dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7
share rss forum feed


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

3 recommendations

reply to FF4m3

Re: Anonymous Wants DDoS Attacks Recognized As Speech

Their right to free speech stops at the point where it infringes on others' rights of access. That is the balance that must always exist for a society to remain free in any meaningful sense of that word. DDOS, by definition, is Distributed Denial of Service. One may have a right to picket and chant on a public street, but that right ends at the point where it blockades and denies others' right of access to a facility. Normally, the authorities (and wise protest leaders) will make sure that both picketers and folks crossing the line get a reasonable opportunity to act in each one's own interests. But with DDOS (and much of the "occupy" mindset), there is no such mediation or moderation... the DDOS attackers simply seek to block everybody else, period. That has nothing to do with "free speech", but has everything to do with bullying and coercion. As such, it is way out of line in any responsible and free society.

As far as the White House website petitions, they are simply an exercise in garnering publicity for all involved. They carry no legal meaning whatsoever.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
said by Blackbird:

Their right to free speech stops at the point where it infringes on others' rights of access.

Not exactly, you still have the right to free speech when violating access laws. It's the access blocked that is to be dealt with. I/m presuming that they really want it acknowledge that a DISRUPTION caused by DDOS is an equivalent form of protest (for a building) or disruption(picketing of a building).

said by Blackbird:

One may have a right to picket and chant on a public street, but that right ends at the point where it blockades and denies others' right of access to a facility.

No, that opinion is at the discretion of the relevant authorities to either charge, move on or even allow to continue and even change their minds repeatedly.

said by Blackbird:

Normally, the authorities (and wise protest leaders) will make sure that both picketers and folks crossing the line get a reasonable opportunity to act in each one's own interests. But with DDOS (and much of the "occupy" mindset), there is no such mediation or moderation... the DDOS attackers simply seek to block everybody else, period. That has nothing to do with "free speech", but has everything to do with bullying and coercion. As such, it is way out of line in any responsible and free society.

The DDOS attack's will effect time/cost factors to the target. All those that propose a DDOS as free speech, must then way up was it the only action that could be taken, until it's better understood through the courts as to the nature of the action.
I feel community standards will say that an internet outfit (national or global) has as much right to Picketing as bricks and mortar but costs to the target will still be an issue.
Knowing that, the media is still probably the best avenue to bring to light their plights.

Sending letters to people for contributing to digital protest to appear in court is a lot better than wasting resources on the chance that some will clash with people/authorities.

--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!