What is Digg?64 Comments
- Pixelante, on 10/11/2007, -1/+19Yes, because an online petition will stop them. Sure.
- slearwig, on 10/11/2007, -1/+18The proof is in the pudding.
Maybe people need to googlebomb Google on this subject and if Google suppresses the bomb, then we'll know they are not addressing this issue.
You can sign the petition to stop political and corporate censorship of
The Internet. Copy/paste the link near the end of the article into the Address window of your browser or click it here,
but please do so.
http://irrepressible.info/ - kindrobot, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16Block lists are for pussies.
- drilldown, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Censorship SUCKS ASS.
Let me check my blocked list. OH, stupid me, i've never ***** had one. - Kingfisherx, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9What the hell kind of fun is there in having a blocked list? It negates the option of telling someone they are an incompetent jackass. Same goes for censorship.
- redrock34, on 10/11/2007, -0/+7Only in a free society can people truly prosper.
- ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -5/+11Modern society has become so secretive that it cannot let people who care about truth on internet take other the spectacle. The Spectacle is the reality today. Words have been deprived of their real meaning. Carefully crafted images and words broadcast thru the corporate media rule our dreams, create our desires, mold our personalities, influence our conversations, limit our freedom of thought, erect mental barriers, dumb us down,...internet can not be allowed to become too different in content from TV. The risk is that we stop acting according to the script fed our minds from the start: obedient consumers full of consumer dreams, obedient salary-men who have adopted the ideology of the bosses and stock-holders.
joe361, I agree and at the same time I do not: I think it is worse!
Capitalism is the cancer of life on Earth. Governments have allied themselves with capitalism to service it first, not humanity. They have become a cancer too.
Look at a balance sheet: freedom and free speech do not make money, treating people and the Earth good does not make money.
Everything that can not get counted, computed, is worthless for capitalism.
What is human is worthless for capitalism.
Just watch The Corporation is it is not clear! Or read Guy Debord: Comments on The Society of the Spectacle.
Worshiping a brand, a corporation, a product, a star, a politician, is living by proxy...it is like being a living dead for a human being...not connected with your most human feelings, not connected with the Earth anymore. As modern as robots, only connected with electronics. - bumfish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5he was his uncle
- macaca, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9I am selling my GOOGLE stocks now.
- Leomarth, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4There are many individuals who want to censor the 'net also. People want all kinds of things from porn, to religion, to discussion about scientific topics banned from the Internet.
There are just too many people out there who want to run other people's lives. - MacParrot, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I mean after all, the Muslims and Hindus have certainly proven themselves to be champions of free speech!
If you had said organized religion as compared to just saying Christianity, I might have agreed... - CrashPoint, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"Amnesty International is neither. Buried on the sheer stupidity of that organization alone."
Ad hominem arguments are for cowards.
"Those guilt herders should be shut down."
For what? - pr3998, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3kingfisherx, you're an incompetent jackass!!
Wow, you're right, that felt sooo good! `-) - Morelia, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3It isn't these things that worry governments. It is just ordinary and free exchange of ideas that have them seeing red. They simply don't want intellectuals having open discourse for all to see. It damages their campaigns to tinker with social engineering, propaganda cultivation and propagation and control. It is free speech that distrurbs them, not terrorist activity. To Bush, your neighbor the American named Tom , is his greatest enemy.
- jacobmiller, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Right, because the Chinese communists are so Christian...duh
- OrangeTide, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Which Christians are you referring to? There are many different sects of Christianity and many of them are polar opposites politically. There are groups of Christians who are against the death penalty, and against military service, and against the pledge of allegiance. Your broad category is inaccurate and unfair. It amount to little more than ignorant stereotyping.
- romulasry, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Not yet, thankfully.
- resta6, on 01/12/2009, -0/+2we are just lucky they let the genie out of the bottle before they realized they could supress it. If that was the case, right now we would all be logging onto the internet with our social security numbers, and all of our activity would be tracked by the government computers
But seriously, internet right now is the last free media. Look at Ron Paul he has TAKEN OFF on the internet, but in the real world he has very little time in the media. Why? Because in the media to know more about him you would have to wait for your favourite program to feature him. On the internet, you just go to his site, or wikipedia or anywhere else and read more about him - Philipp_Lenssen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Actual source is here:
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=17366 - simpleid, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2NO because we will create a new 'pirate' network layer under everything else to discretely exist where no internet has existed before. Ah hah!
There's always a way around every issue. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2"Yes, because an online petition will stop them. Sure."
I agree, but take a stand and sign it anyway.
@mike17032
First the globalists censored free speech in China, and I did nothing because I was not Chinese, then the globalists ******** **** ****** ** *** ****. - Travelsonic, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1" how an explostion from an aluminum plane went clean THROUGH the building.. and a few others.. "
Plus the foward momentum of seats, bins, galleys, lavatories, bodies, cargo, etc.... not just aluminum.
Makes the crash much more plausible when you actually don't leave things out, eh? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5Sorry but this is *****. These companies MUST comply with local laws in order to do business there, end of ***** story.
And its not our place, or googles, to tell China how to run their internet connection. - widman, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Most of the search engines have strong ties to US government agencies. And the US government is their main customer directly or indirectly. And their ranking engines are secret.
- Ryosen, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Brave man. I'm sure the fact that their stock is at a 3-month high (up 15% from March) has nothing to do with it. :)
- joe361, on 10/11/2007, -12/+13Larry Page and Sergey Brin are just like many other corporate *****, even with their stated motto of "Don't be evil."
- RanZom, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2***** censorship, the ***** hole third world nations and their communistic governments can keep that *****. If I wanna flame our worthless president on an internet message board the constitution gives me and everyone else that right... although unless we get rid of said president we may end up living in a communist country
- bsiviglia9, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1What about corporations like at&t? When is self-censorship just censorship?
- oriondarkwood, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I am not surpised.. govemrent and Fat Cat Corps have always came up with ways to turn every potentinal key of freedom into another chain that holds up down while at the same time making them richer.. How much millionares/billionares has the internet created at the expense of creating another barrier between the have's and the have nots.. and I am not just talking 3rd world countries but even here in our own... Most companies including McDonald's will not even look at you unless you have some computer/internet skills
- robertleithe, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2I dont' blame the companies for abiding local law. I blame them for putting their own economic interests before human rights. After all it IS their choice to enter these markets, knowingly and willfully aware of the situation.
They could for instance put pressure on the government BEFORE entering the market. Tempting them with their (otherwise) good services. And who says I don't boycott BBC, CNN et cetera? ;) - robertleithe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Seriously, this is why I gave up Microsoft, Google (also YouTube after Google purchased them) and Yahoo all over. No products from any of these three giants comes nowhere near my computer. I also quoted this as the main (and only) reason why I resigned my AdWordprogram at Google.
Good riddance, too! - robertleithe, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@Leomarth
Well, isn't that exactly what I'm doing. As a consumer, I'm telling the corporations that I won't user their products and services because I don't agree with their policies/activities. Of course, if I and I alone do this it won't do much good (for the greater good, I'm completely at ease with this myself). As long as "most people" simply disagree with Google etc, and still use their products and services... To me it would feel wrong to critizise them for this, and continue to support their business. - cyssero, on 04/18/2009, -3/+3When will you crackpots accept that 9/11 was not a government conspiracy? http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html . See! I can post links too.
- Kythas, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2WTF? Companies such as Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo MUST abide by all local laws of jurisdictions in which they operate. If you're concerned about censorship, don't blame the companies following the local laws, but blame the governments which put those laws in place.
If something is illegal in your country, it's illegal in your country on the Internet, too. Do you seriously think China only censors the Internet? They censor all media and all information. If you're boycotting Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo because of their compliance with Chinese law, then you chould also boycott the BBC, CNN, and any other news organization which has operations in China because, guess what - they abide by the local censorship laws, too.
Put pressure on the governments to change their laws, not on the companies which are required to follow them. I'd argue, however, that unless you live in China, you have no right to criticize Chinese law. I may not agree with it, but it's not my place to change it. It's the responsibility of the local citizens to lobby for that change. - ukchipped, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Never fear to be called a conspiracy theorist! Conspiracies are real, because, all other things being equal, members of small groups have more power than members of large groups, plus lower costs of organization. Consider a group of hundred people with a billion dollars - $10 million each, versus a billion people with a billion dollars. Their individual share is $1, and their organizational costs are far higher. Therefore small groups will always be able to take advantage of larger ones. Consequently, conspiracies exist! And it is an amazing PR coup for would-be and active conspirators that the term 'conspiracy theorist' (and all it implies about an individual) emerged from the activities of the security and intelligence agencies fighting the Cold War. The term served as a useful cover for both sides' activities, so there was little resistance to its emergence.
- pirashkee, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1That old chapter of human rights must be rewritten according to this new situation against personal freedom of expression on the net and violators should be hung from their nuts.
- widman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1@ISIfunded911 "capitalism is the cancer of the earth"
Go back to your pro-socialist college and try to learn something this time. It's ***** like you taking over the rights discussion to pull your own political agenda that make us all look stupid. Take out your flags from over our heads or we'll do it for you.
This discussion is censorship. It's done on every socioeconomic system known of and it has nothing in particular to do with Capitalism. Quoting Penn Gillette: Shut-the-*****-up.
Note: I am not pro-capitalism and I think Google founders are hypocrites. - alpine75, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0It's interesting the attitudes that have developed the past 15 years as internet useage has increased. Users do things on the internet that are illegal in their countries, such as trade child porn or make drugs deals online. The dark side of the internet is incredibly dark, and what's amazing is that people think their above the law, just because their online. Does that really make any sense?
- caution, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Amnesty International is neither. Buried on the sheer stupidity of that organization alone. Those guilt herders should be shut down.
- wbienek, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Im not a crack pot.. Im not saying 100% that the government was behind it, just that there are some interesting things.. When TV shows a guy floating on air and doing all kinds of crazy junk Im skeptical of everyone, including conspiracy theorists.
I just dont choose to be naiive and automatically believe everything on the TV - NSMike, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1http://irrepressible.info/
EDIT: Whoops. Didn't notice slearwig had that up there already. - orangery, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Test
- bartbrinkman, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Amnesty should stick to it's profession. Besides, we can always inaugurate a new Internet, built on the ruins of the old one.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1 Internet Repression in America will come in the form of protecting us from " Hate Speech" The ADL is working on this right now as we speak, after all they have already given us the gift of hate crimes which are really though crimes.
- aintthatsomeish, on 10/11/2007, -11/+10corporations are the cancer of society.
- live52, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Clearly you've found a way to deal with the situation and that's enviable but I don't want to get over it.
You said, "He who has the big stick makes the rules."
But there have been times when the one with the big stick didn't use it to whack his own countrymen over the head. There have been benevolent leaders who cared for the welfare of ALL the people rather than the few.
You also said, "...they should have demanded equal arms back in the civil war era and beyond to keep the govm'nt in check."
People rarely take up arms against their own government but it does happen--as it did in the French Revolution of 1789 and the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917--under certain predictable conditions. Those conditons are extreme unemployment, extreme povertyand high food prices with the catalyst being a small group of very rich who are living it up. Things are no where near that bad in the US. It's hard to imagine a revolution when people are driving SUVs and have a six pack in the fridge. That's why any talk of armed revolution, right now anyway, is ridiculous. When a man has only the choice of sitting at home and watching his children starve or risking getting killed attacking the government and the rich, THEN you might have a revolution.
So I don't put much hope in armed rebellion under the present conditions because it ain't going to happen. If small groups of people do start something sale of ammo and guns will be banned immediately. And then what you gonna do? No, the only way out of this situation is to try to fix it before any shots are fired. But how can we do that when most Americans don't even see that there is a serious problem?
Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Communications Inc that has magazines, newspapers and radio and TV stations. Hearst and the other big media corporations want to continue manipulating us, and fear, especially of terrorists, is one of the devices they use. So they want you to believe that 911 was the work of foreign terrorists and I'll bet that's exactly what the aritcle or video concludes. No surprise there. - Error601, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Yea...sure...if that was the case digg along with tons of other sites would have been shut down a long time ago. The fact is there has never been a successful censorship attempt in the US.
- Leomarth, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1@robertleithe
I think you may have a misunderstanding. Companies will do exactly what the majority of their customers tell them to do. In this case, not enough people care that Google does business in China, or that Wal-Mart doesn't pay employees well. If they did, things would change as they are already in the "green" field. Many companies are feeling the consumer pressure to go green, and so they are.
A lot of people want to anthropomorphize these companies, and say "they" are doing bad things, but really it's the people running them. It's people making decisions.
Corporations will do exactly what you want them to do. But only if you have enough public pressure for it. If there isn't enough public pressure to go green, they won't. If there isn't enough public pressure for them to put their employees first, they won't. - wbienek, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0BTW daza, thanks for the link, Im listening to it now... Im hoping they'll address most/all of the things brought up in the 10 part 9/11 CONINCIDENCES video. I sure will sleep better at night if they do.. Ill follow up this post in 30 mins after I listen to it.
- Morelia, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0But if the Christians were but behind a separate Internet, those very porno Sites that they target would go out of business. They are the ones that both visit the sites for pleasure and them complain about them. They play both sides just like good little hypocrites should. To promote Heaven, you have to shoe Hell. Christians need porn and gays and drugs and prostitution, for without all these evils they become superfluous and cant get funds to survive. Christianity is a racket. The fact that the government hasn't targeted them for wrongdoing and immorality is the real issue that deserves looking into.
OrangeTide ... I refer to the variety of Christian that believes in blind faith, supernatural creatures, half-god kings, and trust the Bible. The Christians that don't do this are not on my list. -
Show 51 - 63 of 63 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