Clinton And Trump want to police the internet and dismiss free speech

[mauricio]

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20151207/21225233018/two-leading-presidential-candidates-clinton-trump-both-mocked-free-speech-internet.shtml

Give your rights away or else the terrorists will get ya.

[dtq123]

 :57:

[Baruch]

I feel sorry for the fool ... who is surprised by any of this.  I will protect you they say ... just make me dictator!  Also no encryption ... math and privacy must be banned, or the Muzzies will get us!  The ideal country that everyone wants to be, including the US ... isn't the US anymore, it is China.  Even my cat is saying ... Mao, mao ...

[josephpalazzo]

Sorry, but I'm with them. There is no such thing as ABSOLUTE free speech. You can't scream "fire" in a theatre because of the potential loss of life in a human stampede that cry would trigger. Similarly, terrorists who use the internet to recruit and perpetrate their atrocities should not be able to operate so freely. You might argue that the authority might abuse and stifle freedom. I'd rather have that any day than let a bunch of barbarians chopping off heads on the internet.

[Sal1981]

ffs

[Hydra009]

"You’re going to hear all of the usual complaints, you know, freedom of speech, et cetera. But if we truly are in a war against terrorism and we are truly looking for ways to shut off their funding, shut off the flow of foreign fighters, then we’ve got to shut off their means of communicating. It’s more complicated with some of what they do on encrypted apps, and I’m well aware of that, and that requires even more thinking about how to do it."

Shut off their means of communicating? These tools are tools that everyone uses -- and, in fact, which Hillary Clinton herself did a tremendous amount of (good) work helping to spread around the globe as Secretary of State. And now she's trying to cut it all off?

Oh noez, Clinton is going to shut down the internet!

"Clinton said at a Washington event that ISIS is “using web sites, social media, chat rooms and other platforms to celebrate beheadings, recruit future terrorists and call for attacks,” and asked Silicon Valley to crack down on the terror group." Source

Or maybe she just wants to squelch jihadi social media and websites that ISIS uses.  You know, like we've more or less been doing already.

So yeah, not exactly the best evidence of her wanting to police the internet and dismiss free speech.

[Baruch]

Yes ... we must have separate water fountains (and Internet) from law abiding people and brown people ... and shut down the water fountains (and Internet) that the brown people are using.

Josephpalazzo ... so will you be ready when the Gestapo come for you?  After you have thrown everyone else under the bus.

[mauricio]

Oh noez, Clinton is going to shut down the internet!

"Clinton said at a Washington event that ISIS is “using web sites, social media, chat rooms and other platforms to celebrate beheadings, recruit future terrorists and call for attacks,” and asked Silicon Valley to crack down on the terror group." Source

Or maybe she just wants to squelch jihadi social media and websites that ISIS uses.  You know, like we've more or less been doing already.

So yeah, not exactly the best evidence of her wanting to police the internet and dismiss free speech.

she literally hand waved free speech... as if that is not a valid argument, the fight against Islamist rhetoric is about creating a counter narrative not trying to censor them, definitely not giving the government the power to circumvent internet privacy and private websites policies to do it. Most popular social media platforms already have TOS that banS them, thought obviously this is the internet you can always avoid bans and use encryption and if you open a door for the government there you fuck up the entire concept. This "solution" could bring much more problems considering who this candidates are and who pays them. And the constant push by governments to end anonymity online and criminalize victim-less activities online.

[josephpalazzo]

Personally, I'm against anonymity on the net. You should use your real name and you should be responsible for every word you put on the net. What the internet has encouraged is bullying, spreading false rumors, lies, falsehoods and all that is the lowest in human nature. Any media, be it books, TV or the net, it should strive for the best in enlightenment, and those who abuse them should be taken to court. My two cents.

[mauricio]

Personally, I'm against anonymity on the net. You should use your real name and you should be responsible for every word you put on the net. What the internet has encouraged is bullying, spreading false rumors, lies, falsehoods and all that is the lowest in human nature. Any media, be it books, TV or the net, it should strive for the best in enlightenment, and those who abuse them should be taken to court. My two cents.

fine as long as people keep their freedom to remain anonymous, I only oppose attempts to forcefully remove anonymity.

[Baruch]

Personally, I'm against anonymity on the net. You should use your real name and you should be responsible for every word you put on the net. What the internet has encouraged is bullying, spreading false rumors, lies, falsehoods and all that is the lowest in human nature. Any media, be it books, TV or the net, it should strive for the best in enlightenment, and those who abuse them should be taken to court. My two cents.

You just got to go there, didn't you ;-(  We must have the Pope be the only poster, and only when he is ex cathedra ... otherwise any other post must be put on the List of Forbidden Posts.  Please go confess to your local priest, today!  Of course I would have a lot of Catholic ancestors who would agree with you.

[doorknob]

I think what she's proposing is proposterous. Any one buying this doesn't know how technology works. There are infinite ways to get around anything they throw at the terrorists AKA hackers. So yes this is a huge deal and free speech is threatened for all the users who don't know how technology works or care to learn. But what you all don't realize is that it's already too late for that.

There is literally a digital trail leading straight back to you if you aren't covering your butt and most aren't. I could tell you stories upon stories of scary security breaches and leaks found by white hat hackers. And those hackers have been afraid to report these breaches in security to cover their own butts since any hacking at all is now illegal. I'm little closer to the white hat's than most since I have a few friends in IT. I'm sure every one's heard stories though.

the point of what I was saying though is that there are already white hat and black hat hackers spying on us all as we speak. And some of them I'm sure work for the government. Not to mention spy wear that companies now track us all with. Nothing is anonymous trust me on that one.

[Baruch]

Understandable frustration ... wanting to do piss ant measures of censorship, when we really want to go up to a foreigner, kill him, and use the top of his skull to drink his blood ... so we can show him that we ... we are the civilized ones ;-(  If you are that, look in the mirror, take your meds, get sober.  Rambos ... all Stallone and no stallion.

[Hydra009]

Personally, I'm against anonymity on the net. You should use your real name and you should be responsible for every word you put on the net. What the internet has encouraged is bullying, spreading false rumors, lies, falsehoods and all that is the lowest in human nature. Any media, be it books, TV or the net, it should strive for the best in enlightenment, and those who abuse them should be taken to court. My two cents.

My position is the exact opposite.  I strongly support internet anonymity.  It allows for freer and more candid speech, since it carries less risk of government or personal reprisal.  There are drawbacks of course, but the same anonymity that allows for bullying and gossip also allows for political activism that would otherwise be repressed and criticism of religion that would otherwise bring violence down on the critic.

I mean, imagine if your proposal took effect on AF.  Some of us post from places that aren't exactly atheist-friendly.  And a lot of us have friends and family that would probably hit the roof if they knew we were atheists, let alone our other stances.  Would that proposal have more desirable consequences than undesirable ones?

[Baruch]

Totalitarianism is always grasping for more power.  Often under the flag of law and order, and to save us from our fears.  Worked in Germany just fine.