moschopsPremium
join:2003-12-20
Oakland, CA | "Pirated content" filtering If they start filtering "pirated content" it is only a mater of time before they decide to start filtering "illegal content". But "illegal content" is whatever the courts say it is that week.
I can see it now, all we need now is a widespread distributed attack on US websites and Internet addresses that causes the same kind of problems they had in Estonia. Before you know it there will be a sudden patriotic surge to defend the internet from cyberterrorists. The Department of Homeland Security will require ISPs to start filtering external packets from networks on demand, and all kinds of other draconian filtering will become the norm.
Filtering will also be used as an excuse for "tiered Internet" because ATT will claim it costs them too much money to filter other networks content so it is easier to either exclude, restrict or charge for it to pass through to their customers.
I for one hope that pretty soon consumer driven mesh networks like Meraki become widespread enough to create completely independent carrier free networks. Of course Homeland Security would probably want to make those illegal too since only non-patriots (read "terrorists") would want to use such a network right? |
|
Asmodeus
join:2004-05-26
Spring Valley, CA | said by moschops:If they start filtering "pirated content" it is only a mater of time before they decide to start filtering "illegal content". But "illegal content" is whatever the courts say it is that week. can you please tell us which court has deemed something as illegal content and on which week...? i'd like to know so i can do my proper due diligence based on the hyperbole you've just made a claim to... thank you... |
|
moschopsPremium
join:2003-12-20
Oakland, CA | I think you missed the "it is only a mater of time before" part.
Regardless you seem to have forgotten there is already plenty of content deemed illegal - child porn would be one example, and the story is about another kind - copyright infringing content.
The question is would networks dare to start preemptively filtering content? I think the original story makes this obvious - yes.
But once you cite "national security" during a national crisis scenario virtually anything can be made illegal and get passed into law as Patriot I and II have proved. It can then take years for the Supreme Court to go back and overule such things as unconstitutional.
We may laugh about the Great China Firewall and how restricted the Chinese are, but it is clear that we are now laying the foundations for our very own wall - one packet filter at a time.
Cue Pink Floyd music... |
|
|
|
