solution is the same - do the right thing yourself; simply by wanting to make the world a better place, we make the world a better place.

i do not actually think that we can censor the internet anyway.

Systems will be developed by the sites to bypass the censorship anyway.

here in saudi arabia they've tried hard to censor, and they haven't done a bad job of it. it's a really big countrywide firewall. you just can't get to some sites. here's (http://www10.brinkster.com/asaakitesting/isublock.JPG)what you get if you try.
but there are of course several leaks. they can't know every single 'censorable' site out there. and people are putting sites up all the time, they just can't keep up.

lol

HTTP1.1 STATUS 403 Remote Access to this object forbidden This file cannot be directly accessed from a remote site, but must be linked through the Brinkster Member's site.

you cant directly link to the image :P

hoever i did see the image and that is a pretty impressive way to handle the censorship. However as you say sites get created everyday and they cant keep up.

Id love to be the guy that decides the sites that get denied. He/She would be the 'God' of the internet in your country :P

I have not ever come accross anything like this, except in American history X when he stepped on that guys head. I couldn't watch that. I don't want to get in to it talking about the sounds associated with that, so I won't.

I am against censoring that stuff, people can do what they want. I just think they should of people that rate sites and by search engine

Rating: teen

or whatever. That would be neet.

PS.kryceck


WOW, that must've tooken awhile to write......

I am completely against censoring.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t want to hurt or offend anyone, and as far as I can control it (always start with yourself, you know) I try to take care of that. But even then …
The other day, a college of mine was horrified that I took out a piece of meatloaf (she’s a vegetarian). Now, I can imagine how horrifying she must feel when she walks past a butcher. Does this mean butchers should be censored? That they should “blank” their shop windows like sexshops do?
I can imagine it must be hard for an Iraqi to surf to almost any American site. I’ve seen dozens of sites with stars and stripes and messages like ‘we support the flag’ etc. I can imagine it must be quite offensive and hurting if your family gets bombed and your host is …
Thai people can be offended if you use your pillow to sit on, or if you use your left hand for anything else then on the toilet.

I mean, what we might see as normal, can be offensive for other people. Are you going to burn your Henry Miller (or Salman Rushdie) books? If I gave you a Picasso, would you rip it apart? All these are/were offensive for some people.

I never came across that sort a stuff, cause I’m not looking for it. (that sounds so simple) Prohibitting it won’t work. There was never so much booze and gambling as during the prohibition! One of the strongest attractions for most people is the fact that it is prohibited.
And pushing the boundaries is necessary! OK. Some stuff is way beyond the boundaries but societies aren’t always as nice as you might think/wish.
Check out the Milgram experiments. No one could believe the madness and obedience of the nazi’s, so he thought up an experiment and gave people the chance to torture and kill people. He didn’t really have to force them. Just giving them some short instructions was enough.
And you really thing we are so normal on a sexual level? Ha! Did my thesis on bestiality (for my master in psychology) and you wouldn’t believe how widespread that sort of behavior is and always has been. And isn’t that Greek methodology great (though it’s almost nothing else then bestiality, violence, murder etc etc) And all these nice fairytales!

Why is there so much porn and violent material on the web? Cause people have no imagination and have to see everything, instead of imagining it. Instead of enjoying a stripper and get teased, the want “the real thing”. We don’t live in an age of teasing and longing! What we like to get what we want. Instantly. Just clicking and it needs to be there. But off coarse, it’s never what we really wanted…
People like to be unsatisfied. We’re in it for the longing, not for the satisfaction! So the porn and snuff supplier always needs to go further. Need to keep the dream alive that there could be something out there that really meets our longing.

A dirty mind is a joy forever! So I don’t need those sites, just needs to close my eyes.


So it’s no use censoring it. It follows the same dynamics as 24/7 supermarkets (which will probably for a average Ethiopian what those sites are for us). Abundance. Instantly. It’s the way we live, and there’s no way we can prohibit it.
As long as we consent to viewing that stuff. Which is a whole different issue then censoring it. I don’t mind that it exists, but I don’t want to be bothered by it, which has never happened until now

But the problem of keeping children etc away from it still remains. Because I think that parents should be allowed to prohibit their children from visiting those sites.
I know there are some tools that do that sort a thing, but don’t know ho effective they are. I don’t know if it can be done technically, but I think the best solution is to enforce these sites to register as a ‘contains explicit whatever content’ site and to display that info before the first page of that site is loaded. If someone encounters such a site, that doesn’t follow the simple rules, it should simply be shut down.
IP’s of these sites should be stored in a central db that’s linked to these kinds a “keep your kids away” tools

I’m not in favor of oppression, but if all content is allowed (even if its illegal, cause legal or illegal is just a moral perspective) and they just need to register or get shutdown, then it becomes controllable without being oppressed. The Vatican also had brothels at some point – to control and focus the inevitable sins of mankind – and still holds the biggest sex-library. There’s no use in trying to eradicate it, it’s better to isolate and control it.

Meanwhile, I’m happy that my girlfriend didn’t miss out on the sexual revolution!

Originally posted by mouse
Having just found a website full to the brim of video and imagery of executions, murder, accidental death, suicide, brutality, violence, mutilation and mutation... a series dedicated to babies...

I remember seeing one site where they actually showed people having their throats slit... I forgot where it was, but I know I reported it to the host/registrar... felt sick when I came across that.

I can't believe so many people are willing to let someone else decide what they are allowed to view! Raf was right, what may be offensive to some may be normal to others. In parts of the Middle East the thought of a woman wearing a bikini is shocking considering they can't even show their faces. A woman given the power to vote... OUTRAGIOUS!

Oh, by the way... Pornography does not lead to people becoming social deviants.

Originally posted by webmarkart
As I said before... legal

I guess I will be the one to argue that a morbid curiosity in death is natural. I've seen my fair share of these videos/pics on the web and I am definitely disturbed by quite a bit of it! The caveat to freedom of speech is:

Your freedom stops where it interferes with someone elses.

No one makes you go to these sites right? There are a lot of weird people with all sorts of fetishes out there and I am not one of them but there is no way I would support you or anyone else telling me what I can and can't view regardless of what you think of it.

I don't think mouse was talking about what I would call fetishes. I would not define this stuff as a fetish - speaking generally, that is. There may be people who get a sexual thrill out of it.

Fetishes are harmless and although they may offend people, they are not harming anyone (in most cases - and those that do, I do not support) plus they do not hurt anyone.

Things such as pictures of corpses DO hurt people - the families. As mouse said, how would you feel...?

I'm not telling you what you can and can't view. I'm telling you what I feel should and shouldn't be publically available.

For instance, surely this stuff should be enforced as 18+ content, yet it's easy for a child to access if they know the URL. There are issues here!

I personally am against this material being available AT ALL however my main point is that of it being available in public. No-one forced ME to go there, but I did not know what was there until I went there.

I would argue that these things ARE interfering with 'somebody else' - again, the family, etc. and so the right to freedom of speech is removed, as far as I am concerned.

::] krycek [::

Originally posted by brothercake
I'm going to be idealistic - legislature has no business trying to control or influence what people do. Nothing should be censored; the very idea of censorship is rooted in a moral paradox - one person (a censor) has to look at something in order to tell the rest of us we can't.

How do we, bottom line, stop this kind of thing? We can't. We simply make individual choices. I've never killed anyone; that's my choice; if everyone makes the same choice, there is no murder.

Child pornography is particularly sickening, but all pornography is abuse at some level. The existence of pornography reveals a societal malaise that will not go away just because the symptoms are hidden.

I would tend to disagree with the blanket statement that 'all pornography is abuse' - I do not see any evidence for that. I would however agree if you said that all pornography is exploitation - that is very true. And in most cases it is the models who exploit the people who buy the porn ;)

A basic business tenant: 'sex sells'. That's exploitation, not abuse :p

I agree with you that we cannot stop it - I said so myself, earlier. No, it will not go away. However, if it is allowed to thrive publically, without opposition, then what kind of people are we to allow it?

OK you have never killed anyone. However, if there is a site that shows vidoes of executions, and you go there, and so do other people, and the site is not censored... you could convincingly argue that the popularity might encourage these twisted people to go out and make some more of the same.

Hence in a convoluted way, you could be seen as an accessory to murder - because you kinda encouraged it. OK sure you could not be prosecuted for it but I'm talking morally here; right and wrong and what does your conscience say...?

Now, I'm not saying that you've ever even visited such a site. However, by allowing such stuff to continue, are you any different? Are any of us?

There's an old saying: 'See no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil'. That's all very well but there is 'evil' everywhere. If we ignore it, we appear to be accepting or advocating it. I cannot do that - my conscience pricks me to speak out against it.

::] krycek [::

Originally posted by ASAAKI
what about when u innocently click on a link and get a gazillion 'sick' popups? i do believe that if it's my choice to not view such things then their popping up unwanted in my face is interfering with my freedom.

[etc. etc. etc.]

...I agree totally. You put your point across very well :)

::] krycek [::

Obviously if something ever happened to someone I loved I would not want to see it plastered all over the Internet. I do feel however that it is normal and natural to have a morbid curiosity about death and pornography. They are both natural aspects of life.

Am I so demented because one of the topics I like to research is the JFK assassination? There are autopsy pictures with... well you know. That was a part of history! Should these images be censored because they are so graphic?

I just don't get offended very easily. Some people may think that I am desensitized by the media ect. but that's far from the truth. I recently witnessed a man getting run over by a garbage truck. The images that I saw will forever haunt my mind. For insurance purposes I have pictures of the aftermath (it happened a foot outside of my driveway). I will never show those pics to anyone. Maybe if people had more of a conscience, things like this would not be so prevalent.

Originally posted by mouse
I disagree. It's my theory that users of pornography - the sick content I referer to in my first post too - start off on something fairly light and get desensitised so look for something more. I think porn gets more extreme to cater for hardened 'users' (no pun intended) who need more of a kick, I think this is where real abuse comes into play; rape, child abuse etc. I think internet pornography corrupts rather than simply being a reflection on a section of society.

I think that the 'type' of pornography you view depends on the type of person you are. I did not want this to focus on me in any way however I can only really use myself as an example. Despite my parents trying to ban all porn I was easily able to access it from my early teens. I think all blokes go through that interested stage, however my moral code told me personally what I could and could not accept.

Today I am a normal, average, stable person, happily married with a kid on the way :D My wife does not have a problem with porn and neither do I - my views have not changed in the past decade. I still think there is 'good' porn and 'bad' porn.

I subscribe to Playboy, for a start. I think it's a great mag and I read it cover to cover each month. It features some great women, too. However, I a, not obsessed with porn (heheh, rather if anything I kinda lost interest with it a few years back) and neither do I feel the need to get 'stronger' stuff.

There are some people who naturally want to view certain types of material. In that way I agree with you about material existing because of an interest. However I disagree that one thing leads to another, all the time. I think you only ever go as far as your own conscience and comfort let you - if someone ignores their conscience, they will feel guilty (well not everyone but then, not everyone seems to have a conscience. There are some scary people around.)

I am quite comfortable and happy with my life and I have strong morals. They are different to many other people however I can accept other people's morals too, so long as they do not condone actions that will hurt anyone else.

It's in hurting others and infringing upon other people's rights that I have a problem.

::] krycek [::

Originally posted by brothercake
The problem with "if you don't like it don't look at it" is that not everyone has the emotional maturity to know what they can handle (very young children). And sometimes we're not given the choice - if we're gonna have censorship, I move to include political speeches as one of the things you have to be over (18|21) to view.

I think censorship's true purpose should be to protect children, and nothing else.

But as much as my earlier statement may have been a little naive, I still maintain that censorship can only ever be like a plaster - it patches the hole, but it doesn't solve the underlying problems, so new holes will always appear.

The ultimate solution is the same - do the right thing yourself; simply by wanting to make the world a better place, we make the world a better place.

...better to patch the holes and continue doing so, than to loose the wall entirely :)

::] krycek [::

Originally posted by mattover-matter
I have not ever come accross anything like this, except in American history X when he stepped on that guys head. I couldn't watch that. I don't want to get in to it talking about the sounds associated with that, so I won't.

I am against censoring that stuff, people can do what they want. I just think they should of people that rate sites and by search engine

Rating: teen

or whatever. That would be neet.

PS.kryceck


WOW, that must've tooken awhile to write......

heheh well it did take a while, yes - and your sig is 3 lines on my monitor, so that's fine! :p

I saw American History X a while ago and I know the bit you referred to. Suffice to say, I was not impressed.

I too am against censorship in general, however like I said before, there are things that need to be restricted, plus there are things that should not be allowed to be distributed due to (as I see it) a violation of other people's basic rights.

::] krycek [::

I'm not saying you can't view this or that, I'm saying some things should not be available for public viewing. I have no problem with consenting adults performing lewd acts and publishing it on the web, nor mature viewers visiting these sites, however there is a line there as regards exploitation. "clean" porn in my view is quite rare on the internet; there's alot more 'sexploitation' than there is good wholesome fetish porn; incest, voyeaurism, borderline legal (ie porn using girls who couldn't be proven to be underage) etc. must make up a major proportion.

I had trouble posting this thread at all tbh, I even PM's George about it as I wasn't sure about people on the forum having to read about such unpleasantries

webmarkart it was morbid curiosity that led me to this site; I was looking for the images that "prove" soldiers are being executed in Iraq, the link was posted on a forum. I would excuse that by saying it's news, as was JFK's asssassination, but who really sits down at the computer and thinks "hmm, I'd ike to see a dead baby with three arms and the lupus virus today".

krycek, anyone who says they don't, or have never, looked at/for porn on the net is a liar. The reason I say it corrupts is because I have too; what is titilating at first just isn't enough and the porn gets harder. Now I have 24/7 cable porn isn't an issue, it's boring, but I'm not sure whether it is or it is because I have the moral fortitude not to delve any further into it.

What I propse really is a regulatory body that hosts and ISP's would sign up to. The host would then monitor site's on their servers and report to the body, the body would then confirm or deny whether rules were being broken.

I don't believe in the internet as a free world where anything goes, for two reasons; 1) it's only escapism for the viewer, not the guy being shot on camera or the child being abuse for the viewer's pleasure, however harmless you think the content is, it's the lengths gone to to produce the content for a "market" that really disgust. and 2) i feel it holds the internet back alot, far more people would use the net if they could search Google or altavista without accidently finding porn, or use email without recieving advertisments for ***** extensions, beastiality websites etc etc in their inboxes.

Originally posted by raf
I am completely against censoring.

So am I. I'm also completely against war, but I acknowledge that there are occasions where it is necessary (such as defending your country - I am not making any reference to the current situation in Iraq here because I think it is best if that is not brought up). I'm completely against killing someone but I would do it if they were about to kill my family. There are situations where something you are against, may be necessary.


Don’t get me wrong. I don’t want to hurt or offend anyone, and as far as I can control it (always start with yourself, you know) I try to take care of that. But even then …
The other day, a college of mine was horrified that I took out a piece of meatloaf (she’s a vegetarian). Now, I can imagine how horrifying she must feel when she walks past a butcher. Does this mean butchers should be censored? That they should “blank” their shop windows like sexshops do?
I can imagine it must be hard for an Iraqi to surf to almost any American site. I’ve seen dozens of sites with stars and stripes and messages like ‘we support the flag’ etc. I can imagine it must be quite offensive and hurting if your family gets bombed and your host is …
Thai people can be offended if you use your pillow to sit on, or if you use your left hand for anything else then on the toilet.

Yes, I agree however... um, very good point actually. Very good. I agree, but... I'm trying to think of a 'but', lol! :rolleyes:

OK. Some things are cultural and such, however there are some things that go deeper than that. I don't care if a foreigner believes women are inferior to men - I think that is an invalid culture and I do not accept it. I think there are basic tenants that override culture (many arguments could be had about that!) namely about equality, human rights, affecting others etc. I'm not sure if you will agree with that, though.


I mean, what we might see as normal, can be offensive for other people. Are you going to burn your Henry Miller (or Salman Rushdie) books? If I gave you a Picasso, would you rip it apart? All these are/were offensive for some people.

Sure... my mum does not like some of the books that I do, and they offend her (i.e. Clancy :rolleyes: ) - things like that happen. But I feel this level of stuff is a bit different.


I never came across that sort a stuff, cause I’m not looking for it. (that sounds so simple) Prohibitting it won’t work. There was never so much booze and gambling as during the prohibition! One of the strongest attractions for most people is the fact that it is prohibited.
And pushing the boundaries is necessary! OK. Some stuff is way beyond the boundaries but societies aren’t always as nice as you might think/wish.

Too true... however, control is a very, very good idea for some things. Lack of control, and it's like anarchy. (That's a very general comparison)


Check out the Milgram experiments. No one could believe the madness and obedience of the nazi’s, so he thought up an experiment and gave people the chance to torture and kill people. He didn’t really have to force them. Just giving them some short instructions was enough.

Yup, I studied them... it's a similar kind of thing to 'Lord of the Flies'. People are capable of horrifying things, but that does not mean they are morally right, or acceptable. Else, why do we have governments? And laws? Same principle...


And you really thing we are so normal on a sexual level? Ha! Did my thesis on bestiality (for my master in psychology) and you wouldn’t believe how widespread that sort of behavior is and always has been. And isn’t that Greek methodology great (though it’s almost nothing else then bestiality, violence, murder etc etc) And all these nice fairytales!

My rule: whatever you like, do it, so long as it does not hurt anyone. People get offended, yes. I personally do not have a problem with polygamy, for instance, although I am in a monogamous relationship (I'm married). However, polygamy is one thing; cheating is another. I would never cheat on my wife - that's against my moral code. Yet it's not against my moral code for a man to have two wives, etc. That may seem strange... it offends some people. Yet it HURTS no-one.


Why is there so much porn and violent material on the web? Cause people have no imagination and have to see everything, instead of imagining it. Instead of enjoying a stripper and get teased, the want “the real thing”. We don’t live in an age of teasing and longing! What we like to get what we want. Instantly. Just clicking and it needs to be there. But off coarse, it’s never what we really wanted…
People like to be unsatisfied. We’re in it for the longing, not for the satisfaction! So the porn and snuff supplier always needs to go further. Need to keep the dream alive that there could be something out there that really meets our longing.

That's true. Unfortunate, but true. Thankfully not everyone is like that.


A dirty mind is a joy forever! So I don’t need those sites, just needs to close my eyes.

So it’s no use censoring it. It follows the same dynamics as 24/7 supermarkets (which will probably for a average Ethiopian what those sites are for us). Abundance. Instantly. It’s the way we live, and there’s no way we can prohibit it.
As long as we consent to viewing that stuff. Which is a whole different issue then censoring it. I don’t mind that it exists, but I don’t want to be bothered by it, which has never happened until now

I mind that it exists. However, I respect people's rights to view things that I find objectional. I think there should be a system for controlling access, at the very least. As for the censoring I'll point out my previously explained point about hurting other people. It's my guess the people being executed in those sick movies did not do so willingly.


But the problem of keeping children etc away from it still remains. Because I think that parents should be allowed to prohibit their children from visiting those sites.
I know there are some tools that do that sort a thing, but don’t know ho effective they are. I don’t know if it can be done technically, but I think the best solution is to enforce these sites to register as a ‘contains explicit whatever content’ site and to display that info before the first page of that site is loaded. If someone encounters such a site, that doesn’t follow the simple rules, it should simply be shut down.
IP’s of these sites should be stored in a central db that’s linked to these kinds a “keep your kids away” tools

That would be a great idea, however there are always ways around these things... but we know that. Just trying to control it would be a start, though.


I’m not in favor of oppression, but if all content is allowed (even if its illegal, cause legal or illegal is just a moral perspective) and they just need to register or get shutdown, then it becomes controllable without being oppressed.

Exactly! I think that's what should be aimed at here :) I still think that the 'hurting rule' should be obeyed by censorship, though.


The Vatican also had brothels at some point – to control and focus the inevitable sins of mankind – and still holds the biggest sex-library. There’s no use in trying to eradicate it, it’s better to isolate and control it.

yup, and the first nunneries were brothels, too... :p


Meanwhile, I’m happy that my girlfriend didn’t miss out on the sexual revolution!
lol! me too! :D (um, as in, my wife - I don't know your girlfriend or anything! :o)

Originally posted by mouse
I'm not saying you can't view this or that, I'm saying some things should not be available for public viewing. I have no problem with consenting adults performing lewd acts and publishing it on the web, nor mature viewers visiting these sites, however there is a line there as regards exploitation. "clean" porn in my view is quite rare on the internet; there's alot more 'sexploitation' than there is good wholesome fetish porn; incest, voyeaurism, borderline legal (ie porn using girls who couldn't be proven to be underage) etc. must make up a major proportion.

I had trouble posting this thread at all tbh, I even PM's George about it as I wasn't sure about people on the forum having to read about such unpleasantries

webmarkart it was morbid curiosity that led me to this site; I was looking for the images that "prove" soldiers are being executed in Iraq, the link was posted on a forum. I would excuse that by saying it's news, as was JFK's asssassination, but who really sits down at the computer and thinks "hmm, I'd ike to see a dead baby with three arms and the lupus virus today".

krycek, anyone who says they don't, or have never, looked at/for porn on the net is a liar. The reason I say it corrupts is because I have too; what is titilating at first just isn't enough and the porn gets harder. Now I have 24/7 cable porn isn't an issue, it's boring, but I'm not sure whether it is or it is because I have the moral fortitude not to delve any further into it.

What I propse really is a regulatory body that hosts and ISP's would sign up to. The host would then monitor site's on their servers and report to the body, the body would then confirm or deny whether rules were being broken.

I don't believe in the internet as a free world where anything goes, for two reasons; 1) it's only escapism for the viewer, not the guy being shot on camera or the child being abuse for the viewer's pleasure, however harmless you think the content is, it's the lengths gone to to produce the content for a "market" that really disgust. and 2) i feel it holds the internet back alot, far more people would use the net if they could search Google or altavista without accidently finding porn, or use email without recieving advertisments for ***** extensions, beastiality websites etc etc in their inboxes.

mouse, I feel that was a very well-balanced and well-explained post, and I agree totally with that :)

::] krycek [::

I totally agree with that too.

I switched my inbox more than the average person due to some fools spamming me telling me if I want to increase the size of parts of my body.


:rolleyes:

Originally posted by ionsurge
I totally agree with that too.

I switched my inbox more than the average person due to some fools spamming me telling me if I want to increase the size of parts of my body.


:rolleyes:

LOL! :D

yeah, I tend to get that... trouble is, I get both the male and female versions of the email, which is rather amusing...! :p

::] krycek [::

I have never had one for women, rather how to make them happier.

Originally posted by ionsurge
I have never had one for women, rather how to make them happier.

lol :p

they send breast enlargement emails :rolleyes:

::] krycek [::

i MAY be getting off-topic here, but...

Originally posted by webmarkart
I can't believe so many people are willing to let someone else decide what they are allowed to view! Raf was right, what may be offensive to some may be normal to others. In parts of the Middle East the thought of a woman wearing a bikini is shocking considering they can't even show their faces. A woman given the power to vote... OUTRAGIOUS!

as far as your/the general world ideas go, concerning the middle east....shallow ideas encouraged by the media, that is...well don't get me wrong here, i won't say much on this very particular topic lest this turn into a burning political-personal-religious-feminist debate, which it shouldn't be on CF, obviously.
i'll simply let you know that Middle Eastern women have had the right to be, and have been,candidates for elections themselves way way way way before the first western woman finally managed to fight for her right to only vote.

neither is it that they can't show their faces. plenty of them choose not to, out of their own freedom of choice.
we were all brought up with different values.

no offence to anyone. just please don't get into sensitive issues like that. i am a middle-eastern born person with south asian roots and have spent most of my life in a western educational system. i know a thing or two about the world's major contrasting cultures. :p

okay...sorry for getting personal...:o

back to the topic...i still support censoring. :p:p:p. IMHO it's not an issue of freedom and smart alecs telling what you can do and what you can't. it's a question of what's morally, humanly correct, and what isn't.
but that brings us back to cultures....:rolleyes:
in which case, good bye:D

I dislike censorship because it easily can be used to lie and at best to hide the truth to what it's called "vox pópuli"... as we can see nowadays both in USA and in Iraq (and no, I don't want to talk about war).

Should be censored the images of undernourished african childs or birds died by fuel contamination or homeless people? they can be considered offensive too... Give a politician the power to censor and he will create a wonderful world for you :D

Offensive and disagreeable content it's the prize that we have to pay for our freedom to offer, say and hear what we want. Of course if somebody offers illegal things (like child porn, ...) it must be pursued: there's no need to censor what already it's a crime; you just need to punish it. Censorship will not stop the real criminals :(

Originally posted by mouse
What I propose really is a regulatory body that hosts and ISPs would sign up to.
I agree - I also think we should have a .sex TLD - if you're a porn site you *must* have a .sex name; period; no other domain is allowed to host pornography.

It wouldn't have to stop there, since the demand would be quite large - we could have .xxx or .rude or, er, .other things ... I mean why not? Who'll be offended by that when the only people looking at it are looking for it.

You make a good point about porn being a limiting factor in the development of the internet; you're absolutely right - I know one person who just doesn't wanna know about the net; as far as she's concerned the internet = in-your-face wall-to-wall filth; her opinion may be based on basic ignorance, but that's way beside the point, and ultimately a shame for her because she's missing out on what's so great about the www

With .sex it would be easy - easy to find, and easy to avoid, whichever you prefer.

Man, this is some reading here.
Just got home from work (in my private plain there's no internet connection) and the thread has grown a mille.

Krycek,

This is not against you personally, but i think some guys misted the point. I'm not against stuff being out there. I would be against being confronted with it without consenting. It would annoy me the same way as some popup and spam annoys me. It takes up time and costs money.

But i don't mind it's out there. You should only consent before being able to view this stuff + the files should be listed and parrents should be able to restrict them from there childrem.

I don't like the moral tone in some of the posts.

If i would be offended by gay porn (don't think i am), does that mean it should be prohibitted ? Doent think so, do you ? Some people (or countrys) should even prohibit a thread like this one.
I I could feel hurt because i continuosly see bombs falling in Iraq, should all newsprograms then be cancelled?

I don't want to draw a line somewhere. It wount disappear + what is acceptable is so culturally determinated and changes so fast through (recent) history that you immedeately see it nothing alse then a subjective moral judgement.

You also shoudn't focus on sex and violence that much. As i stated before, it's just an exponent of our present instant-and-unlimitted-sattisfaction cultur. So maybe for you that's not your thingh. Maybe some guys here are hooked on computers (and spent lots of money on them while half the word dousn't even have safe water or food), with others, it's sex or violence.
here is absolutely no conclusif evidence about these sort a stepping-stone theorys that it starts with clean nice porn and goes on to whatever.
There's even no evidence that viewing this stuff will result in more violant behaviour. There are more victims of violence and victims of sexual violence that become (sex)offenders themselves, then there are "viewers" that become offenders.
It's absolutely not so that only deranged, sadistic people hurt other. Millgram prooved that. There's no other explanation possible.

It's not a comforting thought, but most people don't need much to do the most horrible things. So don't think there's some kind a marginal freek-circuit out their that you can whipe out just like that, by censoring it out. I'm a psycho-analist and you woudn't believe the horrible things some parrent do with there children (or to eachother). And i don't mean torturing them. Often just things they say that hount these people for the rest of there lives.

I'm glad you feel that way, and react so strongly, but there no use in saying 'i don't appove'. It among us, everywhere. Don't be fooled by the spectcle of these site, nore by the fake normality in everydays experiences.
I really hope i didn't offend you. (sounds silly here)

This issue is a can of worms dating back as long as people have had ideas, and other people judged those ideas.

A very long time.

The problem with the Internet is it's truly international. It goes across borders.

I personally take a great deal of interest in an R-rated genre in science-fiction. At times it's NC-17 rated, others PG-13.

I disapprove a great deal of the NC-17 stuff. I write strictly PG-13 whenever I can, and I often take the humorous approach to the more mature aspects, in essence making the idea of the R-rated stuff just absurd in the extreme (which it is). My other writing for the genre contrasts societies in the genre (our societies versus the alien ones), whereas the tradition has been on a more person-to-person level.

In the case of this genre, the lead website in the genre was recently taken down because the owner moved to a fundamentalist Muslim nation. This is for that owner's protection, and I realize that. At the same time, it's mildly frustrating because my own works appear in a few places on that same site, specifically the humourous-absurdity ones.

My work is hardly dangerous in any particular way you look at it. By association, it is in a genre that can be rightfully considered dangerous by some.

Can the Internet be censored? I seriously doubt it, in the most extreme definitions of censorship. Should it?

Based on my above commentary, I can't honestly say yes or no. This despite my being a Catholic, and one who considers his faith a reasoned one (not just on the surface, parroting Rome).

It's really a case-by-case basis, on the part of the recipient, the author, and the various legal (and in my case, spiritual) entities in between. Barring a change in the current state of affairs on Planet Earth, that's how it should be.

Originally posted by Alex Vincent
The problem with the Internet is it's truly international. It goes across borders.

you're right.

if there was such a thing as 'internet per country', with the country's laws governing it, people used to their own cultures would generally not be bothered by censorship issues, etc because it would be according to their own culture.

but then it wouldn't be worth 2 cents of what it actually is. it is what it is because it's so international.

oh well. :-s

Originally posted by ASAAKI
no offence to anyone. just please don't get into sensitive issues like that. i am a middle-eastern born person with south asian roots and have spent most of my life in a western educational system. i know a thing or two about the world's major contrasting cultures. :p


I over generalized "middle east" and I didn't mean to offend you. I still don't think anyone has the right to decide what is offensive and what isn't for me. I am capable of making that decision on my own!

no probs:)
debate wudn't be half as good as it is if everyone had the same ideas

Originally posted by ASAAKI
no probs:)
debate wudn't be half as good as it is if everyone had the same ideas

very true :p

that would be kinda boring, wouldn't it! :D

::] krycek [::

Originally posted by mouse
Having just found a website full to the brim of video and imagery of executions, murder, accidental death, suicide, brutality, violence, mutilation and mutation... a series dedicated to babies...

I think I know the site you are talking about, and I have seen worse than that.

I do believe that it shouldn't be out there, but I will protect its right to be there, for you can't have free speach with exceptions and still have free speach...

i think that the only person you ever have the right to censor, is yourself. i frequently find that i don't like what someone has said ( which is not the same as disagreeing with it. more often than not, i don't like the way someone said something that i agree with ), and i may tell them so, i may even say that i wish they hadn't said it, but i respect their right to say it.

someone said something that implies that morality is a question of culture; in some cultures, something is moral, and in another, it is immoral. i don't think that's true. something is moral or immoral regardless of culture; the difference is that some cultures find it SOCIALLY acceptable, and others do not. it's an important difference. i read that in Japan, Samurai would test new swords by killing the nearest peasant. that may have been socially acceptable, but i think we can all agree that it isn't morally acceptable.

it's immoral for us to censor people. everyone has a right to say what they want. however, certain actions result in forfeiting your rights. which means that theoretically, you can say certain things, that negate your right to the freedom of speech (threatening someone is a good example, i think). which actions are censorable though? well, if we follow the example of threatening someone, then actions that infringe one someone else's rights (eg, the right to life) are censorable.

so that brings up the question of whether the sites that we want to censor infringe on someone else's rights. pornography depicting children is obviously violating the children's rights. normal pornography is not as clear cut; there are examples that could be used to argue either side. the same goes for the violent suicide site. we believe that the sites are exploiting the family and friends of the deceased, but this isn't necessarily true. i'll grant that it's probably a relatively safe assumption, but it's still an assumption. it's perfectly possible that the sites wait until an acceptable amount of time has passed since the occurance of any content they post, and they only post content with the consent of the next of kin. for all we know, they take themselves seriously, and handle their interest with the all the respect and decorum possible. ( to get it out of the way now, no, i have never been to any such site, and i probably never will. i can imagine that many of these sites are not respectful, but my disinterest in the content provides me with reason not to find out if i'm right, and as such, i'll give them the benefit of the doubt )

assuming the above, then even though we dislike the content, the site hasn't actually done anything we can truly call morally wrong. only in those cases where we know with a certainty, that they've overstepped their bounds, can we censor them.

i think that the only person you ever have the right to censor, is yourself

Very true.

joh6nn - what you said, I totally agree with. Much of it was stuff that I had been trying to explain but I hadn't quite put it that well...

:thumbsup:

::] krycek [::

bravo joh6nn.

I have just read this entire thread and your post summs it up.

I am only 14 and I haven't seen anything like what you are on about.

I own my own laptop and I am basically the only one in my family who knows anything about computers, and I am sensible enough to stay away from things that dont sound right.

It do however ( like most ) find it annoying when you get popups from sites, or spyware, that directs you to innapropriate material.

My younger sister of 7 likes to play games sometimes over the internet, and I usually have someone stay with her, because someone of her age, may not even know what it is.

"Look, it popped up, I should click it"

You get filters for content, which is fair enough, but it annoys me when people make porn sites that are made to not be filtered.

An example is at my school, some of the "tough" kids like to try and find these sites, to show that they can beat the security, and are able to access the media from school, which is even worse. I have high access because I am incharge of the school intranet ( Im one of 2 who can write HTML JavaScript and a ServerSide language :o ), and I could get on to other sites, but I never have tried, because I see no point.


I do agree that content should not be prohibited, but It should be able to filtered in the normal way, and like brothercake said, have something like .sex or .xxx.

Well, I will just "butt-out" of this conversation. You guys must be going to some crazy sites to see peoples throats getting slit.

Originally posted by mattover-matter
Well, I will just "butt-out" of this conversation. You guys must be going to some crazy sites to see peoples throats getting slit.

I think you kinda missed the point...

...like, totally...

::] krycek [::

Yeah.

We are discussing wether or not this stuff should even be on the net? Can you honestly say that you have never typed in or gone to a site that turned out with something that you really didn't expect, or stumbled across something sick by accident.

nope, none at all.

really?

ok, maybe 1 in 1000000 people are lucky :D

I just think when you guys do searches like "throat slitting" or something, well duh! :D

Originally posted by mattover-matter
I just think when you guys do searches like "throat slitting" or something, well duh! :D

actually if you had even bothered to read my post about how I first encountered this kind of stuff (it's on the very first page of this thread) then you would kinda get the idea that you don't have to search for it - you can encounter it purely by accident, as I am sure mouse did.

If you have something to contribute, please do, otherwise I'd love to know what the point is of telling us all that you've never found it etc. etc. etc. - so, you are lucky? And? The stuff is still out there and that is the point of this thread.

::] krycek [::

I am saying that I, in my experience, have not found this to be a problem.

I am with mattover-matter I have never encountered this kind of stuff, I have encountered some of the "funny" movies out there of people getting their legs broken or whatnot. But then again, I never tried to look for that stuff even though I knew it was out there. I did see on TV once, some goth people getting off on peircing eachother. Some people like that stuff, Im not one of them, but then again Im not one to say its wrong. Its just not something that appeals to me nor is it something that Im interested in. So aside from the sick porn popups I don't see that stuff and stear clear of it. Which brings me to those sick porn popups. They should be gone, I hate the idea that I now need a filter to keep those things from comming up on my computer when I didn't go looking for them.


Jason

Originally posted by mattover-matter
I am saying that I, in my experience, have not found this to be a problem.

do you actually understand the point of this thread? :confused:

Or, are you saying that you have absolutely no problem with stuff like that existing? :eek:

I would rather believe the first one, personally...

::] krycek [::

Originally posted by Jason
I am with mattover-matter I have never encountered this kind of stuff, I have encountered some of the "funny" movies out there of people getting their legs broken or whatnot. But then again, I never tried to look for that stuff even though I knew it was out there. I did see on TV once, some goth people getting off on peircing eachother. Some people like that stuff, Im not one of them, but then again Im not one to say its wrong. Its just not something that appeals to me nor is it something that Im interested in. So aside from the sick porn popups I don't see that stuff and stear clear of it. Which brings me to those sick porn popups. They should be gone, I hate the idea that I now need a filter to keep those things from comming up on my computer when I didn't go looking for them.


Jason

...missing-score said that he has also never encountered this stuff, but he made some good points :)

Just for the record, the kind of stuff I was after was things like a monkey sniffing its butt and falling over; a penguin tripping up another penguin; a cat jumping out of a bush and scaring a kid; etc. etc. etc. All stuff that you could show to your family. Many people search for this kinda stuff, and it's harmless. I don't think the 'bad' stuff should come up and ruin their day.

And yeah, the 'goth stuff' that you mentioned is odd too but pretty harmless compared to the things that lurk in some places.

Steering clear of it is all very well, but you don't have to look to find. Just like the porn popups, it can come from seemingly nowhere... and, just like the porn popups, should it be allowed to?

::] krycek [::

Ok, I dislike popups and all but Im not going to say that their content is harmful. You have to semi-look for this stuff. Cause its from a javascript or whatever that is on a site that has potential harmful material if that is how you see it. I think if Im stupid enough to go to a site that is sponcered by porn then I deserve that popup. Close the darn thing and move on. And if you are quick enough <alt><F4> the thing and you won't ever know whats on it. Granted I think kids shouldn't be as privlidged to see such material but that is a hazard of life. They are going to see this stuff eventually but what age is it ok. I let my 6,7yr old sisters use my computer, they play but I monitor their use and make sure they go to places like yahoo or wherever so I know they wont get that kind of stuff since I don't have net-nanny or those garbage porn stopers that don't work.


Jason

whenever you get on the internet, you are agreeing to see whatever is on the site you go to. If you do not want to see it, stay off the computer and go to a library.

Well then, if you have never had seen any of the sort of content we are talking about, or you dont have a view on censoring, is there really any point you posting?

same her. Quote from earlier post

I never came across that sort a stuff, cause I’m not looking for it. (that sounds so simple)
So us three are the lucky ones out of three milion?

Don't think so. However: when you surf and specially download a lott, they seem to hook on to you. Few weeks ago, i was looking for some images to download to fingle with for a new app. I took great care in avoiding opening links to sites that could contain explicit material. Downloaded some harmless stuff from clean sites + a couple of free photoeditor packages.

What happens? As soon as the next day, i'm on some mailingslist with promosing subjectkeywords as Incest-nudes-porn ...

So i can imagen that if you look around alott for nice graphical stuff, you get hooked into the circuit.

Yup, that seems to happen a lot, raf. I get a lot of junk email and pretty much all of it I have no idea as to why I am getting it.

But junk email is kinda another matter - SPAM.

mattover-matter, the whole point of this thread is, "Should the Internet be censored?". So far you haven't given any valid reply to that question; rather, you have told us repeatedly how you've never come across it yourself.

As I said before, missing-score pointed out that he has never come across it either, but he still knows it is there - as do you, I expect.

I would not personally say that one in a million is a correct figure; indeed I would say that many if not most of the members of CF have probably never seen what mouse started off by talking about, however pretty much everyone knows of the existence of such things, and pretty much everyone has been subjected to unwanted material at some time.

So mattover-matter, please don't tell us any more that you've never come across it, because I for one don't care (and I'm not trying to be rude). It's not what this thread is about. If you have an opinion about Internet censorship, please post it, and then we can have a legitimate discussion.

Cheers

::] krycek [::

Originally posted by Jason
Ok, I dislike popups and all but Im not going to say that their content is harmful. You have to semi-look for this stuff. Cause its from a javascript or whatever that is on a site that has potential harmful material if that is how you see it. I think if Im stupid enough to go to a site that is sponcered by porn then I deserve that popup. Close the darn thing and move on. And if you are quick enough <alt><F4> the thing and you won't ever know whats on it.

Not always true.

I go to www.gamefaqs.com occasionally where they have a MASSIVE forum. On the main page they used to have a warning, I believe it went something like this ( not exactly, Im trying to remember )


Please report any popup windows that occur while you are browsing our site. We do not have popups, especially not pornographic ones. These are not in any way sponsered by gamefaqs.com, someone is bugging our site.

I never actually got a popup, but I know a friend who did. Browsing a section on PS2 games. So you dont always have to be looking for something to find it.

I wouldn't say 1 in 1000000 is correct either, A bit over the top.

Also, sometimes people can have popups without knowing it. My brothers mate clicks cross on anything that pops up without reading it, so he could have had a popup to one of these sites, but just didn't wait long enough to find out.

There is some things that I do think should just not be allowed on the internet, but alot of the stuff could stay, because ( like someone said ( forgotten who :rolleyes: )) if something is banned, more and more people will attempt to make it accessable.

I think that they should stop popping up windows on innocent sites, and make sure it is clearly marked to what it is.

I envy anyone who can honestly say that they have never had anything strange or offensive, or porn links popup. Most people will do at some point, hence the point of this thread.

I am probably lucky in the sense that I never recieve much spam. I use a few e-mail addresses, so If one gets flooded with spam, I would just switch.

I think the main thing in this sense is to be careful who you give your e-mail address to.


Just had another thought:

I dont know about you, It might be my area, but Recently I have had loads of popups ( Net messages ) from sites ( mostly porn ) asking me if I want to visit. All webcam sites, all almost Identical text. It says they live in places in England, and are all 21-22.

This annoys me, I usually get about 2 a day, And its this sort of thing that I think should be stopped aswell.

Something I'd point out is that alot of the content I spoke of in the first post, is illegal in most western countries. You could never publish or distribute it in magazines, books or videos. It's gross indecency or whatever.

Krycek,

Just pointing out you can end up on mailinglist that send you porn without you consenting to it.

Is this about spam? Seems to me it has something to do with most replys here. Confronting you with it without you wanting it ...

Anyway, like i said, i'm not against it being there (if you can block it off from your children), but you should consent to viewing/been confronted with it.

Another cofrontation i resented were some people that dumped it on a server of ours and spread it from there. (In the firm i previously worked, they hacked our educational server (which was outside the firewall) and run ther show from there.) So it would be verry hard to isolate or shut it down. They just search for easy vulnarable servers and use them.

This sort a things botther me more. (But maybe i'm not quite sane. could be. probably. tjeese, nowadays i care more about pc's and fast and undistracted browsing then about uncorrupted children. it's going downhill..)

Originally posted by raf

Another cofrontation i resented were some people that dumped it on a server of ours and spread it from there. (In the firm i previously worked, they hacked our educational server (which was outside the firewall) and run ther show from there.) So it would be verry hard to isolate or shut it down. They just search for easy vulnarable servers and use them.


My point exactly ;)

What is worse? Hacking and dumping content onto an educational server, or having a special server set aside for this sort of material?

OK, firstly if a server is that vulnerable, it's a lesson to tighten the security! Or, fire the net admin and hire a GOOD one...! :rolleyes:

Security should not be thought of as an option. It's important! There are thousands of hackers out there (mostly school kids wanting to be 'l33t' :p) who are always looking for exploits etc. No matter what the content, system administrators should face up to their responsibilities and make it harder for their servers to be hacked.

Secondly, as mouse said, this debate is mainly about material that is ILLEGAL. I hate porn popups as much as anyone else, but I'm not in favour of banning porn, neither do I think porn should be 'censored' - although I DO think it should be controlled. The .xxx suffix idea is a very good one!

As I have stated previously, I am against censorship, except there are some situations that I am in favour, such as those that mouse first described. I can't sum it up any better than joh6nn did previously.

Thirdly, SPAM is a completely different issue, as I tried to point out. I hate spam. Pretty much everyone hates spam. But that isn't really the point of this thread.

I hate threads that go off topic too much :p (ahhhh, and so often I am guilty of doing that! :o) so let's keep it to the original question, and someone open a new thread about spam or popups if that is a point you want to debate :)

Just my £0.02 :D

::] krycek [::

well, as "an obnoxious idiot who doesn't know his you know what from a hole in the ground" i disagree.

everything about the main issue is pretty much said.

but to me, personally, if people don't mind it being out there, and just mind being confronted with it without consenting to that, that's a valid opion on internet censoring. (needs to be eradicated because it bugs me, just as valid as an argument as 'because i resent it')

To get even more off topic:
You're absoltely right about the serverpart. I couldn't believe it when i heard it, but thats inevitable. Someone setting up a server at home or divisions buying one for there product without management from IT ...
Point is, these opportunities will always be there, so it'll be hard or even impossible trying to isolate or prohibit it. So the question if it should be censored is quite irrelavant. It technically is impossible.

Originally posted by raf
well, as "an obnoxious idiot who doesn't know his you know what from a hole in the ground"...

lol! :p I wouldn't call you that; I value your opinions :)


...i disagree.

everything about the main issue is pretty much said.

but to me, personally, if people don't mind it being out there, and just mind being confronted with it without consenting to that, that's a valid opion on internet censoring.

Yes, it sure is, however I didn't get the impression that mattover-matter was saying that. I felt he was saying that we must have gone looking for it or whatever. If he doesn't mind it being out there, then that is a valid opinion, but I don't recall him saying that.


(needs to be eradicated because it bugs me, just as valid as an argument as 'because i resent it')

To get even more off topic:
You're absoltely right about the serverpart. I couldn't believe it when i heard it, but thats inevitable. Someone setting up a server at home or divisions buying one for there product without management from IT ...
Point is, these opportunities will always be there, so it'll be hard or even impossible trying to isolate or prohibit it. So the question if it should be censored is quite irrelavant. It technically is impossible.

nope, not totally impossible, but rather improbable :) but the thing is people's opinions, rather than if they can be put into practice - which I agree, would be very, very hard.

::] krycek [::

Not wanna get into semantics, but i say impossible, because you can only re-act to it. So it'll alway be accessible/spread before you can shut it down or block it of with whatever filter or preventionmechanisme you use.

Unless you wanna go that far that you can't run your own server and that all content needs to be checked by whoever before you can publish it.

Most governements don't spend much attention to this. I read in the paper today, that the policedepartement that need to overlook this stuff in my country would be 1 month offline because they moved and the internetconnections were not set up :( That kinda says enough about governemental concern.

The volume in databases is double every 18 months or something like that. I can immagen that the amount of all sort of explicit material is doubled even faster :( .

I think it would be easier to change peoples mentality, then to find a technical sollution (which makes me somewhat pessimistic)

Ok, so we aren't talking about spam and we aren't talking about popups then that means you have to click on a link to open up a page with explicit material. Unless these are popups which probably have some cookie on your computer that says to open up every 20min or something for the next month. I think in a sense you do have to go looking for it. Im not saying there aren't hackers out there that put it in unwanted places like www.gamefaqs.com where I for one never noticed the popup warning but would have wondered why such a known site doesn't have better security. I guess I am in favor of the .xxx extension for porn sites, that would make it easier to sensor for children cause I do believe they don't need to see some of that material bestiality and whatnot.....


Jason

that would be idealism. Simple thing is, it is not going to happen. Underground "business" can find the smallest hole and go right through.

I've briefly read this thread and here's my 2 pence worth.

In my opinion the internet is not a safe place for children.
Where are the parents whilst their child is looking at pornography?
Rather than seeking to remove offending content which appears through censorship perhaps treating or looking at the cause and reason behind it?
I'm not offering a solution but perhaps good upbrining, understanding of morality, and respect for others could be a solution ? or it could just be some sort of Chemical, Electrical or Genetic reason for all I know.

The internet has become a part of our everyday life and there is nothing we can do about it.

My belief is that the parents are the ones who should keep an eye on what their children are doing on the internet.

here's a great article I found about if the internet should be censored or not (http://articles.famouswhy.com/should_the_internet_be_censored_/)!

I feel that there is alot of good sites on the Internet, but then there are thoughs few that try and spoil the Internet and give it a bad name.

I have seen many good sites, but as a minor few very disgusting sites that shouldn't be online and have the content that they do.

Freedom of speech and expression are basic rights up until the point at which they start to infringe on the rights of others.

I agree. And just because something is legal does not mean that it is moral. As for morality, there are things in the universe which are just wrong. No "judgement call" is needed; there are some absolutes.


what about when u innocently click on a link and get a gazillion 'sick' popups? i do believe that if it's my choice to not view such things then their popping up unwanted in my face is interfering with my freedom.

In this case, you haven't sought these out -- they found you. That is wrong. Spam is wrong. Telemarketing is wrong.

There is a very thin line between freedom and censorship; and censorship unfortunately has a way of starting out as a way to "save the children" (after all, who can argue with that?) and ending up as a removal of all freedoms. As they are fond of saying in the media, it's that "slippery slope."

I would like to say that I do not want any government censorship, because frankly I do not trust the government -- any government -- implicitly. With power comes the potential for abuse. What I do want is a way to be able to filter out this kind of stuff so I don't even have to look at it; and that means that the marketers of this filth should not be able to blanket the internet or other media with this stuff without some kind of warning in place before innocents stumble upon it. Think of it as a porn "opt-in".

I think not.

Sometimes.

Ok, I dislike popups and all but Im not going to say that their content is harmful. You have to semi-look for this stuff.


No you don't. I had the unpleasant experience of receiving XXXX-rated e-mail that came up right smart in Outlook with photos included! No imagination needed; everything was visible. I most certainly DID NOT go looking for that stuff.

This happened several times over a period of a couple of weeks. E-mail filters did not remove it from my inbox. I did call my ISP and discuss the problem with them; they did something and it went away.



whenever you get on the internet, you are agreeing to see whatever is on the site you go to. If you do not want to see it, stay off the computer and go to a library.

Okay, go to a library and check out a book on, oh, gardening. Roses. You open the book and are treated to XXXX-rated photos. You didn't go looking for that, did you? Well, stay out of the library.

Honestly, your suggestion a real cop-out! :(

no. let people go to where they want.

Persons who keep looking will NOT stop looking at it.










privacy (GDPR)