What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Play the flash game. view!
DragonAgeJourneys.com - Play the free companion flash game to Dragon Age: Origins.
17 Comments
- sautegod, on 12/27/2008, -1/+15By the time he said "This is not a campaign against free speech", I was pretty sure it was a campaign against free speech.
- TastyWheat, on 12/27/2008, -0/+14First net neutrality, then net morality, then net legality, then net normality. You tell the government to keep their hands off the internet or you can kiss the internet as you know it goodbye.
- Branchex, on 12/27/2008, -0/+14Have you ever tried simply turning off the computer, sitting down with your children, and hitting them?
Seriously, this is just like what Australia wants to do. If parents think the internet is so dangerous then don't let them use it unless you can watch what is on their screen. But don't make us all live in a nanny state because you are lazy. - bradspangler, on 12/27/2008, -1/+11Almost all tyrants attempt to justify their actions with high-minded rhetoric about the "public interest".
Apparently it doesn't sound as convincing when they just drop all pretense and say "I'm a creepy little sociopathic martinet who's fully prepared to abuse your gullible acceptance of a violently monopolized security industry to bully you all into doing things the way I want it or the way people I owe favors to who got me to the pinnacle of this dung heap want it. And when I say 'bully' I mean bullying you by proxy, using men with badges, guns and medium-low IQs who were weaned on capsacin and lost their virginity to a taser. Because, after all, unlike a common thug who's also prepared to use violence to get his way with you, I don't have the integrity to at least do it myself." - KMye, on 12/27/2008, -0/+8Terrifying quotes to read from a sitting cabinet official, especially one in a post called the "Minister for Fun" by its first occupant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_Secretary
Are there religious fundamentalist politicians in the Labor Party? - PopcornDave, on 12/27/2008, -1/+9Someone needs to take a very large book and hit him upside the head to knock some common sense in to him. If he wants to raise everybody's kids, I hope he's got a big enough house to care for them all otherwise he can just ***** off.
- Beautyon, on 12/27/2008, -1/+7Andy Burnham is the spokesliar behind the fascist ID card scheme, who the Telegraph itself says is '...doing just what the Nazis did':
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/3623965/Labour- ...
This man is a seasoned liar; his deliberate deceptions on the ID card are well documented.
He also clearly knows nothing about the internet, is a computer illiterate, and is yet another chinless wonder out of the same mold that spawned Mandelshon who wants to nationalize Nominet, the body that organizes (very successfully without interference from Government) .co.uk domains. That particular scumbags department wrote the following letter to Nominet:
"In a letter dated October 15, senior civil servant David Hendon, BERR's Director of Business Relations, asked Nominet chairman Bob Gilbert: "What arguments would you employ to convince my Ministers that the present relationship between government and the company is appropriate in ensuring that public policy objectives in relation to the management of the domain name system and the standing of the UK in the internet community are understood and taken into account?"
Im not making that up; "justify why we should not incorporate you into the government" and if they think the reasons are not good enough? Well then, I guess you just have to bend over Nominet.
Back to subhuman Andy Burnham, you can bet that his ratings board will be based on the British Board of Film Censors that gives out certificates to films before they can be shown in the UK...and when I say 'give' I mean film makers have to PAY to be censored and given a rating. If you do not get a rating, you cannot show or distribute your film in the UK. Period.
Do you really think that the government is going to give out ratings to websites for free? Even if they did it would still be wrong, but you can be sure that they are going to CHARGE each and every website owner a fee to have their site manually reviewed and given a certificate.
This animal says that the internet as “quite a dangerous place”.
He has no idea about what that really means.
If this 'idea' gets any sort of traction, he is going to face an Anonymous style flood of actions the likes of which he cannot even BEGIN to imagine.
The internet does not belong to government, or to anyone. No one can control it, and anyone who tries gets bitten in the ass.
Hard. - inactive, on 12/27/2008, -1/+5This reminds me a quote from Supercat:
"Scalp dem, scalp dem and hang dem up high" - ryan83189, on 12/28/2008, -0/+2Good thing she cleared that up then. I, for one, am relived because all of the evidence was pointing to the contrary.
- inactive, on 12/28/2008, -0/+2This is a bad idea.
- 4libertyy, on 01/03/2009, -0/+2This is making me sick. WE better not allow this to happen! Government censored media? Government controlling where you get your news from?? Government controlling what they want you to know??? C'mon Britain, they've already got cameras on every street watching your asses! You guys got it worse than America right now, but that must mean that we're right behind you and that's what freaks me out.
- GlassAgate, on 01/16/2009, -0/+1The following message is rated R...
You can go take your measly attempt to censor my
speech and you can shove it up your ass. Lesbians
kissing each other is what my cat likes to watch
while mating. I want to see a fly ***** a wasp!
If someone creates a system, that would be completely
voluntary, that might be okay. You can set your browser
to "PG", and no one will be able to visit a website rated
"XXX". Of course, this would only work with the websites
that chose to use the rating system. - mcla007, on 12/28/2008, -0/+1Whenever a politician wants to control something s/he immediately invents a crisis about it. Then s/he starts a vicious campaign of scaremongering telling people repeatedly--through the official anointed media channels-- how scary and dangerous the subject in question is; how we need to do something about it IMMEDIATELY, how the fate of the free world hangs in balance; why we need to rise above narrow partisanship and follow his/her lead; why we need to sacrifice a little liberty now for greater security, and finally, that he/she is NOT against freedom. It's almost a blueprint.
E.g., NYT reports terrorists are pushing drugs using BitTorrent to exchange Google Earth maps of locations where children gather. Be afraid! Very afraid! We need to regulate p2p networks and Google Earth! - bonsomme, on 12/27/2008, -1/+1This guy is a sorry little wanker.
- stubadub99, on 12/29/2008, -0/+0"There is content that should just not be available to be viewed".
This article & any more tripe from Andy Burnham should be included. - davemedsker, on 12/28/2008, -1/+0post thought, the Bible and internet citations of it get an "R" rating for violence and hate speech, right?
- davemedsker, on 12/28/2008, -1/+0methinks ya'll protest too much.
noone's gonna take your porn or free speech. This works with the movies and it works with tv. In my memory after they started rating tv programs in the US the content actually got racier. The ratings people do a service that I don't always agree with, but in the end it would be nice to see a little regulation on the internet.Obviously there will be costs and new jobs. If posting cost two cents, half the internet could go away and we could find the stuff someone felt was worth saying. If I put in my two cents, maybe it should be literal. By the way, bradspangler, that is some of the most entertaining and interesting ranting I've read in a while, thank you.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is