David Cameron threatens to raid Ecuador's embassy in London if it does not hand over Julian Assange! Ecuador declares such a bold action would be considered a hostile and intolerable act as well as a violation of its sovereignty. Cameron asserts that under British law he can give Ecuadorians a week's notice before entering the premises and the embassy will no longer have diplomatic protection.
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Ecuadorean Foreign Minister Ricardo Patino says: We want to be very clear, we're not a British colony. The colonial times are over. The move announced in the official British statement, if it happens, would be interpreted by Ecuador as an unfriendly, hostile and intolerable act, as well as an attack on our sovereignty, which would force us to respond in the strongest diplomatic way.
Free Speech Debate declares we must be free and able to express ourselves, and to receive and impart information and ideas, regardless of frontiers. We defend the internet and all other forms of communication against illegitimate encroachments by kleptocrats. We require and create open, diverse media so we can make well-informed decisions and participate fully in political life. We allow no taboos in the discussion and dissemination of knowledge. http://venitism.blogspot.com
A group of Assange supporters have gathered outside the embassy to demand Assange's freedom and streamed the scene live on the Internet. Assange fears Sweden could send him on to the United States, where he believes authorities want to punish him for publishing thousands of secret U.S. diplomatic cables on WikiLeaks in 2010 in a major embarrassment for Washington.
Samuel Adams pointed out it does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. There's no real threat to free speech from private entities. It's only through the middle man of the state, either a court or a government inquisitor, that can actually shut you down. A private person could take you to a defamation court. He could engage in lawfare against you, but again that's using the tools of the state. And if you just simply fixed those laws of the state, you're protected from them. Public entities are the real threat, both through restrictive laws, such as the defamation law, and government agencies. Your government is your worst enemy!
Cybercensorship encourages freakish governments, such as the brutal government of Greece. On October 18, 2010, the Greek government stole my computer and my life at gunpoint. Mr. Samaras, bring my computer back! Enough is enough! Needless to say, I also demand my life back. Greece, the bully of blogosphere, has crossed the Rubicon against civility, terrorizing and robbing dissident bloggers. http://venitism.blogspot.com
Giving cybercensorship to blogbusters is giving gin to alcoholics! Blogbusters galore! Freak! Freak! Freak! The freakish government of Greece, the most corrupt country in Occident, steals computers! Robbing dissident bloggers and locking them in jail is a freakish behavior that does not belong to the European Union, not even to this galaxy! No wonder some vain Greeks boast they come from Andromeda galaxy!
Uri Rosenthal points out that standing up for freedom online is the logical next step to our age-old endeavor for freedom of speech. For centuries, this fundamental freedom has been the driver of democracy. The fight for freedom of speech continues. But in the last decades, it has taken on an extra dimension, that of freedom online. Freedom of speech online is no different from freedom of speech offline. Only now, we are faced with new technological possibilities and challenges.
Rosenthal notes we are still doing the same, only with different means, and much faster. Protecting freedom online is to safeguard its democratic potential. It is time for governments, companies, ICT experts, the academic community and civil society at large to join efforts. The freakish government of Greece stole my computer!
Since network neutrality first appeared in policy debates, its meaning has been less than crystal clear. Some advocates have argued that net neutrality demands that broadband Internet service providers (ISPs) treat all bits equally: a bit is a bit is a bit, while others make exceptions for malware bits, spam bits, child pornography bits, etc. Some advocates have argued that net neutrality must apply not only to wired broadband ISPs, but to wireless broadband providers as well, while others recognize that wireless broadband has a unique technological structure that requires more stringent and flexible capacity management than is consistent with a bit is a bit is a bit. Prophylactic regulation is not necessary, and may well reduce welfare. Sound policy is to wait for ex post evidence of harm to justify interventions in specific cases.
It is impossible to effectively control the flow of information in the digital age by law and technology without harming public freedoms, and damaging economic and social development. This is similar to the squaring of the circle, a problem that cannot be solved. The freakish government of Greece stole my computer!
Net-neutrality means the internet has no gatekeeper. It encompasses all the issues related to the circulation of information on the internet, such as free speech, access to knowledge, copyright, or innovation. Thanks to this principle, everyone retain the freedom to access and produce the information they want. Socialists want prioritization of certain information flows by taking control of the network. Kleptocrats threaten net-neutrality by seeking to implement filtering techniques in order to re-establish the kind of control they used to have on traditional media. http://venitism.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.