Internet lockdown

[Tubetec]

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50902496

Russia has completed a test of its locked down internet,

https://www.eurocanadian.ca/2019/06/global-internet-censorship-lockdown-begins-canada.html

Looks like Canada wants a similar kill switch for whatever they happen to deem fake news, hate speech or incitement.

Here in Ireland theres talk of similar laws , sure they might succeed in catching a few trouble makers , but its far more likely to be misused to keep stories unfavourable to the regime out of the media.

 

[JohnRoberts]

This is already being done inside repressive regimes and China is even powerful enough to censor web content published by some large western (american.. cough) companies who are more interested in the dollars than sense.

JR

 

[Tubetec]

Theres a couple of African countries have shut the internet down temporarily during their elections , its probably the only way to prevent outside interference at this stage .  This idea that a government or administration could have a hotline directly to social media to pull what they deem hate speech or fake news  sounds more  like a national socialist ministry for propaganda. 

The modern way our data is being horse traded to third parties like the medical and insurance industry  and online being made a prerequisite to access government services, we could well end up as bad as the Chinese system in the longer run .

 

[Anthon]

I would be more concerned with Google pretty much controlling the whole internet.  :
It can easily exclude sites from search, or give priority to the information.
So how 'free' is the internet really? Sure you can say whatever you want, but if the magical algorithms of Google don't like you, then your opinion won't really matter.

On the other hand, just because the government wants to have control on the internet does not mean it is totalitarian.
One of the main tasks of any government is keeping order, and some information needs to be blocked, like extremism and hate speech.
In some countries more intervention might be needed then in others, it depends on the cultural context.

Perhaps the most infamous example where 'freedom of speech' caused tremendous amount of harm is the Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines, which played a huge role in Rwandan genocide back in the 90's.
It's often hard to draw the line between just free speech and plain extremism. Usually it starts softly, and gradually evolves into extremism. People do not become extremists overnight.
I've witnessed several of harmless 'meme' sites plunging into plain nazism over the past couple of years on the internet.

So I would not underestimate the power of 'fake news'.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I would be more concerned with Google pretty much controlling the whole internet.  :

It can easily exclude sites from search, or give priority to the information.

I have discussed this before and stopped using google some time ago...

So how 'free' is the internet really? Sure you can say whatever you want, but if the magical algorithms of Google don't like you, then your opinion won't really matter.

so what?  My opinion doesn't matter, but that's why I vote. My vote matters.

On the other hand, just because the government wants to have control on the internet does not mean it is totalitarian.

No but totalitarian governments desperately want to control communication.

One of the main tasks of any government is keeping order, and some information needs to be blocked, like extremism and hate speech.

Um no, the primary task of government is insuring security and protecting personal freedom/liberty...(especially from people who don't like what other people say). Free speech is one of those protected freedoms (1st amendment). Of course the right to say stupid stuff, does not protect you from the consequences (like yelling fire in a crowded theater).

In some countries more intervention might be needed then in others, it depends on the cultural context.

and who decides?

Perhaps the most infamous example where 'freedom of speech' caused tremendous amount of harm is the Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines, which played a huge role in Rwandan genocide back in the 90's.

I doubt that it literally caused the genocide but may have inflamed an already dangerous situation.  Without the civilizing influence of rule of law, religion(?), and polite society, we are still animals and often behave that way. (Many people have also been killed in the name of religion, and are still are being killed today).

It's often it is hard to draw the line between just free speech and plain extremism. Usually it starts softly, and gradually evolves into extremism. People do not become extremists overnight.
I've witnessed several of harmless 'meme' sites plunging into plain nazism over the past couple of years on the internet.

I have watched one major political party tilt toward full bore socialism. It is sad to hear defenses of Marxist ideas. I thought history had already succinctly proved it unworkable, but it keeps popping up in political arguments for its attractive class warfare screed, etc.  (Note we are already a little pregnant with socialism and I do not expect that baby to ever be aborted. )

So I would not underestimate the power of 'fake news'.

Indeed....  your Rwanda genocide accounts for less than 1M deaths, communism is responsible for several tens of M deaths.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." (Santayana).

Free speech can be pretty ugly, but IMO is better than the alternative.

JR

PS: The silliest recent example of the social media cancel culture losing their mind, was a "woker than thou" blogger claiming that Hallmark Christmas movies are fascist. You can't make this sh__ up...

 

[Tubetec]

Thanks for those points of view  Anth.

I had heard about how radio played a role in the Rewandan genocide , a friend who works in advocacy for refugees represented a radio Dj who was claiming asylum here , I forget how the case ended up now ,but from what my buddy said people completely lost the run of themselves over the air and it did contribute to the situation .

In reference to the use of google , yeah I got rid of it as a search engine a good while back and Im sure it does help thwart their data aggregation to some degree, I dont know how to check how good duck duck go actually is ,but it seems to find what I look for ok.  Just clicking around different sites on the net , google is very often allowed in as a third party cookie and it most likely can sniff sideways with its big hooked honker .

I think freedom of speech gets confused with freedom to write ,  word of mouth is a curious beast , if it catches peoples imagination it can pass down the line like wild fire , however if what someone says is well off balance not as many will repeat it ,it dies away fast , written language has a kind of staying power , I just had a recent convo with a buddy on this very topic .

Ok imagine I have an argument with a friend or family member , all kinds of crap can come out in the heat of a situation like that , but in time the spoken words and hurt start to fade  from memory , on the other hand if you happen conduct your argument over  either text message or social media , all you need do is read back and old angry message from someone and your blood might be boiling just as it did first day .  Even though I wont touch FB or T with a shi**y stick I certainly have seen family  situations vastly complicated via social media , you may be saying something in private to someone over it but thats absolutely no guarantee its going to stay private . Its this fundamental difference between 'word of mouth 'system we have evolved over tens or hundreds of thousands of years and this flash in the pan setting in stone of words via the technology wich seems to lead to a huge waste of human energy fighting and bickering.

 

[Anthon]

Indeed....  your Rwanda genocide accounts for less than 1M deaths, communism is responsible for several tens of M deaths.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." (Santayana).

Free speech can be pretty ugly, but IMO is better than the alternative.

JR

I've  written a whole essay, but I've decided not to post it because it feels like it will lead to a lengthy and meaningless debate, and I have better things to do  :
Let's just say I don't believe there is such thing as real ''democracy'' and ''freedom'' anywhere in the world.

I will only address your last point on communism:
I'm not sure how you imagine the Russian Revolution and rise of communist party happening, or why you consider communism as the only alternative to freedom of speech (it's not even in the same spectrum), but in reality it all started with bunch of revolutionaries like Lenin and the Bolsheviks, inspired by works of Marx, who used technology like printed materials and cinematography as 'propaganda' to gain popular support across the vast Russian Empire, which would not be possible without uncontrolled spread of ideas. Which in turn ignited major strikes, protests, uprisings, and eventually the civil war.

So if anything, you've just made an argument against freedom of speech.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I've  written a whole essay, but I've decided not to post it because it feels like it will lead to a lengthy and meaningless debate, and I have better things to do  :

Thank you, I agree....

Let's just say I don't believe there is such thing as real ''democracy'' and ''freedom'' anywhere in the world.

Opinions vary.

I will only address your last point on communism:
I'm not sure how you imagine the Russian Revolution and rise of communist party happening, or why you consider communism as the only alternative to freedom of speech (it's not even in the same spectrum),

I think only you imagine that I said that...

but in reality it all started with bunch of revolutionaries like Lenin and the Bolsheviks, inspired by works of Marx, who used technology like printed materials and cinematography as 'propaganda' to gain popular support across the vast Russian Empire, which would not be possible without uncontrolled spread of ideas. Which in turn ignited major strikes, protests, uprisings, and eventually the civil war.

So if anything, you've just made an argument against freedom of speech.

I don't think so.

Communism is an attractive political argument, which is why it keeps coming up. An informed electorate should know better.  Free speech means that all viewpoints get expressed, and dismissed when appropriate.

Happy new year...

JR