Alternatives to online censorship

[GreyGeek]

Pat Condell again, about YT censoring his latest video

[GreyGeek]

Good points, seth. But, what matters more about the take downs is the deliberate defunding and isolating of channels that are very effective in presenting their viewpoints, vs letting the smucks post their garbage. Dave Cullen of "Computing Forever", Black Pigeon and others.

Remember "Yellow Journalism"? The Hurst Paper monopoly and news manipulation? "Fake News" of the past.
Here is TEDx talk by Sharyl Attkinsson on current "Fake News", and who originated the term. The answer surprised me.

[sithlord48]

Well considering I don't use facebook or twitter and I might goto youtube once in a while. My view of social responsibility doesn't matter. Its Ultimately the view of the board and stock holders of those companies that matters. What I have seen is people posting stuff that not allowed according to the terms of service and platforms are starting to crack down on that alot more. Im sure if we were to look at this banned content it would run quite a wide range of stuff. Its possible that some groups of people are more likey to be vocal about their content loss then others. Or some groups are more likey to post content that violates these terms.

edit:
I did a quick search (just now) on youtube of "pro trump" and "anti trump". currently on youtube there are over 2x the number of videos returned for the pro trump search. So the arguement that they auto take down stuff in support of trump doesnt seam to be true.

[GreyGeek]

The are NOT the new public meeting space they like many other places online are small self selected communites. Go move to a new community you will only be moving into more of an echo chamber.

Those mentioned platforms ARE the new commons exactly because MOST Internet traffic and social interactions pass through them. Haven't you noticed? And, haven't you noticed that you can post two identical posts saying exactly the same thing except one uses "White" and the other uses "Black", or one uses "Union" and the other uses "Confederate", or one supports the 2A right to own and use an "AR-15" (or "gun" in general), and guess which one "violates" the vaguely written standards?

This is what i read above..
"I signed up for <platform> and then they decided they have some kind of social responsibility. And the stuff i like was deamed not acceptable, so i will now go retreat to a place where people are more aligned with my point of view.."

You make my point ... what is your definition of "social responsibility"? Is it socially responsible to declare that ALL White people are racists by virtue of their skin color? Of course not, but that post will survive on FB and one which says the same thing about Blacks will be censored. You aren't blind. You've seen examples of censorship which are so common yet so heavily biased against Conservatives but so forgiving of Progressives. Any effective post which supports Trump, for example, is censored while those critical of him or which appear to be supportive but written by illiterates are not.

[sithlord48]

The are NOT the new public meeting space they like many other places online are small self selected communites. Go move to a new community you will only be moving into more of an echo chamber.

This is what i read above..
"I signed up for <platform> and then they decided they have some kind of social responsibility. And the stuff i like was deamed not acceptable, so i will now go retreat to a place where people are more aligned with my point of view.."

[GreyGeek]

4 pages and no one has posted this
(snipped comic)

That's because YT, Twitter and Facebook, even though owned by public corporations, have replaced the soap box in the community commons because THEY have become the new community commons. THEY asked, invited and begged people to join their forum when they first began. I was one who joined Google 10 years ago, maybe longer. THEY initially started out with the "Do no evil" motto, which after Microsoft's evil attracted me, but after they gained control of over the other online forums they took it upon themselves to do evil. IOW, they support the 1A ONLY for those who agree with them. That's why the number of Conservative Twitter & FB users is declining rapidly if they don't censor themselves, which is the same as being canceled. However, they reserve the 1A for their own ideologies.

They began censoring posts that didn't match the ideology held by the corporate leadership. Then they began blocking accounts for various lengths of time. Then they canceled accounts and banned politically incorrect users. BUT, that was not enough. So zealous in their "Progressive" ideology are they that they decided to search the web for posts by their users on other forums which didn't line up with their own political theology, and canceling their accounts if they found any. So, if I were a Google or Facebook users and they saw the posts I made in this forum they would use my posts here to cancel my accounts on their site.



They were not satisfied with even that. They lobbied Congress to modify the CDA section 230 so that they HAVE to censor "hate" speech. It's the FOSTA bill. It just so happens that they believe that anything a Conservative posts to their site is "hate" speech by definition because it disagrees with their own Marxist theology. Hate if they support the 2A. Hate if they support 1A. Hate if they point out the facts about Islam and its suppression of women. Hate if they support Christianity. Hate if they write against enlarging government control of our lives. Their dream is to turn America into the EU.

Pat Condell said it better than me:

A society afraid of free speech is afraid of itself.
Anyone who needs a safe space from other people’s opinions should be in therapy

FOSTA (& SESTA) will give Twitter, Google, FB and others license to censor without fear of contradictions. While purporting to be about protecting those sexually abused, it will end up being used as a bludgeon against all whose views are not "Progressive".
https://www.eff.org/fr/deeplinks/201...win-censorship
"H.R. 1865, the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA), allows for private lawsuits and criminal prosecutions against Internet platforms and websites, based on the actions of their users. Facing huge new liabilities, the law will undoubtedly lead to platforms policing more user speech."

"Under SESTA, states would be able to enact laws that censor the Internet in broad ways. As long as those laws claim to target sex traffickers, states could argue that they’re exempt from Section 230 protections. As Eric Goldman points out in his excellent analysis of SESTA, Congress should demand an inventory of existing state laws that would fall into this new loophole before even thinking about opening it."

IF one has to have their views approved by an authority (of any sort) before they post them online, then that person has no views worth posting, and even if they did post, they have become merely an echo chamber for the authority.


IMO, the target of this bill is to kill the Internet itself, except for those with approved political views. That sword can cut both ways. If I become censored my Internet use will drop drastically across all sites, or disappear entirely. I won't be alone and the economic woes that would result would affect massive numbers of businesses, including Google, YT, FB and all the other sites that have teamed up with those three.

[sithlord48]

I canceled my G+ & YouTube and Gmail account a couple weeks ago after Google, Facebook and Twitter announced a "combined effort" to censor politically incorrect posts.

4 pages and no one has posted this

[GreyGeek]

Switch your browser’s “Agent” to IE or Mac, or start using a VPN


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[woodsmoke]

We are "tending" now to think of "online" as being on a cellphone but the internet through a wire and cable are "online" things also.

To that end...

Just as a comment, a student today was talking to other students and mentioned, in passing, that she and her hubby had moved into a new apartment and that:

BEFORE the cable / internet company would do ANYthing...

They BOTH had to "sign a paper" on which they "swore" that they would not use any kind of "torrent" such as Pirate Bay, etc. And if they did that they would be summarily cut off from both cable and the internet.

So...

This raises a couple of questions.

a) Can "we" now assume that the cable / internet providers now have the SPECIFIC capability to moniter ALL of their tens of thousands of users INDIVIDUALLY. to determine if "data" that is coming through the line to the person is FROM a torrent supplier?

this is NOT THE SAME as "throttling bandwidth" ...it is, apparently, the ability to watch one woman and her hubby to determine if they are using an "illegal" torrent... or just "a torrent" at least...

b) Or is it just a fake to try to stave off some people?

c) would a "torrent" only be registered to "the cable / internet " software as "a torrent"?

OR...can it discern if the "torrent" is a "pirated film" or is it a "Kubuntu torrent"?

If it does NOT distinguish betwen them...weelll.

d) What if... someone put Kubuntu on a "Pirate Bay" torrent thing... if the cable / internet company can only perceive " a torrent from Pirate Bay"...then...

e) if it does not "distinguish" but can "perceive" a "torrent" then...guess what...

Microsith would then have a defacto BLOCK against Linux, not by "stopping linux on the computer" but by stopping the movement of "linux" through the wires.

WHETHER OR NOT it was a "valid" torrent from a Kubuntu server.

this would be...

IN ADDITION to Sony(tm) having a defacto block to the "possibility" of harm because someone downloaded a film without paying for it..

just some questions, of little worth.

woodsmoke

[TWPonKubuntu]

GG: I'm very aware of the possible futures. My use of "EOTW" only makes sense if we have a chance of survival and that is where the ability to create our own computer network may be useful.

I will be the first to admit that I'm not ready for many EOTW scenarios, but within the context of we computer geeks, I want the ability to share information, preferably somewhere above the level of a public newsletter or notes posted on a tree.

Assuming that we aren't working under a dystropian government, a small scale network is workable... If we have the equipment to assemble it. Sure, we might need to use "sneakernet" to move data between distant points, but I want to have that ability and the data in an accessible form.

The fact that such small 'nets might only have a few members, each, is not a factor in my plans to make such a network happen.

And I thought it was the guy with the white hat who wins...

[GreyGeek]

GG; what you say makes sense, sadly...

Truthfully, my main usage for such a system is more for a EOTW scenario, and I really would not like to remain in my suburban location at that time.

There is more than one EOTW scenario. One kind of EOTW is taking place in Venezuela right now. A member of this forum from there said he has lost 10Kg over the last year, and that was 6 months ago. I haven't seen him on this forum in a while, so he has probably lost his Internet connection. That scenario has stretched on for so long that it I suspect that it has exhausted all emergency food, energy or barter supplies for most people. Only the Marxist leadership and their cronies & thugs are eating well. The ordinary people have gone beyond eating their pets and the local bird and rodent supply. I've read reports that all the animals in the areas surrounding major cities and towns have been swept clean, ditto for wild animals. I suspect that fish have been cleaned out of most bodies of water. In every location human populations are too great to be sustained by wildlife alone. Now the people have nothing to lose and are beginning to risk their lives for food by facing armed thugs working for the Marxist leadership. So much for the "worker's paradise".

In a similar situation Americans would not fair any better. Millions will leave the cities thinking they will find food and shelter "out in the country", only to find that it has neither in quantities that will allow more than a fraction of the population to survive. Most will die of diseases in their drinking water. The leadership and the wealthy have already stocked up their bunkers and islands with several years of food, fuel, weapons, ammo and necessities. Many have stocked up their "bug out" locations and created small fortresses to protect themselves and their own from ANY intruders, as every person will be seen as a threat to their own resources. Most, however, are NOT prepared to live in the 18th century because most do not have a team of oxen, plows, a supply of wrought iron, a blacksmith forge, wood working tools, seeds for next year's crops, bows & arrows, etc... All of which will be required when the stocks of gasoline & kerosene are exhausted, the electrical generator breaks, the lights burn out, they run out of ammo, Iodine, antibiotics (IF they are any good against modern super bugs) .... Most have not thought completely through how they are going to survive without our modern conveniences.

At the most my wife has a one month supply of necessary heart medicines. Then she dies. Most folks beyond 65 yrs old won't survive any kind of EOTW scenario. One episode of Atrial Fibrillation with tachycardia and the odds of survival without beta blockers to bring the heart back under control will be life threatening. Watching your prostate? Why bother? What could you do? Not a happy scenario.

Another EOTW scenario that seems favored by the delusional, fat, spoiled child dictating lives in North Korea is that of a nuclear Holocaust. That idiot must think hiding underground in his fully stocked and shielded bunker he will be immune to nuclear radiation. That bunker will become his tomb.

What are people afraid of? Death and dying, something they can't avoid, no matter how long they live.

I don't worry about it. I've read the book. The man on the white horse wins!

[TWPonKubuntu]

GG; what you say makes sense, sadly...

If I limit myself to 1000', the number of techy people is probably less than 10. I know of only one for certain. If I were to use the "cantenna", I could probably get to about 2000', line of sight only. With repeaters, it becomes limited only by the number of sites which could be maintained and powered. Still not a large number...

Truthfully, my main usage for such a system is more for a EOTW scenario, and I really would not like to remain in my suburban location at that time.

[GreyGeek]

...

GG. What prompted you to conclude that it "is not possible"...? I can see some problems relating to security (people will be a weak link)...

Do you see hardware problems? Like a lack of suitable devices or something else?

Take a mental survey of the folks who live within, say, 1,000' of where you live. How many of them have the knowledge or ability to set up a wifi bridge? Not enough to establish a mesh. Since 2013 PittMesh has been able to link only 50 sites. 50 in 3 1/2 years. Their network is so sparse it reminded me of the Berkeley Marxist protesters of the 1960s and their "underground radio". (They don't need an underground radio any more, their progeny have gained control of the major news networks.)

Not only that, FCC has improved detection technology and triangulation is a LOT faster than it was 60 years ago. You stationary wifi base and or bridge can give your location away from a much greater distance than it can communicate with. If TPTB didn't want your mesh in operation it wouldn't take them but a few minutes to shut it down, either by SWAT raid, or by a focused EMP targeted to your device. Your wifi transceiver won't work if the receive part is burned out.

If you revert to QRP radios in moving vehicles the FCC, or whomever, will merely use your signal to track you. We have become prisoners of our own technology.

That's why I don't care about P2P networks any more. There is no point to them.

[GreyGeek]

One could resort to F2F (Face 2 Face) communications.

Probably not in public places, or if you have a smartphone nearby that hasn't had the battery removed, and with long distance eaves dropping technology (IfraRed or microwaves, or even your smart TV.

Solution? Covertly write what you want your respondent to know on thin tissue, hand it to him, and after he reads it dissolve it in a glass of water or eat it. I've tried but I can't seem to master the Vulcan mind meld.

[TWPonKubuntu]

"SneakerNet Lives!"

I have a pair of tested and proven sneakers which I am willing to donate for further research.

GG. What prompted you to conclude that it "is not possible"...? I can see some problems relating to security (people will be a weak link)...

Do you see hardware problems? Like a lack of suitable devices or something else?