We all know that certain governments censor what their citizens can read online. This week's article looks at the efforts that have gone into circumventing this censorship. Go to the link below and read the article. Write a reflective comment that shows you have read the article, expresses your views, and addresses my questions.
What is your opinion about the use of this software to evade government censorship? Should people be allowed to access any website that they want, regardless of its content or purpose? Under what conditions should a governenment block and filter Internet content? What risks do you see in using this software? What is your reaction to the following quote from the article? "As with George Orwell’s “Newspeak,” the language in “1984” that got smaller each year, governments can block particular words or phrases without users realizing their Internet searches are being censored." Should Congress fund circumvention services?
Net Censors Article
18 comments:
I think software that evades government censorship is totally acceptable- it's like telling someone that there's a part of life that they can't access. It could be blocking something as ridiculous as women on youtube.com to an important part of history like the Tiananmen Square incident. What's on the web is on the web for a reason (so that everyone has access to it) and to block it is ludicrous (unless it's blocked for age reasons). A government should only block and/or filer content if it's a world-wide age-related issue, obviously including child pornography. If the people don't have any information on their own country's government, how can they be expected to pass proper judgment upon it? The only risk I can see in this software is if the government makes it a law, and then someone's caught with it causing many arrests across the country. I think it's very deceitful of a country to block people's searches, and even worse to do it without their knowing. Yes, they should. It'd be great to let people look on the web and let them find out information for themselves without being blocked by their country.
And, Mr. Beyer, there's a typo on the first page, paragraph four, line three. "… a spiritual movement that has beem suppressed by the Chinese government since 1999." ('beem' should be been) According to what we've learned in class, we shouldn't be using this site because although it looks professional, it has typos; therefore, it could be a bad site trying its hardest to look legitimate. You should probably not use this site for our weekly blog responses anymore. . .
**Mr. Beyer, I'm not sure that after all we've learned this is the best site to use, like Cat pointed out. There's a spelling mistake and you're the one that taught us that gives away an illegitimate site.
I think that the software that evades government censorship is fine because the internet is for people to look at- if non-Iranians can look at it, then they can as well. It's like saying, "Oh, everyone can see this, but you can't." It doesn't really make sense. So for a software to be made showing them what they want to see, I think that's completely acceptable. I think that people should be allowed to access whichever site they want regardless of its purpose and content because if there's an age issue, parents can take care of that. Otherwise, people have access to the Internet privately so that they can use it for whatever they would like so I don't think anything should be barred. Anything including risky things that would lead to trouble, such as child-molesting online or such, could be blocked; other than that, they should leave it up to the people to decide. Also, military confidential information could be blocked. I think that the only risk with this software is, well, it is illegal. The government stops something, and the people find a way through it so they can get in trouble for it. I think that the government is really deceptive because then the people they're governing are confused and not getting everything they're paying for- the reason they get Internet is for things such as finding out things that wouldn't be found out normally. I think the government is wrong for basically lying to their people. Yes they should because their people deserve to know what's on the Internet just like any other group of people. They shouldn't have limits as to what they see or read online. The government can block risky things that are wrong, but nothing that the people have the right to see.
I think that governments shouldn't be censoring in the first place. I believe that people aught to have rights in viewing whatever political or social websites they want. Even if they oppose their governments. obviously explicit sites should, be banned, not censored, but otherwise anything should be allowed on the web. For example, I don't think that Congress should have banned the F word on television. Some people, they love the F word, but the point is that it is part of popular culture for many people and that the F word is heard more from person to person than on TV and it won't make a difference. Just like political views and opinions, someone will find out. (North Korea is an exception because they are so strict that people can't even get in and out of the countries, so obviously neither can political views).
I don't support the idea of using software to avoid censorship, cause you could get into trouble.
Personally, I do not see a problem with people using this software to evade government censorship. In my opinion, a government should not have complete control over its people and they should give them some freedom, especially when their citizens are on the Internet. The Internet is a place for people to learn about new things and they should have access to it in all of its shapes and forms, making it wrong for certain governments to block some websites from their people and making it right for their people to use this software to see the full truth and make sure they are getting the big picture when it comes to certain issues. Furthermore, I believe that people on the Internet should be able to access whatever website they want, as ultimately, I think people are responsible enough and aware of what is considered to be right and wrong in their communities and many people simply decide to steer away from what is not appropriate for them; if they do not do this, then tough luck for them. On the other hand, though, a government should block and filter Internet content when it comes to things, such as child pornography and other sexually explicit content that is in no way suitable for minors. A government should also block secret information that concerns them and has been leaked out, which infringes on their privacy. Moreover, the risks that I see in using this software is that it is illegal, as when you come to think about it, a person that uses this software is toying around with their government and trying to get past it, which could have serious penalties. As for my reaction to the quote from the article, I believe that it accentuates how truly unfair certain governments are being with their people, as they are putting a limit on their learning by blocking certain websites from their viewing. Additionally, my reaction to this quote is also negative because it is as if certain governments that use online censorship think their people are dumb and can be fooled when it comes to their online searches. Lastly, Congress should for sure fund circumvention services, as different people from all around the world should be learning of all the different sides of certain issues (despite how hard certain governments try to prevent this from happening) and then coming to conclusions individually. More importantly, people should not be treated as if they were naive children and be blocked from the truth.
I think that it is acceptable that the government can see what we are reading online. I think that people can access some websites but not all websites because some might be private. The government should block and filter Internet content when people are downloading applications that is prohibited. Yes it should congress circumvention services.
I think that the use of this software to evade government censorship is not good because the Iranians can’t censor everything that people shouldn’t know because they have to know like connecting with people on Facebook or watch important things on YouTube. They people should definitely be able to access any website they want because they won’t be able to know the news around the world. The government should block and filter the Internet content that would have pornography because the children aren’t supposed to be watching this stuff unless they are 18. The risks that I see using this software is that it is illegal, like everyone is saying. My reaction from the following quote is that these words or phrases could be secret things or inappropriate things. I think that the Congress should fund circumvention services.
Omar Abdel-Rahim
Like my classmates, I find that the software being used to avoid censorship by the government is totally acceptable and justified. People should not be told what they can and can't look at as they have their own rights. Everyone should be allowed to access the web as they see fit. People should be allowed to access any site that they want, unless the site has inappropriate content. In that case, an age limit should be sent. But otherwise people on the web should be allowed to view freely whatever site they want, as it’s their right and their choice on what they want to see, and, as long as its age-appropriation monitored on some sites, the government has no moral right to control what people look at online, as that's their private matters. As my classmates and I have said, the only conditions under which a government should filter content would be things that are only inappropriate for those of young age, like pornographic material, or ordering beer or alcohol online. That's okay to filter, but instead of blocking it completely, how about setting an incredibly strict age limit, to make sure that people who are looking at these pornographic sites, or ordering substances that are not appropriate for young ones, are at the legal age limit. Child pornography sites should be banned altogether, as they are just wrong. Also, sites that give information about the insides and secret information of that government are okay to block, as these are private matters that they don't want spread across the web. A risk that I can see with this software is that it's technically illegal, and, if the people using it are found, or even if one person using it is found, it can lead to even further, stricter censorship, and punishment for those who tried to evade the law. Many arrests would ensue, and if the media got hold of it, like TV crews, then it could turn into a multi-national issue, which is a problem. I am personally disgusted that a government would block people's searches, as people do have a right to view what they want, and the government shouldn't be allowed to censor that. What further deepens my disgust is that they are doing this in secret, blocking searches without people knowing. This is very deceptive of a government, and they should not infringe on people’s rights and privacy like that. I am outraged that a government, who is supposed to help the people, is, as the cartoon picture suggests, 'blindfolding' its people, and limiting their rights. This is very wrong, and the government should not do this, as it is deceitful behavior, as they are, as Cat said, lying to their people. Congress should definitely fund circumvention services, as people should be allowed to look at what they want, and have privacy in doing so, without being blocked out by their government, who is censoring them. They should have freedom to look at what they want, as it's a right to al people. That's why Congress should fund circumvention services.
I think that software that evades government is okay. People should have the benefit of accessing any website they want regardless of their purpose. The internet is made so that you can search it and find what ever you want. I believe that every one should have the freedom of exploring everything, or avoiding certain things. Governments shouldn't force people not to visit some places, because it will only make people more eager to know what exactly it is. The government should never filter any thing unless it has private information that may lead into conflict and uprising. This software might get the government angry and create a law against it and therefore will cause more troubles. Governments should never block people's searches with out them knowing, it's just not cool. yes, Congress should fund circumvention services.
srry Mr. beyer, not they people, the people
Many people in many countries have certain limits. For instance in the UAE some AXE commercials are banned because the way the AXE company works. They work by targeting their product to teens. So in their commercials they have hot girls who do stupid but sexy things to get the guys attention because he is wearing that type of deo. So on some sites online when an advertisement of AXE would show up the whole site itself would be blocked. I really don't agree with the fact that the Persians are not allowed the freedom of the Internet but, then again, it all has to do with their religion and how strictly they follow their religion. I do believe that people have the right to go to any websites. It is their legal freedom right to do things. I can't imagine the trouble that teens with raging hormones must feel like. It is scientifically proven that to hold things in is extremly unhealthy and it is dirty, and harms the body in the future. I think they have to learn to understand that this is a part of growing up, these are things and feelings that the teens must experience. I say it is unjustified that most web sites, including facebook and youtube are blocked. But I will say again, because of the sensitivity of the religion in that country it is what it is. I think the government should not block all the pornography web sites but I do think it is a good idea to block most of them, but not all. I honestly don't think that the software is a good idea because it is somewhat illegal. I think the public needs to know what is being blocked, like the small words the government blocks. It should be public knowledge because yet again, it is the right of the public to know their limits, not sneak it under thier head. I do think the congress should fund the service. This is not an easy topic to talk about because it all depends on the government and religion of the country.
Many people in many countries have certain limits. For instance in the UAE some AXE commercials are banned because the way the AXE company works. They work by targeting their product to teens. So in their commercials they have hot girls who do stupid but sexy things to get the guys attention because he is wearing that type of deo. So on some sites online when an advertisement of AXE would show up the whole site itself would be blocked. I really don't agree with the fact that the Persians are not allowed the freedom of the Internet but, then again, it all has to do with their religion and how strictly they follow their religion. I do believe that people have the right to go to any websites. It is their legal freedom right to do things. I can't imagine the trouble that teens with raging hormones must feel like. It is scientifically proven that to hold things in is extremly unhealthy and it is dirty, and harms the body in the future. I think they have to learn to understand that this is a part of growing up, these are things and feelings that the teens must experience. I say it is unjustified that most web sites, including facebook and youtube are blocked. But I will say again, because of the sensitivity of the religion in that country it is what it is. I think the government should not block all the pornography web sites but I do think it is a good idea to block most of them, but not all. I honestly don't think that the software is a good idea because it is somewhat illegal. I think the public needs to know what is being blocked, like the small words the government blocks. It should be public knowledge because yet again, it is the right of the public to know their limits, not sneak it under thier head. I do think the congress should fund the service. This is not an easy topic to talk about because it all depends on the government and religion of the country.
My opinion about the use of this software to evade government censorship is that it’s not a bad thing and not a good thing. Everyone should be allowed to access any website that they want, regardless of its content or purpose, my dad made orange, the internet company, block everything inappropriate but it didn’t just block inappropriate things but it also blocked things like “Bikini” “Sex education”. Governments should not force anyone not to access a site; it will only make the person more eager to access the site, for example, proxy. When I went to Dubai everything entertaining was blocked, many YouTube videos. The governments should not block things like that; they should only block things that lead to private information about the government, and Dubai blocks Pornographic content and things like that because it’s a strict Muslim country. The risks I see in using this software are that people will use Proxy’s so I don’t see a point in this. I think that the quote is just stupid because people can use Proxy’s. Yes Congress should fund circumvention services.
OMAR ALSADIIIIIII
I don’t think that the government should see what we are reading online. Yes people should. I think that the government should only block viruses and kill hackers. I think that there are not any risks using this software. I doing think that the government should be able to do that. They don’t own us and they should be blocking out think that they don’t like.
Naomi
In my opinion the use of this software to evade government censorship is completely acceptable. I think not all of the websites, because it would be inappropriate if a six year old would open a porn site …
They should block and filter internet content if there’s a lot of violence and if it’s rated.
I see no risk in using this software.
My reaction? I don’t agree, sure the language is changing, but that’s how life goes, so build a brigde and get over it. And what kind off world would it be if we couldn’t even talk freely?
And yes they should fund circumvention services.
In my opinion, I think about the use of this software evade government censorship it is acceptable. Not all people should allow access to any website because of the ages. Conditions should a government block and filter Internet content viruses and violence. I don't think that there are any risks that I see in using this software. My reaction to the following quote from the article is it's smart. Yes they should Congress fund circumvention services.
I think the use of software’s to evade government censorships is totally acceptable. I also think that people are allowed to access any website they want because people have their own rights. I agree with Ammar that all people have the freedom to search and visit anything they want. I think that the government shouldn’t block anything unless it’s really unacceptable. I don’t see that much of a risk in using this software, and if there was a risk it would be the viruses. I think that congress should not fund circumvention services because as I said before people can site what ever they want with privacy.
Post a Comment