What is Digg?171 Comments
- ScrewedThePooch, on 10/11/2007, -5/+70most incomprehensible sentence...EVER
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -11/+58We need to reinvigorate our personal networks.
I hope net censorship never happens, but if it does, as the elite threaten it will, we will need strong social networks. Person to person like extended families or clans or neighborhoods. Where information can pass freely, independent of hijacked technology.
This is no simple task. It will take work. We should work toward this now rather than be forced to when the plug gets pulled. The goal should be info sharing as fast as by computer but without computers, by just getting together and communicating. - jspegele, on 10/11/2007, -27/+67I can't stand PrisonPlanet.com. They make completely unreasonable assumptions. This article was based on their article, " Blair Calls For Chinese Style Net Controls In the UK" which was based on a Telegraph.co.uk article which makes no mention of "chinese style net controls". Actually, it makes no mention of any net controls. Both of these articles, claiming that Blair wants to completely censor the Internet, are based on the following quote from Blair; "As the technology blurs the distinction between papers and television, it becomes increasingly irrational to have different systems of accountability based on technology that no longer can be differentiated in the old way." Blair is calling for a new form of accountability for the media, basically, making sure that the "media" is not lying to us. He does not say that the media should be accountable to the government. He's not calling for control over, or censorship of the media.
And regardless, he only has 8 days left in office to take over the Internets.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2007/120607Blair_media.htm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=MWVH3P0K0CKE1QFIQMFCFFOAVCBQYIV0?xml=/news/2007/06/12/nmedia312.xml - tobleronejones, on 10/11/2007, -9/+35Boo! I was expecting a funny pic. Boo!
- tizz66, on 10/11/2007, -5/+30I have a retard translator, allow me:
"Well Diggers, if the internet should end up like that, those investors who invested in ISP's will lose their money and broadband will go under! Crikey!" - z00k, on 10/11/2007, -6/+30Just change the logo and its going to pretty much look like this:
http://www.google.cn/
Computer: "What are you searching for today"
Person 1: "Well, I was going to sear..."
Computer: "Sorry, You're *****." - chris9902, on 10/11/2007, -6/+26just say no to drugs.
- jake8689, on 10/11/2007, -6/+23is that a riddle or somthing
- mattmcm, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20...move Zig for great justice? What?
- KennMac, on 10/11/2007, -4/+18Usually I can figure out what the person is intending to say... you got me on this one.
- cultist667, on 10/11/2007, -5/+17THIS POST HAS BEEN DELETED BY REQUEST OF THE CHINESE GOVERNMENT.
- Chompy, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15If Big Telco gets their way, then we'll get to see what everything looks like when it goes through a corporate filter.
- KennMac, on 10/11/2007, -6/+16Guys, lets all calm down. This would require an extreme upheaval of the current architecture of the Internet. Networks in the US are far too established to ever even consider converting to a system as described in the article.
- jspegele, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9@generalloy
Did you even read my full comment? The quote I included from Tony Blair? I didn't call the British media unaccountable, Tony Blair did. I know the British media is much more accountable than the American media, and I didn't say otherwise, in fact, I didn't say one word about the American media. I do, though, think that people need to stop thinking that the British media (namely the BBC) is infallible. Yes they're good; better than most American outlets. But they're not perfect, and they're still part of the media. - xianx, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10If broadband in China is slower than dial-up than how are gold farmers so productive?
- YoshDestroys, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11I just check his profile read other stories he commented on. They're even more mongodumbtarded.
- LakeshoreBaby, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Sorry, it's called A Blueprint for Introducing Disruptive Technology Into the Internet. It's a collaborative project between the government, big business and major universities.
https://www.planet-lab.org/about - LakeshoreBaby, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8That's why they are constructing Internet 2, which is almost finished. They want the present internet to fold into the more regulated architecture of the new system. You can google a great paper about it called How to Introduce Disruptive Technology into The Internet. Explains how they want to disappear our present net.
- voidvector, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7The article doesn't characterize the speed of Internet in China correctly. There are broadband in China. In fact two of my cousins had it when I visited them last year.
There are two major ISPs in "China Telecom" and "China Netcom". I don't exactly know the real situation, but it seems like neither side wants to invest in paving lines connecting to the competing ISP. Say when you have China Telecom as ISP, your connection to Netcom websites would be real slow, verse-versa. Connection to sites hosted by the same ISP is fine. This is shown by the fact that most Chinese file hosting websites or game servers list not only the location of their server, but also the ISP.
The Great Firewall of China may also play a role when connecting to international websites, but I don't recall any major issue. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -7/+14It's not called the "web" for nothing! (or the "net"...)
- digiguy, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11If the crybaby pussy watchdog groups get their way, we will have censorship in the future
- 15charmaxwtf, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Net neutrality is government regulation, it is a step in the wrong direction.
- xixor, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11This is just fear-mongering. Remember, we *pay* for internet access. If our internet access slows to 'slower than dial-up' speeds, how many of us will be shelling out $20-$100 per month for our broad-band internet connections? I am pretty sure that ISPs and telcos enjoy making money, and am pretty sure that the government wants to see the multi-billion dollar online gaming industry, and multi-billion dollar online advertising industry stick around.
- danconia, on 10/11/2007, -23/+29Come on guys... Prison Planet?
- enginbeering, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5no breach of human rights?
ever heard of Zeng Jinyan?
http://www.time.com/time/specials/2007/time100/article/0,28804,1595326_1615754_1616169,00.html - Drakkor, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5@themoose
yeah,we have freedom of speech......... as long as it's in a "free speech zone" , which is far removed,sometimes miles away from the action.either that,or you're in a "staged Bush photo-op" and kissing Bush's ass !. You call that free speech ?? - wishninja, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7It will happen. If the government starts to see it as a threat they will cut it off. Maybe most people do not see the threat maybe they do not read the stories on digg, Wired News or for that matter watch Cspan. Of course major Neo-cons are not saying that they are already set to do this they do not want to create a stir. I think it was only a year ago Newt Gingrich a major voice in the Republican party made a speech that he would like to see the "level of supervision" raised on the Internet. To deal with terrorism. You being dugg down is strange on digg well at least it used to be strange. In the last few months Digg seems to be over run with Neo-cons. Feels like a big pro government shift in here. I have found myself more and more looking at only the dugg down users and skipping the dugg up. For example people being dugg here are the ones that are saying it could not happen. "the network will not work that way and is too established." That is the stupidest crap I have ever heard. The Government already has enough control to do this these systems were mandated by the government by ISP's. Its called the "Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act" CALEA. They passed the act before most people were even on the Internet. 1994 All they have to do is Give the FCC the thumbs up and they will have censor power.
- GorfTron, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6The irony is that free political speech on the internet reduces true activism. The internet allows the masses to vent anger into a void. The powerful do what they want and dissent is redirected to /dev/null.
- MrKC, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7How will your friendly Senator and Congressmen surf for porn on the "Chinese Internet" ?
- snowball69, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5"fxxk the Internet"??? books???
Unfortunately you won't be allowed to buy the books. The need to give out ID for cash purchases is already steamrollering ahead in the UK (and US I am told) even before legislation is implemented. Several people I know have even been asked for ID for things such as snack food and cosmetics where cash is used. Even the dumbest person should be able to join the dots here and realise that this equates to control and monitoring over what you read which then gives power and control OVER what you read.
As far as the other source of books - In the UK public libraries have been clearing their shelves of books for at least 20 years and my own library now resembles a child play centre rather than a centre for research, education and intellectual exercise. Books are approved for education by very left-leaning committees who detest books such as 1984 and you will find no shortage of lefties who would like to see such books banned. All book loans are centrally monitored and it is impossible to get a book which even skirts ANY issue of freemasonry, serious occult research, cults such as the Mormons, critical analysis of world politics, books critical of globalism or the US/UK governments and so on - without putting an order in on the central computer database. "No call for intellectual books, sorry mate, how about the Sponge Bob or Spice Girls annual?".
You could go down the local pub and console yourself - but in the UK they are already rolling out the same "useful idiots" who comprise the Digg bury brigade to write "protesting" letters at local and national media demanding prohibition of alcohol once prohibition of smoking is more or less complete by effect. So not only will you not be able to have a fag (cigarette not homosexual) in peace without some clipboard-wielding moron chasing after you and trying to impose an £80 ($160) cash penalty from you but you won't even be able to join your friends in the boozer and drink away your sorrows. This is no theory - I've been involved in politics and know letter-writing campaigns are organised. New Labour was caught with it's pants down sending the same cut and paste letters to newspapers using different names in the last elections not to mention fiddling proxy or eballot papers. See, we DO learn from Americans when it comes to elections at least!.
Keep a close eye on the UK TV media for a steadily increasing stream of "soapumentaries" dealing with the entirely state-created "issue" of British youth and alcohol consumption and "what must be done" and how the "government must CRACK DOWN". The British public have as short a memory as their US counterparts, they forget how national breweries were allowed to take almost total control over city council planning decisions and turn our city centres into puke-sodden boozeramas whilst the other members of the Neo Labour party sucked up to US commercial interests to push casinos and poker on UK TV. I mean, come on, POKER FFS!!! for hours on end on prime time UK TV - hours of watching some bunch of goons playing sodding cards. Now if that doesn't have the US corporate stamp all over it then what does eh 888 dot com??
An era of UK Prohibition - if they think they can get away with it - and if you can get away with what they've done with cigarettes then why not - has organised crime and Problem Reaction Solution written all over it. Having read some of the letters pages helpfully suggesting prohibition its tragic that us Brits have such a short collective grasp of history and who benefited (and still benefits) from the US prohibition era. - snowball69, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Encryption??
Not much use if your government declares them "munitions" and throws you in jail for an instant 10 years term for using them. Think about it. Can't happen in the US??? - sensi313, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I would bet that when George Orwell's "1984" first came out in 1949 people laughed, sneered, smirked, and said "Ha! that could never happen!" Anyone seen pictures of the UK lately? Been there? There are over 4 million CCTV cameras watching your every move, with a child's voice that talks to you when you do something you shouldn't be doing. Orwell is rolling in his grave and the rest of the brain-dead population thinks nothing of it. But what seemed like only science fiction at the time, is now a very scary reality. So say it can't happen...
- rockbysea, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4well truth is being buried and censored already..Just look at these treasonous bury bastards here at digg...if the feds get their way i guess most of you digg bury bastards will be out of work. You can sit up here all alone and roll in each others stinking slime
- wishninja, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Too bad the government does not see it that way. IN the head of a Politician they do not see freedom if it stands in their way of doing what they want. See they think all of those people die to keep them in office and in return they let us have some freedom.
"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face! It's just a goddamned piece of paper!"--G.W. Bush - attackcardio, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4What would be the point of having the Internet if everything is blocked?
- stihlman37, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I agree but would it not be easier to fight for the freedom our fore fathers promised in the constitution?
- peterzero, on 10/11/2007, -6/+10I was in China last summer, quite an opposite as the article says everybody there has fast Internet connection, try Googling China broadband
- themoose, on 10/11/2007, -33/+36This article is *****. The chinese government are communist for starters, wheras the UK (& USA) aren't.
You see, we have a thing called freedom of speech. Don't know if you've heard of it. And that doesn't just apply to what comes out of your mouth. - raphinaus, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3and for the people who think Bush's term will end?... did you know that in an 'emergency situation', he can suspend the elections until the 'emergency' is resolved? did you also know that he defines what an 'emergency' is?
the current powers want the presidency to be handed on to someone they approve of. someone who supports the profiteering of the oil and arms industries (did you know that the majority of Bush's election campaign was paid for by oil companies & arms contractors? because it was in their [financial] interests to get him elected). and they have so much power that they CAN make it happen... and why not? they can't just hand the country over to someone they don't approve of, and throw away trillions in possible weapons & oil deals.
Wake up and realise you're already living in a dictatorship. public free speech is openly being eroded and seen as a terrorist-supporting act. it's only a matter of time until it includes the internet too. - fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3@nismobeach
Uh, yes it is. Regulating political blogs (which I don't support, by the way) would involve having the bloggers sign up for a certain program, not changing the entire structure of the internet to permit censorship of any page. - snowball69, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4"Don't whine about rights when, in the way they pertain to your life, they haven't changed at all since Clinton"
Unfortuantely like too many Americans (and, sadly, Brits) you're unable to distinguish between "rights" and "lifestyle". The kind of mistake the globalists revel in. Amercans' and Brits' stated RIGHTS have undeniably changed but for many until they encounter an issue with the state their everyday lifestyle may not have changed - stop the internal dialogue. Blair has used the excuse of a state of war to shred our rights for his masters. If he succeeds in his aspirations for the post of EU President then look forward to an EU Wide shredding of even the Mickey-Mouse (TM) Conditional EU "rights".
For any Brits who doubt their RIGHTS - go to the SOCPA zone near OUR parliament wearing a political T shirt, scarf or badge (pin) and see how long you manage to survive before you get arrested. You have NO RIGHT to protest your own parilament either actively or PASSIVELY. You have NO RIGHT to walk the street and speak the names of our own war dead on pain of arrest and uncontestable fine. If feeling adventurous go to any major UK railway station and take a few photos of chuffa trains and see how long you last before you get your collar felt.
For God's sake find another way to earn your 1 cent-per-click for your bosses or get out of your state of denial. All it's doing is helping these f****kers get the job done.
http://www.markthomasinfo.com/demo/demonotes.asp Mark Thomas - UK SOCPA Zones - The Reality - SpenceMasta, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4you're assuming you cant surf for porn on chinese internet, i assure you, you can
- AndrewDB, on 01/10/2008, -4/+7Did anyone else think they'd see a picture of this:
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/d/d3/180px-000_2769.JPG ..
I mean.. if ours is tubes.. - virtualk, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3This is no joke! To the naysayers - you'd better begin to do critical thinking on these topics and do your own research. I realize it's been
practically 'bred out' of people to be able to think critically and logically, but if you don't WAKE UP, you are in for a rude awakening, in the not so
distant future.
What do we do? Go peer to peer, neighborhood networks. - garynils, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8 I've always wondered to myself why THEY weren't going after the internet because it really is the last bastion of free speech. They'll probably reason that due to the ubiquitous terrorist threat or child pornography (kettle calling the pot black), these free speech restrictions are necessary and of course for our own good. This is scary! How long before we're furtively scribbling our last truly independent thoughts in our little note pads like Winston!
- hardkoretom, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5tb0n3r - That is very irrational to say that. when the liberals say a bunch of outrageous *****, you hear very little from anybody. Why dont people complain over the crazy ass statements by people like Ted Kennedy or Barbara Boxer? Those two are more for the loss of your rights and stand for bad policies much worse than the subject of this article.
- darkmule, on 10/11/2007, -7/+10Since when does china lack high speed internet connections?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_in_the_People%27s_Republic_of_China#Development
Anyone else see the word 'broadband' on the list? -- Maybe I'm mistaken.
Yes China does do a 'bad' thing by 'sheltering' people and 'censoring' parts of the Internet, but you know damn well other countries do it, including the United States. China will do what China will do, they're not harming anyone physically while doing this, thus there is no human rights violation here. What one thing is in another country may be something entirely different in another. Its something that must be respected.
Plus if you're going to go after anyones internet rights.. what about North Korea? or should I say Intranet. - MattD1, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3The Chinese internet is a great case in point of how important are technologies like encryption and TOR.
- sensi313, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You must have stopped reading before that because he clearly said "Here's what Internet 2, the Chinese format, will look like."
- Oldschoolhack, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5I am not worried about it. What will I do if the internet is regulated? I'll say fsck you to the internet, and read more books. Should I feel the need to get my multi-player gaming addiction taken care of, I'll go back to playing D&D like I did back in the day, or dust off the old gaming systems. The interet is a part of my life, but it isn't my life. I've long lived happily without it.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 167 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 