Freedom on the Internet

Should the internet be unregulated or should government's censor and take control?

Bi0Hazard: Governments already censor and take control. I support it. Just because it's the internet doesn't mean existing laws shouldn't apply there.

admin: but don't you agree that freedom of speech should still exist on the internet even in countries where there is no true freedom of speech?

admin: For example, we should allow people to say what they want, so we shouldn't criminalize sites that speak positively towards eating disorders or things like that.
This may be an exception: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35505996

Bi0Hazard: Not really. I'd encourage those countries to change their laws but freedom of speech has always been limited in some ways. I don't see why the internet should be any particular exception. Use of technology, after all, does fall under a national jurisdiction.

admin: Why not allow universal freedom of speech on the internet?

Bi0Hazard: Do you honestly believe people should be free to post child porn on the internet?

admin: There can be exceptions. There should be no restrictions of speech on the internet unless maybe it interferes with state interests. Alright, I am a bit contradicting myself here and accepting your side. However, freedom of speech on the internet wouldn't be a bad idea. I live in the U.S., so other countries are not much of a concern for me, but having the U.S. version of freedom of speech is what we need. I guess your right in saying that governments should be able to limit speech. Since you live in New Zealand, I am sure you accept the New Zealand version.

admin: Otherwise I would have to accept allowing child porn and stuff like that, and we can't accept one countries values over the others.

Bi0Hazard: Sure. So if a state should be allowed to limit what is printed in a newspaper, the same standard should apply to what they limit on the internet, IMHO.

admin: A big difference is that the internet is world wide.

Bi0Hazard: And newspapers aren't published world wide?

admin: The internet isn't owned or controlled by one country, but is a global system. That is why I thought freedom of speech should remain universal on the internet and independent of any government, but then I realized that people shouldn't be able to post just whatever.

Bi0Hazard: Sure the internet is a global system, but anything PUT on the internet is controlled by a country. The internet's fairly meaningless without websites and stuff.

admin: Better to jack off to children than to go out and rape them.

Either way, government isn't the best vessel for fighting internet injustice. Possibly the worst.

Priest of Swag: But for child abuse, such images wouldn't exist in the first place. I think it's fair to say most people oppose child abuse. What vessel would you suggest is better suited to combating the problem of illegal pornography?

admin: Despite terrible organization, internet hackers have shut down more illegal activity than the FBI, and I am pretty sure the FBI has shut down more black web sites than all the other world government organizations combined.

admin: Most "child porn" is actually m8's 14-17, in which most people dont even give a damn but the government. An example of why government "justice" sucks.

Priest of Swag: So basically, vigilante justice?

admin: Any justice not delivered by the government fits that definition...