28 Jun 07
Originally posted by lepomisIt depends, if the bill only effect one country then its off no real use as users can easy put something on another server in another country.
What do you guys think of the government passing a bill so that they can control the content of the web? Would it allow for better informed citizens about what is happening in the news/politics in its own country?
Pklus, how could you control that ? I'm no techy, but by the nature of the internet its not posssiable to control it ?
28 Jun 07
Originally posted by RSMA1234China is doing a great job at controlling the internet, and persecuting people who break the rules.
It depends, if the bill only effect one country then its off no real use as users can easy put something on another server in another country.
Pklus, how could you control that ? I'm no techy, but by the nature of the internet its not posssiable to control it ?
I have spoken to people wha have travelled to China, and many websites were just blocked. Upon inquiry, the hotel staff told them that that's just China.
I think it is totally wrong.
I am certain however, that any government trying this will have many reasons, usually to do with security, and most people will accept them because they make us feel safer. A bit like ID cards really.
28 Jun 07
Originally posted by lepomisIf government regulations can improve something, sure. For example, government regulation is great for producing an army that defends the country, highways, a justice system, and national parks.
What do you guys think of the government passing a bill so that they can control the content of the web? Would it allow for better informed citizens about what is happening in the news/politics in its own country?
So let's think -- what could government regulation improve about the internet? The cost? The speed? The quality of information?
Hmmmm. I'm still trying to think of anything...
28 Jun 07
Originally posted by lepomisCan't people do that now?
What the government could do is enforce equal coverage on issues. That way one side will not be able to dominate the web with its ideas. People will be able to read all sides... and in the end, be better informed.
If arguing that more air time should be given for policies and issues that the government disagree with or are against, how would you get a government to vote for that?
28 Jun 07
Originally posted by ElleEffSeeeThere is something called the fairness doctrine that the liberals are trying to get passed in the US. It would require equal time for all issues discussed on the radio, maybe TV. I was curious what web users thought about the same thing for the internet.
Can't people do that now?
If arguing that more air time should be given for policies and issues that the government disagree with or are against, how would you get a government to vote for that?
28 Jun 07
Originally posted by lepomisOh I see. I can't fathom how that law would be manifest - Fox news giving equal airtime to left-wingers?!
There is something called the fairness doctrine that the liberals are trying to get passed in the US. It would require equal time for all issues discussed on the radio, maybe TV. I was curious what web users thought about the same thing for the internet.
I think it's relevant that people have the opportunity to access a greater amount of sources on the web than with cable TV. Information via TV is rather 'pushed' on to you, the content of which is dictated by who funds the reporting of that information. You may have equal airtime on some lowly funded channel up in the hundreds at 3am, but who can find that? Unrestricted information via the internet is immediate, and so I don't think the same issue applies.
28 Jun 07
Originally posted by lepomisWon't make any difference. citizens will choose to be misinformed no matter what facts they are presented with.
What do you guys think of the government passing a bill so that they can control the content of the web? Would it allow for better informed citizens about what is happening in the news/politics in its own country?