6 ms·

What does "Open Internet" mean though? You can't reasonably support free speech in all instances, just like you can't reasonably support an "open internet" in

What does "Open Internet" mean though? You can't reasonably support free speech in all instances, just like you can't reasonably support an "open internet" in all instances. There have to be some exceptions. It's the listing of those exceptions and how you deal with them that's the tricky bit. So saying "I support an open internet" is just ignoring the issue.

praptak 15y ago
> you can't reasonably support an "open internet" in all instances. There have to be some exceptions. Why? I am fine with the internet not blocking anything at all, even though I accept limits on free speech. To drag the "speech" analogy further, I can shout whatever I want and I'm ok with the fact that in some cases this can bring consequences.
- maximusprime 15y ago
  So if a company starts infringing trademarks, polluting search engines en masse, tricking people into buying their rubbish, phishing their details, getting credit card details etc, you'd be fine with that? What about people who DDoS attack you? Is that fine? No need to have any recourse there? How about those that hack DNS to dupe people into visiting their site etc Those are all "Open Internet", but they're also not very nice. I don't think it's as clear cut as some make it. I don't know if SOPA gets it right or wrong, or if the current laws are sufficient, but I'm glad we have some of those laws in place to make the internet a slightly nicer place.
  - DanBC 15y ago
    > No need to have any recourse there? I'm not sure why you'd say that, when the parent says > and I'm ok with the fact that in some cases this can bring consequences. Bad stuff happens on the Internet. People need a way to stop that bad stuff happening. SOPA is not that way.
  - Ein2015 15y ago
    "So if a company starts infringing trademarks, polluting search engines en masse, tricking people into buying their rubbish" eBay? also, already illegal based on trademarks, copyright, etc etc. "What about people who DDoS attack you? Is that fine? No need to have any recourse there?" "How about those that hack DNS to dupe people into visiting their site etc" already illegal -------------- from my understanding, SOPA is more about removing due process than making bad things illegal
  - markkanof 15y ago
    Those things are already illegal and SOPA doesn't address them anyway. I think the important point is that the internet should not be restricted in an attempt to preempt any criminal activity (because it won't work). Instead, the internet should be left alone, and those who choose to do illegal things on the internet should be prosecuted.
  - alexro 15y ago
    So, how SOPA makes anything better? You cannot blacklist a botnet, right? You cannot blacklist a scummer, as he would just setup another domain, right? Who you can very well blacklist is a small guy with his blog giving a honest opinion about reality, right?
  - pleasebehonest 15y ago
    Hold on. In this post of yours (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3382000 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3382000), you said: > I'm against SOPA as much as the next guy Here, you're saying you don't know whether to support the warrentless censorship of websites you disagree with. Why are you saying two different things?
revscat 15y ago
My list of what should be legally restricted in its availability is as follows: 1) Child pornography End list. National security is not enough of a reason for restrictions. Copyright is not enough of a reason. Further, the assumption that corporations or governments have exclusive moral authority to determine what constitutes impermissible material is, frankly, ridiculous. Giving them the authority to make such decisions is destructive, to both freedom and economy.
- maximusprime 15y ago
  I would personally add 2) Websites that are known for mallware, phishing, or otherwise going to mess you up. As I said I don't know if SOPA is good/bad, but my point was that "I support an Open Internet" is a bit of a cop out.
  - X-Istence 15y ago
    Even those websites should be allowed. Should we provide counter measures to help the user decide of a website is legitimate or not, absolutely, but their right to exist shouldn't be tampered with.
  - nextparadigms 15y ago
    That's a terrible idea. So if someone hacks my site and installs malware, my site should be taken down by the Government? There are anti-viruses, browser plugins, and even the browsers themselves protect you from stuff like that. You don't need the Government itself to do it, and they wouldn't be any more effective anyway. They would just abuse the power.
- dextorious 15y ago
  I would add: 2) SEO tips 3) Get things done technique websites to that list.
  - sdoering 15y ago
    if Sarcasm --> do.upvote else --> ignore ;-)
InclinedPlane 15y ago
At a minimum "open internet" means an internet that is not a constitution free zone.
fuzzylizard 15y ago
To me, Open Internet is the same as an open city. SOPA is like going into a city and shutting down a street corner because someone was heard quoting passages from a book or giving away pirated movies. It's ridiculous. Instead of closing down the website (the street corner) close down the people behind the site. The US, instead of enacting laws that restrict movement, needs to put into place laws that make copyright infringement illegal. Oh wait, they already have them. In short, go after the people not the domain. I want to be able to walk around the internet the same way I can walk around a city. If there are seedy places online then it is my choice to avoid them and not the governments right to simply declare them quarantined or off limits.
freejack 15y ago
Its a networking issue, not a legal or political issue. Big Media has decided to go to the mat to defend their dying business model at the expense of the Open Internet by lobbying for legislation like this. If you want to make the Internet safer, more secure, better for commerce, more accepting of DRM, whatever, then let's take that up as a technical discussion and figure out how to amend the infrastructure so that it continues to work. Hiving off slabs of address space and putting them under the control of national legislatures is the fastest and most direct way to ensure that the entire network stops working real quick.

praptak 15y ago

> you can't reasonably support an "open internet" in all instances. There have to be some exceptions. Why? I am fine with the internet not blocking anything at all, even though I accept limits on free speech. To drag the "speech" analogy further, I can shout whatever I want and I'm ok with the fact that in some cases this can bring consequences.

maximusprime 15y ago
So if a company starts infringing trademarks, polluting search engines en masse, tricking people into buying their rubbish, phishing their details, getting credit card details etc, you'd be fine with that? What about people who DDoS attack you? Is that fine? No need to have any recourse there? How about those that hack DNS to dupe people into visiting their site etc Those are all "Open Internet", but they're also not very nice. I don't think it's as clear cut as some make it. I don't know if SOPA gets it right or wrong, or if the current laws are sufficient, but I'm glad we have some of those laws in place to make the internet a slightly nicer place.
- DanBC 15y ago
  > No need to have any recourse there? I'm not sure why you'd say that, when the parent says > and I'm ok with the fact that in some cases this can bring consequences. Bad stuff happens on the Internet. People need a way to stop that bad stuff happening. SOPA is not that way.
- Ein2015 15y ago
  "So if a company starts infringing trademarks, polluting search engines en masse, tricking people into buying their rubbish" eBay? also, already illegal based on trademarks, copyright, etc etc. "What about people who DDoS attack you? Is that fine? No need to have any recourse there?" "How about those that hack DNS to dupe people into visiting their site etc" already illegal -------------- from my understanding, SOPA is more about removing due process than making bad things illegal
- markkanof 15y ago
  Those things are already illegal and SOPA doesn't address them anyway. I think the important point is that the internet should not be restricted in an attempt to preempt any criminal activity (because it won't work). Instead, the internet should be left alone, and those who choose to do illegal things on the internet should be prosecuted.
- alexro 15y ago
  So, how SOPA makes anything better? You cannot blacklist a botnet, right? You cannot blacklist a scummer, as he would just setup another domain, right? Who you can very well blacklist is a small guy with his blog giving a honest opinion about reality, right?
- pleasebehonest 15y ago
  Hold on. In this post of yours (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3382000 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3382000), you said: > I'm against SOPA as much as the next guy Here, you're saying you don't know whether to support the warrentless censorship of websites you disagree with. Why are you saying two different things?

revscat 15y ago

My list of what should be legally restricted in its availability is as follows: 1) Child pornography End list. National security is not enough of a reason for restrictions. Copyright is not enough of a reason. Further, the assumption that corporations or governments have exclusive moral authority to determine what constitutes impermissible material is, frankly, ridiculous. Giving them the authority to make such decisions is destructive, to both freedom and economy.

maximusprime 15y ago
I would personally add 2) Websites that are known for mallware, phishing, or otherwise going to mess you up. As I said I don't know if SOPA is good/bad, but my point was that "I support an Open Internet" is a bit of a cop out.
- X-Istence 15y ago
  Even those websites should be allowed. Should we provide counter measures to help the user decide of a website is legitimate or not, absolutely, but their right to exist shouldn't be tampered with.
- nextparadigms 15y ago
  That's a terrible idea. So if someone hacks my site and installs malware, my site should be taken down by the Government? There are anti-viruses, browser plugins, and even the browsers themselves protect you from stuff like that. You don't need the Government itself to do it, and they wouldn't be any more effective anyway. They would just abuse the power.
dextorious 15y ago
I would add: 2) SEO tips 3) Get things done technique websites to that list.
- sdoering 15y ago
  if Sarcasm --> do.upvote else --> ignore ;-)

InclinedPlane 15y ago

At a minimum "open internet" means an internet that is not a constitution free zone.

fuzzylizard 15y ago

To me, Open Internet is the same as an open city. SOPA is like going into a city and shutting down a street corner because someone was heard quoting passages from a book or giving away pirated movies. It's ridiculous. Instead of closing down the website (the street corner) close down the people behind the site. The US, instead of enacting laws that restrict movement, needs to put into place laws that make copyright infringement illegal. Oh wait, they already have them. In short, go after the people not the domain. I want to be able to walk around the internet the same way I can walk around a city. If there are seedy places online then it is my choice to avoid them and not the governments right to simply declare them quarantined or off limits.

freejack 15y ago

Its a networking issue, not a legal or political issue. Big Media has decided to go to the mat to defend their dying business model at the expense of the Open Internet by lobbying for legislation like this. If you want to make the Internet safer, more secure, better for commerce, more accepting of DRM, whatever, then let's take that up as a technical discussion and figure out how to amend the infrastructure so that it continues to work. Hiving off slabs of address space and putting them under the control of national legislatures is the fastest and most direct way to ensure that the entire network stops working real quick.