PDA

View Full Version : FYI- Wikipedia to Go Dark Tomorrow



garagemark
01-17-2012, 06:52 AM
Just a conversation starter concerning on-line piracy. I don't use Wiki all that often, but it is one of the most popular sites on the internet. If some of the other sites follow suit, it COULD have quite an effect for folks that rely on the Internet for almost everything.


http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/01/17/wikipedia-to-go-dark-for-24-hours-to-protest-anti-piracy-bill/#ixzz1jhBh4l9t

Yeah, I know, Fox news is crape to some, but that's all I can get here at work (I'm on my own time right now ;) ).

So, what do you think?

justanengineer
01-17-2012, 07:39 AM
IMHO Wiki sites should be forced (by the network owners) to stay dark until they (the content owners) remove all of the misinformation, but that is a topic for another thread.

Regarding online piracy, again IMHO, the government needs to stay the he(( out of trying to regulate the internet.

Black_Moons
01-17-2012, 08:19 AM
Wow, Fox news finaly covered it eh? Its been basicly under total media blackout.

'The website will go dark for 24 hours in an unprecedented move that brings added muscle to a growing base of critics of the legislation.'

Growing base? How on earth can 'Everyone on the face of the planet who is not a member of congress' grow? Aside from yaknow, congress actualy figuring it out that when everyone on earth tells them its insane (other then the ones handing them large brown envolopes of cash), that it really is insane.

flylo
01-17-2012, 08:20 AM
Anything the goverment "fixes" it srews up. I understand if these bills pass it might end Craigslist, that would not be good.:confused:

SteveF
01-17-2012, 08:23 AM
Regarding online piracy, again IMHO, the government needs to stay the he(( out of trying to regulate the internet.

Posted by a person who obviously has never watched his income decline due to lost sales from illegal copies or had to deal with a marketing problem because consumers were buying faulty, counterfeit copies of your products.

Steve

justanengineer
01-17-2012, 08:57 AM
Posted by a person who obviously has never watched his income decline due to lost sales from illegal copies or had to deal with a marketing problem because consumers were buying faulty, counterfeit copies of your products.

Steve

au contraire...posted by someone who realizes that "illegal" copies are a fact of life due to Pacific rim and middle eastern countries. The company I work for loses more annually in parts sales alone than the GDP of some countries due to this.

Furthermore, why should the cost of protecting "your" rights be placed upon the government (ie. myself and every other taxpayer)? These are civil matters, not criminal ones. Your company can take legal action against the true sources of these problems much more readily than our government can do anything about it. I pay more, so you can make more? :confused:

Black_Moons
01-17-2012, 09:41 AM
Anything the goverment "fixes" it srews up. I understand if these bills pass it might end Craigslist, that would not be good.:confused:

I misread that as the government might end up on Craigslist. Let me dream about that for a moment....




Government for sale: 300 years old, Still acts like a puppy and shreads anything valuable it gets its teeth into, Not (White)house trained. Tends to crap and shed all over the place. Often drools in sleep during meetings. Does not obey commands unless bribed with treats. Will bite hand that feeds it. Will piss on everything to mark its territory. Does not play well with other governments. Will hump and/or bite other governments if given the chance.

Ph: 555-5555 $20 Obo*, Will trade for freedom or civil rights. Please no calls after 6pm

*$15,242,373,545,234 debt included

Black_Moons
01-17-2012, 09:52 AM
Posted by a person who obviously has never watched his income decline due to lost sales from illegal copies or had to deal with a marketing problem because consumers were buying faulty, counterfeit copies of your products.

Steve

Posted by a person who does not realise what occures shortly after government regulation of the internet with absolutely no accountability or oversight. Also known as 'wide spread abuse'

Im sure your income will skyrocket after your website is blocked from the US internet after the fraudsters and/or competition pay the right person to get it blocked, or submit enough copyright infringement complaints that won't actualy be checked up on before the website is blocked without an appeal process (or a very costly, very long appeal process that won't finish untill you have lost months if not years of business and most of your customers think you have gone out of business as your website is no longer accessable and gives no error message, Or maybe says "THIS WEBSITE TAKEN DOWN BY HOMELAND SECURITY / FBI", Im sure your customers will totaly trust you after they see that!)

goeb8
01-17-2012, 10:44 AM
it would be a sad day if the law gets passed.

lazlo
01-17-2012, 11:04 AM
FYI- Wikipedia to Go Dark Tomorrow

Wow, the number of posts here will drop precipitously :D

Yow Ling
01-17-2012, 12:57 PM
Old Tiffie will be screwed

EddyCurr
01-17-2012, 02:15 PM
Maybe Homeshopmachinist and other forums ought to consider going dark,
too ?


English Wikipedia anti-SOPA blackout (http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/English_Wikipedia_anti-SOPA_blackout)

The blackout is a protest against proposed legislation in the United States
— the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) in the U.S. House of Representatives,
and the PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) in the U.S. Senate — that, if passed, would
seriously damage the free and open Internet, including Wikipedia.

Strictly interpreted, I imagine such legislation could have a deleterious
effect on how members post following enactment.

.

Evan
01-17-2012, 02:18 PM
Wikipedia to Go Dark Tomorrow

A shame it can't be made permanent. I get very tired of typing "-wikipedia" when looking for information.

Evan
01-17-2012, 02:23 PM
It doesn't look like there is much chance of the bill passing in anything like the original form, if at all. Good thing too.


The past weekend will likely long be remembered as a turning point in the debate over how to fight online piracy in the United States. Supporters of SOPA and PIPA suffered a series of blows to their cause starting with the decision in both houses of Congress to eliminate a requirement in both bills that would have required U.S. Internet service providers to cut off access to foreign sites accused of piracy.
Then a group of Senators, some who once supported PIPA, requested that a vote on the bill be delayed. Things kept worse. The White House, which was considered an ally of the music and film industries, suggested in a statement that the president would not support several cornerstone provisions of the bills.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-57360223-261/google-will-protest-sopa-using-popular-home-page/

EddyCurr
01-17-2012, 02:42 PM
Under the original bills, what would the influence have been on quoting
copyrighted material as above ?

.

macona
01-17-2012, 02:46 PM
SOPA or PIPA will have zero effect on piracy. It is just a power grab for the government and corporations.

Wikipedia is not the only one, just one of the bigger and more well known.

Reddit is doing it:
http://gizmodo.com/5875439/reddit-is-having-a-blackout-on-18-january-in-protest-against-sopa?tag=sopa

As for who is supporting it? A lot of companies:

http://gizmodo.com/5870241/presented-without-comment-every-single-company-supporting-sopa-the-awful-internet-censorship-law?tag=sopa

http://gizmodo.com/5872766/the-video-game-industrys-lobbyists-support-sopa-but-they-understand-why-you-might-not?tag=sopa

http://gizmodo.com/5874112/these-are-the-carmakers-at-the-detroit-auto-show-supporting-sopa?tag=sopa

lazlo
01-17-2012, 02:55 PM
SOPA or PIPA will have zero effect on piracy. It is just a power grab for the government and corporations.

+1. There's an immense amount of money changing hands for SOPA. Lamar Smith didn't sponsor the bill because he had an interest in copyright law...



As for who is supporting it? A lot of companies:

After working for The Empire for 12 years, it's nice working for the Good Guys:

Nvidia Opposes the Stop Online Piracy Act (http://news.softpedia.com/news/Nvidia-Opposes-the-Stop-Online-Piracy-Act-246394.shtml)

Nvidia's Bob Sherbin explained, "We oppose piracy, as it hurts our game-developer partners. However, we do not support SOPA. We don't believe it is the right solution to the problem."

RussZHC
01-17-2012, 02:58 PM
Agree with macona, no effect on those who actively pirate...


The most controversial provision would have enabled federal authorities to "blacklist" sites that are alleged to distribute pirated content. That would essentially cut off portions of the Internet to all U.S. users.


maybe they should go after all the other alleged illegalities also on the books somewhere, from the top down...

philbur
01-17-2012, 03:02 PM
If the government stays out of regulating the Internet who will force Wiki sites to stay dark until they remove misinformation:confused:

Strategy is clearly not your strong point. ;)

Phil:)


IMHO Wiki sites should be forced to stay dark until they remove all of the misinformation, but that is a topic for another thread.

Regarding online piracy, again IMHO, the government needs to stay the he(( out of trying to regulate the internet.

.RC.
01-17-2012, 03:24 PM
Perhaps they should also look at why people pirate, and also look at copyright laws, I mean ffs protection for 70 years after the death of the original creator or the works...

Patents only last a short amount of time, copyright should be the same...

Also there is thing called a "global trade" where buying things from different parts of the world is easy...

Yet big publishing companies region lock their products so something bought in the US will not work in other parts of the world... This is so they can set different prices around the world..

Then we get onto TV shows where the latest shows shown in the US might not be shown in other parts of the world for several weeks or months, if at all...

ckelloug
01-17-2012, 03:51 PM
The wikipedia blackout was also covered in today's USA Today.

philbur
01-17-2012, 04:23 PM
Isn't the real issue here not about piracy but about who ultimately controls the Internet. Your government is using the piracy issue as a means to establish a system for control, it’s only the first stage. The question you need to ask yourself is: do I want my government to take control or do I want others who are not accountable to me to do it, as they surely will. Recent events clearly demonstrate the power and unpredictable nature of the Internet, there is no way your government will leave the control of such a powerful weapon to chance, and you shouldn’t want them to. The internet is currently the ultimate loose canon for every government. Nobody can predict which way it is pointing, when it will next go off or what damage it might do. In a democratic society the elected government has a legitimate responsibility to regulate that society.

Phil:)

justanengineer
01-17-2012, 04:29 PM
IMHO Wiki sites should be forced (by the network owners) to stay dark until they (the content owners) remove all of the misinformation, but that is a topic for another thread.


Inserted the unstated just for you Phil. ;) Sorry for the confusion.

loose nut
01-17-2012, 04:34 PM
The US gov. does not control the internet anymore. They can't control what happens in the rest of the world.

This bill will just force American websites to get offshore web hosting, if they wish to go on and the US will become a closed black hole much like China is now. Result, bad for Americans and the rest of the world goes on without caring.

justanengineer
01-17-2012, 04:38 PM
Isn't the real issue here not about piracy but about who ultimately controls the Internet. The question you need to ask yourself is: do I want my government to take control or do I want others who are not accountable to me to do it, as they surely will.

I would dare say that the economy and the related business regulation are significantly more dangerous than the internet, yet recent history demonstrates that the more power our government tries to exert, the worse the system becomes.

Black_Moons
01-17-2012, 04:53 PM
I would dare say that the economy and the related business regulation are significantly more dangerous than the internet, yet recent history demonstrates that the more power our government tries to exert, the worse the system becomes.

The problem is who they are exerting the power for. Its not us, Its who bribes them the most.

lazlo
01-17-2012, 05:03 PM
This bill will just force American websites to get offshore web hosting, if they wish to go on and the US will become a closed black hole much like China is now. Result, bad for Americans and the rest of the world goes on without caring.

SOPA is proposing a national blacklist that would block access to Bittorrent sites hosted overseas. All torrent/filesharing hosts have moved outside CONUS, because current laws already allow those sites to be taken down.

You might recall that in 2009, Australia tried to implement a national porn blacklist/firewall, and that didn't go over well either. As is usual with these things, the proposed blacklist was leaked, and a bunch of sites unpopular with the Australian government, that didn't have anything to do with porn, were on the list. I would expect the US government to similarly abuse the power:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/03/19/1237054961100.html

macona
01-17-2012, 05:08 PM
The US gov. does not control the internet anymore. They can't control what happens in the rest of the world.

This bill will just force American websites to get offshore web hosting, if they wish to go on and the US will become a closed black hole much like China is now. Result, bad for Americans and the rest of the world goes on without caring.

Thats wouldn't work based on how the bill was originally written. Basically the people who control the DNS servers would have to block anyone in the use from accessing the site in question. So it is just the people in the US that can't access external sites. The server does not actually get shut down.

Of course this does not really work since you can still enter the IP address of the site and get to it that way.

Even with piracy, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 made over 1 Billion dollars in 16 days.

Frankly, Piracy will always exist. It's just the risk of the business. The developers need to use DRM of some sort to stop it. It works, this has been shown through game systems and providers like XBox, Steam, and the PS3.

As for Wikipedia, third parties have found that it is pretty accurate, especially in the science related areas. If you find misinformation you are free to correct it. So do so...

.RC.
01-17-2012, 05:23 PM
a tried to implement a national porn blacklist/firewall, and that didn't go over well either. As is usual with these things, the proposed blacklist was leaked, and a bunch of sites unpopular with the Australian government, that didn't have anything to do with porn, were on the list. I would expect the US government to similarly abuse the power:

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/03/19/1237054961100.html

Lazlo they managed to partly implement that plan by stealth... A host of ISP's including the largest one are now filtering a list of sites.. It was done "voluntarily", but the ISP's never notified their customers that their net is now censored by a secret list...

http://www.news.com.au/technology/internet-filter/telstra-optus-to-begin-censoring-web-next-month/story-fn5j66db-1226079954138

Evan
01-17-2012, 06:17 PM
There is a major unreported (in the US) side effect if the bill passes in any form that allows censorship of net traffic. That censorship will apply to all traffic that passes through US controlled Internet facilities regardless of where it originated or where it is destined. Much Internet traffic passes through the US from all parts of the world heading for all parts of the world. It's the way the Internet works. Routes are selected by availability, not by distance, closeness, or nationality. The US probably has the fattest "pipes" of any country which means a lot of traffic passes through the US on its way elsewhere. That is especially the case for Canada where a large percentage of Canadian traffic routinely passes through the US routers.

If this goes through it will severely disrupt worldwide traffic. The eventual outcome will probably be for the US to be isolated from the rest of the net. Might as well move to China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Burma as well as a few other countries.

What is especially disturbing is how it demonstrates the extent that commercial enterprise controls the government. In most places it would be called corruption.

Black_Moons
01-17-2012, 06:41 PM
There is a major unreported (in the US) side effect if the bill passes in any form that allows censorship of net traffic. That censorship will apply to all traffic that passes through US controlled Internet facilities regardless of where it originated or where it is destined. Much Internet traffic passes through the US from all parts of the world heading for all parts of the world. It's the way the Internet works. Routes are selected by availability, not by distance, closeness, or nationality. The US probably has the fattest "pipes" of any country which means a lot of traffic passes through the US on its way elsewhere. That is especially the case for Canada where a large percentage of Canadian traffic routinely passes through the US routers.

If this goes through it will severely disrupt worldwide traffic. The eventual outcome will probably be for the US to be isolated from the rest of the net. Might as well move to China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Burma as well as a few other countries.

What is especially disturbing is how it demonstrates the extent that commercial enterprise controls the government. In most places it would be called corruption.

Yes, I do believe that IS called corruption. Its just nobody has *called* them on it, and even when they do get called on it, Nothing ever happens, No jail time, No fines, Worse case is "Sorry, I'll regetfuly resign and take up my CEO job at the company that bribed me where I make more money anyway"

Also, I recall once doing a trace route on my cousin who lived about an hours drive away... I think we where on diffrent ISP's though. the traffic went to the USA before it came back to canada -_-

Rich Carlstedt
01-17-2012, 11:12 PM
Anyone here who thinks the government can get it right, please explain the following.
My sister who was about 80 at the time, was pulled aside by TSA ( "Home land Security") and relieved of her pinking shears that she had in a sewing bag, and was detained.
These are the very same people who , even though warned in advanced by the father of the wayward soul, permitted the Christmas bomber to board a plane to Detroit, with a "real" weapon and never stopped him.They had his name, and profile !
We only have to read the reports of children being stripped searched, to realize that any government control will- absolutely- go far beyond the desired objective.

Power corrupts
Absolute power corrupts absolutely

I don't condone piracy, but Hollywood and the Electronics industry could do a far better job of complying with good customer practices.
They support NOTHING after coming out with a newer model, or software.
They promote adversarial relations with the total lack of consumer support.

For example, If Hollywood lowered their prices, maybe the far east could not make a profit on copies. I have bought software, and then a few months later find it to be outdated, and the maker is off to "better things"
When any business is cutting a fat hog, it only invites competition---legal or not.

oldtiffie
01-17-2012, 11:27 PM
There is not much or anything that anyone here can do about the perceived problems they see.

It will be determined by "others" with or without consulting you or getting your consent.

In due course you will be told how it is and how it is to be.

You may or may not understand or agree but once you have been told you will be all the better informed even if none the wiser.

Let the "chattering classes" get back to what they do most if not best.

I will just make the most of what(ever) the outcome is and the results of it.

J Tiers
01-17-2012, 11:49 PM
There is not much or anything that anyone here can do about the perceived problems they see.

It will be determined by "others" with or without consulting you or getting your consent.

In due course you will be told how it is and how it is to be.

You may or may not understand or agree but once you have been told you will be all the better informed even if none the wiser.

Let the "chattering classes" get back to what they do most if not best.

I will just make the most of what(ever) the outcome is and the results of it.

And there is another member of the true "sheeple", proving they exist everywhere, not just in USA.

For folks that DO give a rip, my suggestion is that you US citizens at least use your congresscritters' websites to present them a message that you want them to vote these job-killing bills DOWN.

You can easily get to them through this site (and many others as well, of course)

http://www.contactingthecongress.org/

The website of every congresscritter has a "contact" system with a message capability. You do give them your name and address, they only are interested in their OWN constituents, naturally.

For some reason, Sen McCaskill of MO, a normally reasonable Democrat, is supporting these abominations. I was obliged to tell her that I would be forced to vote for her opponents if she voted FOR the bills, noting that both the "PIPA" and "SOPA" bills are essentially "unfixable", and will damage more in terms of lost jobs and commerce than they benefit.

As an author and patent-gaining inventor, of whatever minimal status, I have an interest in squashing "piracy". I can equally see that these bills are essentially "putting out one house fire by flooding the whole valley".

The potential collateral damage makes the problem look small.

oldtiffie
01-17-2012, 11:56 PM
While I may agree with your sentiments JT, I have a close look at issues andwhether I agree with or support them or not and if I can see that no matter how much effort etc. I put into it that nothing of substance will result from it, and if I realise that to bang my head on the wall further is an excercise in futility and/or stupidity of it all I bow to the inevitable, shrug my shoulders, "wipe the slate" and get on as best I can with what I have in doing what I can and am not prevented from doing.

Here endeth the lesson.

danlb
01-18-2012, 12:02 AM
Up until recently (within our lifetimes????) , a person had to work for years to sell a few thousand copies of a piece of music. They had to hand write musical scores, or arrange for special presses to print it. We had copyright laws to encourage talented people to create and share. It was very labor intensive. The "to share" was important. Copyright was created for the good of the public.

Today we have the means to create a music video in 24 hours. We have machines that do much of the work. We can distribute it with very little additional cost. No longer does a musician have to work all day at their craft. I understand that most artists get almost nothing from their work, but the publishers and distributors make fortunes. They are the ones who benefit from the extended lifespan of the copyright.

And yet we have a paradigm in place where you pay the plumber once and use the toilet daily, yet a million people pay for the same crappy song that was performed in less time than it took to repair your toilet.

I do object to piracy. I do not practice it. I object more to criminalizing an act that has dubious impact on the bottom line of the artists. I suspect that the kid with a 20,000 song library was not going to buy any of them in the first place so there are no sales lost in that case.

My hat's off to Wiki for standing behind their convictions.

Dan

oldtiffie
01-18-2012, 12:57 AM
Today we have the means to create a music video in 24 hours. We have machines that do much of the work. We can distribute it with very little additional cost. No longer does a musician have to work all day at their craft. I understand that most artists get almost nothing from their work, but the publishers and distributors make fortunes. They are the ones who benefit from the extended lifespan of the copyright.


Dan,

even today, a musician or artist will get no-where unless he is "known" and gets on some "celebrity's" support list and hence for no other reason other than good publicity he might get lucky and get on the (mainly?) kids "must have" lists.

Whether or not he actually has talent or not may not matter but if the publicisers etc. do there job well (and take their "cut") he might do well more inspite of himself than because of himself or his real or supposed "talent".

Many who get to that stage make little or nothing from "sales" but they make a mottsa it they star in a well publicised "concert" either in their own right or as a support act for a ("super"??) "star".

I don't know how it was in the USA etc. but in our Gold Rush days people flocked here to make their fortunes. Some did - a lot did not - but the publicans, harlots and sellers of tents, shovels and barrows etc. made a killing with no great effort or risk.

It is still going on in some other ways - and will continue to do so.

Ya payz ya munney and ya takes ya chances.

Pete F
01-18-2012, 01:05 AM
The US probably has the fattest "pipes" of any country which means a lot of traffic passes through the US on its way elsewhere. That is especially the case for Canada where a large percentage of Canadian traffic routinely passes through the US routers.
Well, if it has the expected effect, that will change.


If this goes through it will severely disrupt worldwide traffic. The eventual outcome will probably be for the US to be isolated from the rest of the net. Might as well move to China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea or Burma as well as a few other countries.
Yup, a temporary interruption which will work itself out as you say. The internet was designed to handle this type of situation, although I think they were originally thinking about server outages.

-Pete

Pete F
01-18-2012, 01:33 AM
I assumed this would be EST, but I just checked Wikipedia, and it is still online.

-Pete

Pete F
01-18-2012, 01:40 AM
Huh, looks like it took a little time to get it blacked out - queries now redirect to the blackout page.

-Pete

Black Forest
01-18-2012, 01:58 AM
Does someone know where Oldtiffe lives? If so they need to go over there and administer first aid. He will surely have a heart attack.

And we won't see any posts from him until the black out is lifted!

oldtiffie
01-18-2012, 02:40 AM
No wurries BF - I am still alive and kicking - despite the WP black-out.

At least they are big enough to have enough clout to not only be listened to in their own right but it might just re-inforce the complaints of the great unwashed which may otherwise just be wasted and not listened to - despite the platitudes and weasel words of some who support the legislation.

With any luck WP will be around for a while yet.

I will just make the best of which-ever outcome there is.

Evan
01-18-2012, 02:52 AM
There is not much or anything that anyone here can do about the perceived problems they see.

It will be determined by "others" with or without consulting you or getting your consent.


Have you ever bothered to even vote? Or is that just another useless exercise? If you have, why?

macona
01-18-2012, 03:04 AM
Have you ever bothered to even vote? Or is that just another useless exercise? If you have, why?


It seems that is becoming more true. Don't like the results of an election? Sue to have it recounted until the count is what you like. That happened in Seattle a few years ago.

And in many state level referendum level bills, don't like the bill the majority passed? Sue it out of existence with judges basically creating law on the bench.

oldtiffie
01-18-2012, 03:27 AM
Have you ever bothered to even vote? Or is that just another useless exercise? If you have, why?

I never miss - not once since I was able to vote at 18.

The problem with voting is that it is purely a numbers game. All that is needed to win in "first past the post" systems is 50% + 1.

Small groups can skew the vote if they have enough votes where the two say major parties are neck and neck.

Example:

Large parties get say 45% each in which case those who voted them only cancel each other out. The small party 10% is of no use unless it can transfer some of its votes to the major parties.

But if say one large party gets 45% and the other gets 40%, the 45% wins and it may be that the small party "stole" the votes of the losing major party.

If pre-polling identifies that will happen the small party has a huge leverage that gives the small party the power to dictate the outcome.

Needless to say the small party can extract huge promises and concessions from the larger parties.

As is all too obvious at present and will become more obvious as time goes on toward the election (November?) it will be money and spending power that counts to "get the message over" and to get the votes - and to win the election.

I am not at all sure just how democratic democracies are - or are not.

But I never miss voting never the less.

tumutbound
01-18-2012, 04:14 AM
Not having tried to access any wikipedia links, the blackout has gone largely unnoticed by me, other that the many pointless articles in the press.

While I agree that SOPA is a piece of crap legislation, it's a US piece of crap legislation about which I can do nothing. Not much point appealing to politicians here as they do what ever the US says is good for them.

Arcane
01-18-2012, 06:33 AM
Wiki isn't truly blacked out. The page you search for comes up and then after a couple of seconds goes to their blackout page. Just hit your browsers little button to stop the page from loading sometime in that 2 second interval and the page is locked without the blackout page showing up.

justanengineer
01-18-2012, 07:35 AM
Wiki isn't truly blacked out. The page you search for comes up and then after a couple of seconds goes to their blackout page. Just hit your browsers little button to stop the page from loading sometime in that 2 second interval and the page is locked without the blackout page showing up.

It must take a bit longer for your internet to leave, visit the US, and get sent back. I dont even see words on the search page, just a flash of white for .01 second then the blackout.

"Congresscritters" almost made me lose my drink through the nose. Not sure which is appropriate in this instance tho - :D or :eek:

Weston Bye
01-18-2012, 07:52 AM
Google has blacked out their logo, but the site still works. The equivalent of wearing a (cause of the day) awareness ribbon.

J Tiers
01-18-2012, 08:51 AM
As per usual, the main effect of Congresscritters screwing up the internet via SOPA and/or PIPA will be to

1) restrain trade in the US (only)

2) Add huge reasons for the chinese alternate version of the internet to become THE new internet, as the old one dies of strangulation.

3) kill yet MORE jobs in the US. let the GOP explain THAT "job killing" bill....... I hear a lot about job creators, but ll I SEE is jobs created in china..... AS IN THIS CASE

if I were in china, I wouldn't see much if any reason to even CONNECT the chinese internet alternative to the USA. There isn't anything IN the US that is worth the hassle.

lazlo
01-18-2012, 09:02 AM
Not much point appealing to politicians here as they do what ever the US says is good for them.

Our politicians do whatever Goldman Sachs says is good for them.

JoeFin
01-18-2012, 09:11 AM
As per usual, the main effect of Congresscritters screwing up the internet via SOPA and/or PIPA will be to

1) restrain trade in the US (only)

2) Add huge reasons for the chinese alternate version of the internet to become THE new internet, as the old one dies of strangulation.

3) kill yet MORE jobs in the US. let the GOP explain THAT "job killing" bill....... I hear a lot about job creators, but ll I SEE is jobs created in china..... AS IN THIS CASE

if I were in china, I wouldn't see much if any reason to even CONNECT the chinese internet alternative to the USA. There isn't anything IN the US that is worth the hassle.

Excellent Post

But you forgot to mention the REAL reason Congress is prepared to destroy yet more American businesses is because Large Corporate donors are paying them to do it

Black_Moons
01-18-2012, 09:29 AM
There is not much or anything that anyone here can do about the perceived problems they see.
It will be determined by "others" with or without consulting you or getting your consent.
In due course you will be told how it is and how it is to be.
You may or may not understand or agree but once you have been told you will be all the better informed even if none the wiser.
Let the "chattering classes" get back to what they do most if not best.
I will just make the most of what(ever) the outcome is and the results of it.

You must sit down with a painful smile every day, because you get screwed every day by the system and seem to just love it and ask for more.

Its people like you that allowed the system to get as bad as it is, And its people like you that are the major problem. You must be compleatly brainwashed by faux news if you think nothing can be done about anything.

They can only do what they want as long as people like you let them. The second people stop letting them, they are not even the government anymore.

JoeFin
01-18-2012, 09:50 AM
You must be compleatly brainwashed by faux news if you think nothing can be done about anything.


Most Americans don't realize FOX is not allowed to broadcast in Canada because of their obvious slant / distortions

Black_Moons
01-18-2012, 09:57 AM
Most Americans don't realize FOX is not allowed to broadcast in Canada because of their obvious slant / distortions
*Googles*. Well, At least that still works!

'FOX banned in Canada: It is illegal to broadcast false and misleading news in Canada'
Ah, Makes sense. hehe.

"Independent research/studies have clearly pointed out the obvious: Not only does watching FOX News makes you less informed than other news watchers; watching FOX News makes you less informed than those people who watch no news at all"
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/21/1038766/-New-public-study:-Watching-Fox-News-makes-you-dumber

That would explain some people...

loose nut
01-18-2012, 10:19 AM
Who says you can't get Fox in Canada, it might not be worth watching but it is on cable and sat feeds.

justanengineer
01-18-2012, 10:32 AM
On my last vacation in the Yukon, the lodge had more TV than I do now, and all she did was watch FOX for Family Guy, King of Hill, and Simpsons.

My old Merriam Webster does not list the word "dumber." Therefore, I would suspect people are getting there.

JoeFin
01-18-2012, 11:07 AM
On my last vacation in the Yukon, the lodge had more TV than I do now, and all she did was watch FOX for Family Guy, King of Hill, and Simpsons.

My old Merriam Webster does not list the word "dumber." Therefore, I would suspect people are getting there.

I should have been more explicit in my statement just as you should have done your homework

FOX as in FOX News is banned in Canada


Canada’s Radio Act requires that "a licenser may not broadcast….any false or misleading news." The provision has kept Fox News and right wing talk radio out of Canada and helped make Canada a model for liberal democracy and freedom. As a result of that law, Canadians enjoy high quality news coverage including the kind of foreign affairs and investigative journalism that flourished in this country before Ronald Reagan abolished the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987. Political dialogue in Canada is marked by civility, modesty, honesty, collegiality, and idealism that have pretty much disappeared on the U.S. airwaves. When Stephen Harper moved to abolish anti-lying provision of the Radio Act, Canadians rose up to oppose him fearing that their tradition of honest non partisan news would be replaced by the toxic, overtly partisan, biased and dishonest news coverage familiar to American citizens who listen to Fox News and talk radio

http://www.politicsplus.org/blog/2011/03/07/why-fox-is-banned-in-canada/

Now what was that definition of "Dumber"

lazlo
01-18-2012, 11:20 AM
FOX as in FOX News is banned in Canada


Canada’s Radio Act requires that "a licenser may not broadcast….any false or misleading news." The provision has kept Fox News and right wing talk radio out of Canada and helped make Canada a model for liberal democracy and freedom. As a result of that law, Canadians enjoy high quality news coverage including the kind of foreign affairs and investigative journalism that flourished in this country before Ronald Reagan abolished the "Fairness Doctrine" in 1987. Political dialogue in Canada is marked by civility, modesty, honesty, collegiality, and idealism that have pretty much disappeared on the U.S. airwaves. When Stephen Harper moved to abolish anti-lying provision of the Radio Act, Canadians rose up to oppose him fearing that their tradition of honest non partisan news would be replaced by the toxic, overtly partisan, biased and dishonest news coverage familiar to American citizens who listen to Fox News and talk radio

http://www.politicsplus.org/blog/2011/03/07/why-fox-is-banned-in-canada/

Hilarious! :D Canada is relatively conservative too, aside from all that socialist national healthcare nonsense ;)

dp
01-18-2012, 11:20 AM
I should have been more explicit in my statement just as you should have done your homework

FOX as in FOX News is banned in Canada

That is interesting - Fox has been banned, not for lying in Canada, but because they may lie in Canada. In the US we have the first amendment to counter that kind over over-reaching government control. The result is we decide if we wish to listen to Fox news or CNN news, for example. In this regard Canada has more in common with Iran than the free world. Sad to see.


Now what was that definition of "Dumber"

Not having the protections our first amendment brings?

lazlo
01-18-2012, 11:26 AM
In the US we have the first amendment to counter that kind over over-reaching government control. The result is we decide if we wish to listen to Fox news or CNN news

Not really. Fox viewers are a very specific demographic, and they'll believe anything they hear on Fox. Everything else is "Mass Media", which is biased :p

Pretty amusing when even Alistair is pointing out how Fox is canned propaganda :)


Predicting the imminent stampede, let me be the first to say: "In before the lock!" :D

Black_Moons
01-18-2012, 11:27 AM
That is interesting - Fox has been banned, not for lying in Canada, but because they may lie in Canada. In the US we have the first amendment to counter that kind over over-reaching government control. The result is we decide if we wish to listen to Fox news or CNN news, for example. In this regard Canada has more in common with Iran than the free world. Sad to see.

Not having the protections our first amendment brings?

No, Its not because they 'may lie' its because they 'have lied'

Its the exact same as why we don't let american criminals cross the boarder.
Its not because they 'May' commit criminal acts, But because they *have* commited criminal acts, And just because they did'nt do it in this country does not matter, As we have no reasonable expectation for them to magicly reform when they cross the boarder.

See, What we expected was when people say "News" they actualy sorta speak the truth, Unless they are clearly a satire show like the daily show or colbert report (Athough I don't think they actualy call themselfs news do they?)... Though come to think of it, They likey speak more truth then most news shows.

Now, if it was 'Fox talk show' where they said BS, that would be allowed. Or 'Fox 24 hour informerical' that would also be acceptable and they would be allowed to lie all they want.

But when I turn on the news, I at least expect what im hearing to be based in fact, Even if it will be 'biased'.

dp
01-18-2012, 11:36 AM
No, Its not because they 'may lie' its because they 'have lied'

In Canada? I thought they were not broadcasting there. If they are not broadcasting there then they are not lying there.

I don't see how that differentiates them from CNN or MSNBC, though. Both have made gross blunders in reporting. My hunch is since it is a leftist cabal that is fighting Fox in Canada it is more about politics than news or freedom.

dp
01-18-2012, 11:39 AM
Not really. Fox viewers are a very specific demographic, and they'll believe anything they hear on Fox. Everything else is "Mass Media", which is biased :p

And how is this different than people who believe everything MSNBC and CNN say? They too are a very specific demographic.

I don't watch any of them and don't have a dog in the fight, but I'm against, on principle, censorship. I'm that way with smoking in public, too - I don't smoke but if you do then know I'm on your side. I'm surprised to be somewhat unique in regards censorship.

Black_Moons
01-18-2012, 11:40 AM
In Canada? I thought they were not broadcasting there. If they are not broadcasting there then they are not lying there.

I don't see how that differentiates them from CNN or MSNBC, though. Both have made gross blunders in reporting. My hunch is since it is a leftist cabal that is fighting Fox in Canada it is more about politics than news or freedom.

No, they where lying somewhere on earth, and apparently that is good enough. Why is it so hard to believe that because they lie through thier teeth in the USA that we should'nt even bother giving them the chance to lie here?

You don't let criminals from other countrys enter the USA because you don't believe they will behave any better in the USA then where they came from. Why should canada be any diffrent about fox news considering what fox news has done is considered criminal in canada? (Or at least, Against civil laws..)

As for CNN/MSNBC, gross blunder != lying, And well, I don't watch them either. Don't even have cable anymore. Worthless brain drain.

JoeFin
01-18-2012, 11:47 AM
In the US we have the first amendment to counter that kind over over-reaching government control.

Not having the protections our first amendment brings?

I don't have a problem with FUX News saying what they do - I just have a problem with them calling it NEWS when technically it is political commentary with an obvious political slant

Being a Vet I fought for the 1st Amendment Rights FUX News chooses to abuse

The Fairness Doctrine was intended to protect Americans from being deceived. It merely required broadcasters to portray BOTH sides of the story - The True "We Report / You Decide"

JoeFin
01-18-2012, 11:59 AM
"In before the lock!" :D

LMAO

I'll be the first to apologize publicly here on the forum for denigrating this topic to political tripe

Information is good and we should not abuse the opportunity so graciously allowed us by the owner of this forum

Weston Bye
01-18-2012, 12:41 PM
Let me say that I take some personal offense to some of the comments on this thread.

I feel that I'm being denigrated for believing the possibility that there may be a grain of truth coming from right end of the media spectrum as well as the left end. I try not to keep to a steady stream from either end, but rather to test the truth by comparing opposite points of view.

You guys, who I otherwise admire and respect, have had a free-for-all of right wing bashing here on this thread. I'm disappointed.

loose nut
01-18-2012, 12:53 PM
Could be the "right wing" has earned the bashing.

lakeside53
01-18-2012, 12:55 PM
It's mainly the "pot stiring" Canadiens:D

dp
01-18-2012, 01:58 PM
No, they where lying somewhere on earth, and apparently that is good enough. Why is it so hard to believe that because they lie through thier teeth in the USA that we should'nt even bother giving them the chance to lie here?

Because in my mind prior constraint by the government is a greater offense than something I can fix by turning the dial.

Evan
01-18-2012, 02:17 PM
The "prior constraint (sic)" is a federal law here the makes it illegal to publish "False news". We do have a right to free speech but among other limitations that the US also imposes we have the limitation that news reported must be true.

Evan
01-18-2012, 02:27 PM
I do hope that there are at least a few people here that realize that Black Moons didn't mention Fox News. He wrote "faux" news. That is french for False or Fake, as in faux furs.

Willy
01-18-2012, 02:33 PM
It's mainly the "pot stiring" Canadiens:D

Hey!
We're not pot stirrers...we're pot smokers.:D

From the National Post (http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/01/18/hugh-macintyre-the-economic-argument-for-legalized-marijuana/)




The Liberal Party over the weekend voted to “legalize and regulate” the selling of marijuana.

John Stevenson
01-18-2012, 02:34 PM
Could be some truth in it, just got an email off Tiffie.

I know emails are personal but I'm sure he wouldn't mind me sharing this one below.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/stevenson.engineers/lsteve/files/swonder.jpghttp://homepage.ntlworld.com/stevenson.engineers/lsteve/files/swonder.jpghttp://homepage.ntlworld.com/stevenson.engineers/lsteve/files/swonder.jpghttp://homepage.ntlworld.com/stevenson.engineers/lsteve/files/swonder.jpg