Internet without laws 'a recipe for anarchy'

Hi,

I read this on the Australian nine msn site and thought it would be a good topic for a serious discussion hence I posted it in the General Developer Forum. While I agree that social networking sites, etc can be used to abuse others I doubt that will solve the problem of the abuse. Besides if a hacker is experienced or disparate enough what is stopping him or her from hacking the system?

Quote:

---

Source: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/...pe-for-anarchy

Communications minister Stephen Conroy has defended Australia's proposed internet filter by arguing that allowing websites to remain uncensored is a "recipe for anarchy".

In an interview with Fairfax Media, Senator Conroy said that the internet was not "special" and should be censored in the same way as books, films and newspapers.

"This argument that the internet is some mystical creation that no laws should apply to, that is a recipe for anarchy and the wild west," he said.

"I believe in a civil society and in a civil society people behave the same way in the physical world as they behave in the virtual world."

His comments come amid growing debate over the issue of online censorship, which has been fuelled by the rise in Facebook tribute page attacks both in Australia and overseas.

At least some of the vandalism — known online as "trolling" — is linked to the websites 4chan and Encyclopedia Dramatica, both of which are set to be banned under Senator Conroy's internet filter.

It is believed "trolls" sometimes use these websites as gathering points to launch attacks on Facebook tribute pages.

TROLLING

Trolling first gained notoriety in the Australian press in February after the alleged stabbing death of 12-year-old Queensland schoolboy Elliot Fletcher.

Vandals defaced his Facebook tribute page with photographs of bestiality and murder. One picture showed Elliot's head with the words "woot, I'm dead" above it.

OPINION: Why you shouldn't feed trolls

The attacks continued last month when trolls attacked Facebook memorial pages for dead Bundaberg girl Trinity Bates.

Since then, several more similar vandalism attacks have occurred — including on pages for NSW surfer Saxon Bird and Mudgee teenager Michelle Morrissey.

Now the US and the UK have joined calls for online social networks to strike out against troublemakers after dead teenagers in those countries were mocked in similar attacks.

NBC's TODAY show in the US featured a special segment on the trolling following the suicide of popular high school student Alex Pilkington last Sunday.

Trolls attacked her tribute page — not hosted on Facebook but by another website called Formspring — in the hours after her death.

New York police are investigating the messages, with some in her community calling for the trolls to be prosecuted.

Ms Pilkington also received harassing internet messages before her suicide, but her parents say she was in therapy about other issues for some time.

CRACKDOWN

In the wake of the Pilkington attack, Formspring changed the way messages were published. Page administrators now have the ability to decline or allow anonymous comments.

Many say this is the sort of capability Facebook should implement. The website on Tuesday sent a memo to users explaining how to fight back against the vandals.

"In light of these events, we wanted to remind you of the different options available to page administrators to help you moderate the content on your page," the memo said.

"Ban fans that are being abusive. If a fan of your page is repeatedly posting inappropriate content, you can go beyond reporting the fan by banning them from your page by following these instructions."

Users were also reminded how to remove photographs and videos posted by trolls.

The family of Charlotte Wilson, a 16-year-old British student killed in a car accident, said their complaints to Facebook had fallen on deaf ears.

"We've complained to Facebook ... these are cruel and wicked things, just sick and twisted," Charlotte's aunt Sharon Brennan was quoted in the Yorkshire Post as saying.

Trolls infiltrated Charlotte's page with photographs, including one of Jim Carrey sticking his head out of a window with the message "Your dead LOL" above it.

The same image was posted on Saxon Bird's tribute page and has been linked to 4chan.

Ninemsn gathered evidence last month that members of 4chan orchestrated attacks against Trinity Bates' tribute page.

"Help us honor and cherish the memory of Trinity Bates RIP girl," a 4chan user wrote.

Earlier, another user wrote: "You'll have to do some subtle trolling/grieving if you want to get in to the Rest in Peace Elliott Fletcher group without being banned on spot".

FILTER

4chan and Encyclopedia Dramatica — both of which contain obscene material — were included on a purported list of websites set to be banned under Australia's proposed internet filter, which was leaked online last year.

In the Fairfax interview with Senator Conroy, he said his goal with the filter was to "ensure that particularly children ... don't stumble across" child pornography, bestiality, extreme violence and pro-rape websites.

"If we know there are 355 websites today that have child pornographic images on it, should we say well we're not going to do anything about it?" he said.

He admitted that the filter would not block the spread of such material over P2P file sharing services.

The government plans to introduce legislation for the filter within weeks.

---

Nightwalker

It's too vague. How do they propose to censor? Who gets to decide?

Its just another argument for Censorship !!

I don't agree with some politician deciding what i can and cant see on the Internet. They will generally get it wrong and over censor and what they are doing in Australia has disturbing parallels with the China's great fire wall !

If you start down the road where the government can censor, who decides what people can and cannot see. This includes state secrets for the most part. There are plenty of cases where the government denied access to classified material sought by some group, then eventually relented. In every case that I am aware of, the secret proved to be somebodies colossal screw-up. It is quite possible the a secret that should truly be kept secret is one that nobody is seeking to find out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker

It's too vague.

---

Yeah, that's what some people were saying! In other countries you have laws against child porn, etc which are fine. However, this is taking censorship a bit too far.

Actually, it is taking censorship wherever you want to go today, which is why it's a bad idea. There are certain restrictions on free speech in every society, but they need to be spelled out fairly precisely, as there are elements in every society that would like to ban every form of speech (not every element wanting to ban every form, but every form objected to by at least one group). If censorship is ok, and there aren't any rules as to what is allowable, then the censorship will be driven by the most influential group or groups, and most everybody loses that way.

Think of Internet and free speech as separate entities. We're already accustomed to lip service being paid to free speech, it doesn't actually exist. Look at capitalism, laissez faire, democracy and free economy. They existed in theory, in practice, governments do intervene and so you have a derivative of what they're supposed to be. We probably feel strongly about this issue because these are the pioneering days of the Internet and we're used to the freedom of the Internet. Once the laws are applied (and they will), the newer generations will grow up with it and think it's perfectly acceptable. I'm not saying it's a good thing or a bad thing, what I am saying is that we're likely biased about it because of the context of what the Internet is to us.