Why cant we have regulated internet?

Randy

Well-known member
If you want facts Mutley go to the library mate. The internet has very little to do with validity, it's full of crap. You wouldn't ask the barman down the dog and duck whether to get vaccinated, would you? You don't really address the main point though, what's wrong with someone having a web site about a flat earth? I don't see the problem. Some people believe this, let them. Some people believe in God, let them, there are plenty of religious websites about, enjoy the rabbit hole.

I fail to see the issue. If someone is breaking the law, then it doesn't matter whether its on a forum, in a newspaper, in print or down the pub, there are laws to deal with that.

Let people indulge themselves in their beliefs.

You could compare to it to one person believing that medium well is the best way to cook a steak when others believe it's medium rare or blue or well done or whatever.

😲


Mmm steak.
 

Laughing

Well-known member
You could compare to it to one person believing that medium well is the best way to cook a steak when others believe it's medium rare or blue or well done or whatever.

😲


Mmm steak.
Randy, Randy, rare every time, try and keep the conversation sensible mate.
 

rob_fmttm

Administrator
I try and keep on top of things and be fair on this website - obviously I am indebted to the help Borolad and others provide - especially because I might not actually follow who is who as much as them or you do, for that matter.
In an ideal world we wouldn't need to moderate, or only lightly. But that world has slipped by.
We will try and keep this going and stop those that kick against it grinding us down.
 

Randy

Well-known member
I try and keep on top of things and be fair on this website - obviously I am indebted to the help Borolad and others provide - especially because I might not actually follow who is who as much as them or you do, for that matter.
In an ideal world we wouldn't need to moderate, or only lightly. But that world has slipped by.
We will try and keep this going and stop those that kick against it grinding us down.
For comparison another forum I post on has 20 moderators. Granted it's a larger forum with more users but it's obviously and uphill task.
 

festa5

Well-known member
If you want facts Mutley go to the library mate. The internet has very little to do with validity, it's full of crap. You wouldn't ask the barman down the dog and duck whether to get vaccinated, would you? You don't really address the main point though, what's wrong with someone having a web site about a flat earth? I don't see the problem. Some people believe this, let them. Some people believe in God, let them, there are plenty of religious websites about, enjoy the rabbit hole.

I fail to see the issue. If someone is breaking the law, then it doesn't matter whether its on a forum, in a newspaper, in print or down the pub, there are laws to deal with that.

Let people indulge themselves in their beliefs.

It's not that simple though is it? The flat earth society is fairly harmless.

Anti vax conspiracy theories, "stop the steal"etc not so much.

Now you and I might know Twitter, Facebook etc is full of crap and not a reliable source of information. But millions don't, millions are easily manipulated and that can and does have real world consequences.

Most of the lies aren't actually crimes in themselves, but they can still have a lot of power, to a detrimental effect.

I don't know what the answer is, it's a complex issue. Education is definitely part of it. Fit for purpose legislation too.
 

Laughing

Well-known member
It's not that simple though is it? The flat earth society is fairly harmless.

Anti vax conspiracy theories, "stop the steal"etc not so much.

Now you and I might know Twitter, Facebook etc is full of crap and not a reliable source of information. But millions don't, millions are easily manipulated and that can and does have real world consequences.

Most of the lies aren't actually crimes in themselves, but they can still have a lot of power, to a detrimental effect.

I don't know what the answer is, it's a complex issue. Education is definitely part of it. Fit for purpose legislation too.
People who believe we shouldn't use vaccinations are entitled to that point of view as are people who think we shouldn't have blood transfusions. I don't see the harm in allowing them to express their views. Down the pub you hear all sorts of nonsense I fail to see how the Internet is different.

You can't legislate against someones belief system providing it isn't breaking any laws however much you might disagree with their viewpoint.

Who decides what we can and cannot say. The answer is nobody providing we do not break any laws.

If people read stuff on the Internet and believe it, enjoy yourself.
 

festa5

Well-known member
People who believe we shouldn't use vaccinations are entitled to that point of view as are people who think we shouldn't have blood transfusions. I don't see the harm in allowing them to express their views. Down the pub you hear all sorts of nonsense I fail to see how the Internet is different.

You can't legislate against someones belief system providing it isn't breaking any laws however much you might disagree with their viewpoint.

Who decides what we can and cannot say. The answer is nobody providing we do not break any laws.

If people read stuff on the Internet and believe it, enjoy yourself.

And what if someone catches covid and dies because they didn't get vaccinated based on lies they read and believed on the internet?

What if someone storms a government building because they're told democracy is being taken away from them and an election is rigged and someone dies.

The lies have consequences. If you think they're a fair price to pay, that's up to you.

And laws are only written by people. They're not perfect and frequently are flawed.
 

fmttmadmin

Administrator
Staff member
The internet is different to the pub - you can't get sued for libel down the pub.
Once you accept that then you can start to see there are big differences in responsibility.
 

Scrote

Well-known member
I've never accessed it myself
I'd be very surprised if you haven't.

The 'dark web' just means any non-public content e.g. non-indexed files or private content served as web pages (business intranets).

It sounds nefarious enough for the Daily Mail et al to run scare stories but essentially it's just the bits of the web that don't need direct exposure to 'sunlight'.
 

Randy

Well-known member
I'd be very surprised if you haven't.

The 'dark web' just means any non-public content e.g. non-indexed files or private content served as web pages (business intranets).

It sounds nefarious enough for the Daily Mail et al to run scare stories but essentially it's just the bits of the web that don't need direct exposure to 'sunlight'.
Ah by dark web I meant the dodgy sites selling drugs and guns etc. I read a piece about a website called the silk road which sounded line an extreme version of eBay.
 

Alvez_48

Well-known member
The internet is different to the pub - you can't get sued for libel down the pub.
Once you accept that then you can start to see there are big differences in responsibility.

I think your mistaking laughings comments Roberto..

I'm fairly certain he's fine with moderation and prosecuting law breaking behaviour.

Think more like this... One day a heroic Prime minister from the 'legend' party creates a fabulous set of regulation that everyone agrees with. 10 years later a despot gets voted in and all of a sudden legitimate voices of discontent are censored.

For instance Facebook or Twitter banned the SDP for several days with no warning after the capitol riots.

It's a complex and nuanced issue but frameworks are already in place to police it just fine.
 

Laughing

Well-known member
And what if someone catches covid and dies because they didn't get vaccinated based on lies they read and believed on the internet?

What if someone storms a government building because they're told democracy is being taken away from them and an election is rigged and someone dies.

The lies have consequences. If you think they're a fair price to pay, that's up to you.

And laws are only written by people. They're not perfect and frequently are flawed.
What if they do, what are you sugesting, that we tell people what to believe? How would we go about that? People are allowed to express their beliefs, some of them are crackpots and sometime it leads to awful consequences. I agree with that. What do we do about it? Having freedom of expression is a basic tenent of a free society. A free society comes at a cost, and yes I am prepared to pay that cost.

Honestly lockdown is turning people into self-appointed gaurdians of their truth. The tapestry of life we see around us is sometime beautiful, sometime ugly but it is what makes life worth experiencing.
 

Scrote

Well-known member
Gallileo was imprisoned for championing heliocentrism
No, he wasn't.

But then that's a very good example of why truth matters.

Galileo is used a a wonderful example of why a powerful church needs to be fought, when the reality is that Galileo was just a bit of a prat.

Heliocentrism wasn't a problem. Galileo interrupting Bishops when they were about to announce discoveries, to claim the glory for himself was.

It's a different set of problems as to why the church was behaving badly, but it was nothing to do with the popular mythology.
 

Laughing

Well-known member
No, he wasn't.

But then that's a very good example of why truth matters.

Galileo is used a a wonderful example of why a powerful church needs to be fought, when the reality is that Galileo was just a bit of a prat.

Heliocentrism wasn't a problem. Galileo interrupting Bishops when they were about to announce discoveries, to claim the glory for himself was.

It's a different set of problems as to why the church was behaving badly, but it was nothing to do with the popular mythology.
Depends which history book you read, which illustrates my point perfectly.
 

festa5

Well-known member
Honestly lockdown is turning people into self-appointed gaurdians of their truth.

Really? That's what you're going with is it?

For someone who has previously be preached treating other posters with respect, that's a bit hypocritical.

I've offered a different opinion, that's all. I said it's complex and I don't know know what the answer is, so not sure where "self appointed guardian of truth" comes from.
 

Cardiffdaffs

Well-known member
What if they do, what are you sugesting, that we tell people what to believe? How would we go about that? People are allowed to express their beliefs, some of them are crackpots and sometime it leads to awful consequences. I agree with that. What do we do about it? Having freedom of expression is a basic tenent of a free society. A free society comes at a cost, and yes I am prepared to pay that cost.

Honestly lockdown is turning people into self-appointed gaurdians of their truth. The tapestry of life we see around us is sometime beautiful, sometime ugly but it is what makes life worth experiencing.
Well if you recall The Social Dilemma the way that the internet works and the control over thoughts and minds is somewhat different from the mere ramblings of a pub bore.
 

Osboro

Well-known member
We seem to have drifted from my original question , as ever.
Forgive my technical ignorance, but is there any thing preventing a licenced World Wide Web?
One that every poster,contributor , seller, buyer,producer writer etc has logged some ID.
leave the WWW as it is ,but I can help feeling it is becoming a less reliable place everyday.
Why,If I sent a letter to some one pretending to be a bank get done for fraud, get no one, including the banks, seem to want th
Attack these proposals and prosecute.
I use DuckDuckgo as a search engine to avoid too much of my activity being sold around the net, what do others use.?
 
Top
X