India Joins China in Censoring Websites 303
cpatil writes "On the directions of the government of India, Indian ISPs have started censoring and blocking web properties. This was first noticed by Indian bloggers and upon inquiring with their respective ISPs, the actions are confirmed. Unfortunately, Blogspot and TypePad are the targets till now." There's an ongoing discussion of the censorship on GoogleGroups. The rediff.com coverage linked above indicates that the blocking is based on a list issued by India's Department of Telecommunications.
I support State censorship of all media (Score:3, Interesting)
The reason I support State censorship of all media is the same reason why I support the State in all of its madness: the more they do to harm us, the more the free market will provide means for entrepreneurs to find new ways around the madness.
Many of the towns near me have increased their sales tax: up to 9% in some towns! The free market provided loopholes around sales tax for years, and the Internet is the ultimate form of working around the local madness. I don't buy very much locally anymore, and I get to save a huge amount that the State would usually get. It makes me laugh when the local politicians argue about what they're losing to the web. They stole from me, now I get to take it back.
Many of the towns near me are starting to create smoke free "public places" which exist within private property. You can't smoke in restaurants, bars, nightclubs, anywhere. The free market is opening up amazing private property venues for me -- I've already visited 4 private dinner clubs -- the houses of famous and strong chefs in the region who gave up their jobs in order to provide exceptional meals to private consumers. They don't charge a fee, they ask for a donation. For US$50, I can get an amazing meal that gets around most of the regulations of the restaurant-restrictions placed. I can smoke, the chef can cook foods in ways that restaurants often can't, and I pay less than 1/3rd of the usual fee. Some dinner clubs include great wine, and the service is top notch. The chef doesn't worry about income taxes or permits or paying off the local zoning authority and health agency -- and I have yet to hear of anyone getting sick or the like. Good for me, good for the chef, bad for the State.
Let the State censor all of us -- it will only give entrepreneurs more reason to find anonymous replacements of the publicly regulated web. Give it time and who knows what will happen. If every device will be State-required to have some sort of "control" mechanism or DRM or who-knows-what, someone will develop a private hive network on our cell phones or PDAs or old hardware. As long as the State restricts, the market will find ways to provide.
The State: let it grow, let it restrain, let it fail to provide and let the imbeciles that support it think they're doing good for others. I've already found my ways to ignore it in 70% of my life. Eventually I'll extend that more, and not be concerned with what the mad majority wants to do this year that will harm people for generations.
Good for innovation (Score:3, Interesting)
Censorship in a technically savvy, non-repressed country, will spur censorship-circumvention technology by leaps and bounds.
All your TOR are belong to us? (Score:4, Interesting)
Then they came for the religous prosthelizers. I was not a religous prosthelizer.
Then they came for the pornographers. I was not a pornographer.
Then they came for the bloggers. That day I got religion and began standing up for my right to sell p0rn.
not completely new (Score:4, Interesting)
However, censoring blog sites is a step down, why would they do this?
"The list [of censored sites] is confidential and I can't make it public"
It seems like they are trying to push some sort of hidden agenda.
Cencorship sucks (Score:3, Interesting)
Not that I condone the blocking of the 22 sites. Opinion, no matter how counter culturalistic, or hard to swallow must be allowed to be expressed.
The good out of this is that Indian bloggers have filed an application for release the list of the 22 sites blocked. I am very interested to know which sites were officially blocked and why? I have a suspicision that this could have something to do with recent bombings in India. For now, I guess its wait and see.
Re:I support State censorship of all media (2) (Score:5, Interesting)
When the State decides to censor people, it comes in two ways: direct censorship ("You can't talk about subject A") and indirect censorship ("You can't talk about subject B that someone else already talked about"). Subject A is the type of censorship that China and now India are doing. Subject B covers copyright and patents -- both are censorships against words and actions a person wants to perform with his own time, on his own property, using his own body and tools.
There is only one reason for either type of censorship: to protect the interests of an elite individual or group. Subject B censorship (copyright and patents) protects distribution cartels -- the few who control the distribution of content or specific items. Subject A censorship (direct prevention of talking about a certain subject) protects the State itself -- giving major power that is usually used against "enemies" of the State. Both States are corrupt -- if you go to jail because of a corrupt system, there is little that can be done to protect your interests.
We'll hear cries for our own State to work against the States that are censoring others, even though the State we live in is no better. I guess the best defense for my black-market support around censorship is that some eggs will break in order to make the best omelet. Some people will go to jail or will just disappear -- these are those who are directly harmed by the State. Yet millions more will be given more freedoms in whatever the free/black market provides to get around the restrictions and regulations. Over time, this will make us more free in the shadow of the State -- eventually technology will get to the point that no restrictions will be possible on anything the State does. This is a _good_ thing and it is why I consider the "Internet" the most anarcho-capitalist society in existence.
Do I want to be the one to disappear in a cell (or a ditch)? Absolutely not. I was recently in China, and everyone there already has good ways around the State. The government can pretend that their censorship is working, but most Westerners are completely ignorant of the reason behind censorship by China (and India, where I also just visited for almost a month) -- jailing political opponents. The censorship has nothing to do with real topics or anonymous groups -- it is just another tool for the State to get rid of their opponents. It is no different that the "Watch your neighbor" tactics of the USSR, and the US decades ago.
Re:I support State censorship of all media (Score:5, Interesting)
Bearing in mind that we call such free marketeers "pirates" and "terrorists" and toruture and shoot them.
Thank you for your patronage and enjoy your Soviet style "free market." We couldn't do it without you.
The State
KFG
Re:I support State censorship of all media (2) (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:support State censorship of all media (Score:1, Interesting)
in India.
Indians, by and large, have a very strong culturally motivated tendency to embrace authority and to support the people being regulated.
Of course there are exceptions, but the norm in India definitely tends toward acceptance of authority.
Re:I support State censorship of all media (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, I hear there's a lot of private support for poverty! So, what happened to the war on that?
The State at every level in the US is the biggest producer of poverty. No State mandate, regulation or program has helped more people than it harmed, so why do we even bother with new programs?
Temporary? (Score:1, Interesting)
Another possibility is some sort of retaliation for the Mumbai bombing.
Regardless, only rumours at the moment. So take with as large a grain of salt as you choose.
Re:I support State censorship of all media (2) (Score:4, Interesting)
State sponsored health care kills thousands if not millions of people every year. Try releasing a much needed experimental drug to people who are willing to try it -- you'd go to jail. Try charging less to a poor patient than you charge the State -- you'll go to jail (the US government has an entire office dedicated to finding doctors that charge less than they charge Medicare). Try bringing more doctors to the market than the AMA/US wants -- it is illegal.
Try providing alternative water or electricity in your neighborhood -- you'll go to jail. In my previous town I spoke with various neighbors about uniting together to get a large generator installed on our block (this was pre-Y2K, and some people were concerned). We received various competing bids but were told that the local town wouldn't allow it. When we asked for a variance we were told we couldn't do it, and when we tried to do it anyway we were threatened with fines. When we asked what would happen if we didn't pay the fines we were threatened with court and jail time. True story.
Re:And I get told I'm crazy... (Score:4, Interesting)
I remember when the Right in the US was against public schooling, public health care and welfare. That is no longer true. I remember when the Left in the US was against Big Business, internal improvements and war. Again, no longer true. By "center" you just mean "center-Statist." There are two sides of the political coin: those who believe in the market of competition and those who believe in the monopoly of force. Center/Left/Right-ists are aligned on the monopoly of force side of the coin.
Re:I support State censorship of all media (Score:3, Interesting)
Thats the most weak and naieve thing ive ever read. Have you considered the possibilty of you being shot or locked up long before such devices - which would certainly be illegal to produce, distribute, possess - come into exsistance? Not to mention the idea of retreating into a secret world where i have to closely watch my behavior in all public (and private?) places. The idea that you think of it being nessecary to carry around some sort of anonymous framework to protect yourself from going to jail is so stupid i cannot even comment any more on it.
Re:I guess this means... (Score:2, Interesting)
Easy way to get around online censorship (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I support State censorship of all media (2) (Score:2, Interesting)
Interesting how one majorly flawed implementation can make you come to such a conclusion. Do you always base your ideas on so little information?
I'm not even going to counter your argument, because your argument only points out known flaws in the US implementation of state sponsored health care, and not in the concept as such.
Try providing alternative water or electricity in your neighborhood -- you'll go to jail. In my previous town I spoke with various neighbors about uniting together to get a large generator installed on our block (this was pre-Y2K, and some people were concerned). We received various competing bids but were told that the local town wouldn't allow it. When we asked for a variance we were told we couldn't do it, and when we tried to do it anyway we were threatened with fines. When we asked what would happen if we didn't pay the fines we were threatened with court and jail time. True story.
Ah, you ran into the state imposed monopoly on running cables and such. You may want to go take a look in a typical southeast asian city for a clue why that is in fact a very good idea.
Breaking the law gets you fined and not paying fines gets you in jail? the horror!
But then.. buying a generator because of y2k? I guess that tells it all.
Re:Democracy sure does equal freedom (Score:4, Interesting)
I agree, but you left the US off your list of countries. I'm not sure if that was intentional or not, but you did all the same. There are plenty of examples of banned media in the US which needed neither violence nor fraud to be created. You can read more here [upenn.edu] and here [banned-books.com].
Re:I support State censorship of all media (2) (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:I support State censorship of all media (2) (Score:2, Interesting)
Where do you draw the line? (Score:2, Interesting)
So where do you draw the line? When can we stop calling India the biggest democracy in the world? Should we really do that or this is nothing compared to anywhere else in the world?
Ok, how about: "stay the hell out of my state." (Score:1, Interesting)
Please stay the hell out of my state. The great-grandparent's attitude is the same kind of attitude that has made Los Angeles a sprawling unlivable armpit of the country; made Atlanta in to one giant 30 mile wide traffic jam; created a country that essentially can't operate without almost every individual driving each day; costs taxpayers untold amounts of money running roads, sewers, and services to idiotic locations; and hundreds of other painful externalities that everyone else has to suffer even if the runoff from your mine doesn't ruin our water, or the slope instability your clearcut logging doesn't wash away someone else's house, or your high-rise condo doesn't immediately fall off the bluff in to the ocean, or...
We all live in this society and as populations increase, we also increasing share the impacts of things individuals do to their own property. As such, land use laws help prevent you from subsidizing other people's changes, and protect the quality of life for everyone in an area.
It's also worth noting that well managed land use laws also have an impact on prosperity: businesses are more likely to locate in desirable areas; people are more likely to choose to live in desirable areas; and high-paying service oriented businesses may be more profitable in desirable areas because qualified people may not need enticement of much higher salaries to locate there.
But that's really an aside to the fact that this isn't a frontier anymore and we do have to live together. There are few quicker ways to permanently ruin a state than to gut its land use laws.