Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Thousands Marched Against Censorship

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the my-dogs-are-barking dept.

Censorship 131

funfail writes "Thousands of Turkish demonstrators poured into central Istanbul yesterday to protest against the government's Internet censorship. New regulations from Turkey's Internet Technologies and Communications Authority set to come into effect on Aug. 22 will require Internet service providers to offer a choice of four filtering options: family, child, domestic or standard. Many websites are expected to be blocked as a result of the filtering measures."

cancel ×

131 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

That what you get (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139196)

When you vote islam terrorists.

Re:That what you get (2)

darjen (879890) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139252)

That's what you get with democracy. People vote for things you don't agree with. If you don't like it, too bad. You still have to give them your tax money anyway.

Re:That what you get (2)

zero.kalvin (1231372) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139748)

Democracy is not about just just the majority deciding(as your comment incline). If 90% of US voters decided that is legal to kill someone just because they looked funny in your direction, that wouldn't make it a democracy, or if they voted that only professed Christians can hold any job. Democracy is about preserving your rights against the tide of the majority. - Or that's how I see Democracy.

Re:That what you get (1)

darjen (879890) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139912)

Well, in my opinion (take what that is worth) once monarchy started getting too much resistance, the rich got together and decided to create a government that was almost as easy to game, yet still gave the people an illusion their voice was important. Even if it meant sometimes letting a few commoners get into their club, that was a compromise the wealthy were willing to accept. So as long as the right representatives get elected, things like censorship happen and it is just accepted it as the "will of the people"

Re:That what you get (2)

operagost (62405) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139928)

Actually, that's pretty much how pure democracy works-- which is why the Constitution was written to form a republic, which does a better job of protecting the rights of the minority.

Re:That what you get (2)

darjen (879890) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140050)

So were the rights of the poor western Pennsylvania farmers being protected when Hamilton enacted his excise tax on whiskey in 1791? Or how about those wonderful Alien and Sedition Acts in 1798? Seems to me like the Constitution never really did what was expected of it...

Re:That what you get (1)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140280)

Seems the Constitution usually did what was expected of it by those who read the document.

Re:That what you get (1)

zeroshade (1801584) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140002)

Unfortunately, that's not how democracy works. If 90% of the US voters decided it was legal to kill someone for whatever reason and then congress had a 90% vote to change the law to make it legal, then nothing would stop them from making it so. Because "Murder" is not listed in the constitution as something that must be prevented. It's assumed, but not stated.

Even if it was stated, with a 90% of the population, an amendment could be made to make it allowable.

In a democracy, a sufficiently large majority will take charge and decide everything, thus there must always be a balance to how big the majority is allowed to get.

Re:That what you get (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36140138)

Democracy is three wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Re:That what you get (1)

obergfellja (947995) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141562)

if what you don't like brings terror, the creator is a terrorist. republicans are my terrorist.

Re:That what you get (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139396)

Actually that's what you get when the elections are rigged and a vast social re-engineering project is attempted financed by the international forces to fit Turkey's population to their plans. And yes I'm from Turkey and I don't believe full democracy is in effect here for the last 8 years.....

Re:That what you get (1)

the_hellspawn (908071) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140688)

In the U.S. we vote for Democratic terrorists. Democratic terrorist raping your constitutional rights since 1776. Gosh how I hate the United Banana Republic of America.

Censor this! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139206)

Ataturk is Bhumibol!

Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139208)

I love how slashdot runs these "oh no! evil censorship" stories as if people around the world have the same values or customs as it relates to free speech or censorship.

The fact is that our Western norms doesn't make it the right one and people in more conservative or traditional countries in the world have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not. Who knows if the Turkish demonstrators represent the majority or whether its just a small section of the population?

The fact is this should be none of the readers concern here. Leave these internal domestic matters to the Turks or whoever else.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (3, Insightful)

paiute (550198) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139300)

I love how slashdot runs these "oh no! evil censorship" stories as if people around the world have the same values or customs as it relates to free speech or censorship.

The fact is that our Western norms doesn't make it the right one and people in more conservative or traditional countries in the world have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not. Who knows if the Turkish demonstrators represent the majority or whether its just a small section of the population?

The fact is this should be none of the readers concern here. Leave these internal domestic matters to the Turks or whoever else.

Bull crap.

The freedom we enjoy in the US means nothing in the end if we ignore oppression elsewhere.

I'm tired of religious despots. I'm fed up with tribes who circumcise infant girls. I'm real fucking annoyed with honor killings. I have come to the conclusion that there are some traditions and cultures that need to die out sooner rather than later, and I'm willing to apply the necessary explosives to make it happen.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1, Flamebait)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139312)

What branch of the US armed forces are you in?

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139362)

And I'm fucking tired with the death penalty in your country, you're DMCA notices to the whole world, your human-violation rights in your outside US prisons, your pseudo-freedom-of-speech, and a lot of other bulshit.
So fucking what?!!!

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139474)

I'm an American. I tired of that bullshit too.

>Assuming you mean that our Freedom of Speech isn't as broad a protection as it should be

But fuck. Muslim/Middle-eastern culture has some absolutely horrific bits to it. Fuck trying to understand the stuff in the GP's post. That kind of sick shit is completely incompatible with my personal morals. You like NASCAR? Whatever. You worship the a gigantic green blob? Fine. You mutilate infants w/o a valid health reason (boys and girls), kill the victims of rape (to salvage your own appearance), and treat women like property? Fuck your shit. DIAF.

I'm willing to tolerate some differences, but the above shit just makes me wish we'd develop an alternative to oil already so we can pull out and completely ignore the M.E. and let those fuckers kill themselves.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (3, Insightful)

1s44c (552956) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139504)

And I'm fucking tired with the death penalty in your country, you're DMCA notices to the whole world, your human-violation rights in your outside US prisons, your pseudo-freedom-of-speech, and a lot of other bulshit.

And the way they double tax their own citizens when they try to better themselves by working outside their borders. And the way they get involved and mess around in every international and many national disputes everywhere. And the crazy way they try to force their export regulations on companies all over the world. And don't even get me started on their excessive eating whilst large amounts of the world are starving.

The US is about as messed up as the rest of the world. Paiute is an ignorant xenophobe.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1, Flamebait)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139696)

I agree name calling without countering the argument is the best way to scare people off.
Especially when they hate such things as what Paiute was describing.... wait, what?

Id rather be an xenophobe than someone that condones bullying, mutilation, and sanctioned slaughter.
Do the world a favor, act like a jackass and throw yourself off a bridge.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140040)

If you mean male genital mutilation, that is still quite common in the USA.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141304)

It's funny ... he's talking about systemic oppression and discrimination of the kind that the 1st world nations haven't seen in a hundred years ... and idiots like you are comparing it to the icky habits of those uncouth NASCAR-loving Americans. I know that your large intestine is stopping you from seeing things in perspective, but c'mon, really ...

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (2)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139366)

I have come to the conclusion that there are some traditions and cultures that need to die out sooner rather than later

So you want Superman to swoop down and impose 'Truth, justice, and the American Way' it seems.

How isn't that you just manifesting a variant of American Exceptional-ism. [realclearpolitics.com]

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (2)

Golddess (1361003) | more than 3 years ago | (#36143308)

I'm sorry, but could you please explain how you get "Superman should come down and impose every single one of my beliefs on everyone" out of "these few traditions are so barbaric that they deserve to be eliminated"?

Personally, I'm with GP. I don't care who you are or what your reasons are, but something like amputating a child's clitoris* against their will is never cool. We may disagree on what is in the set of Never Allowed actions, and I certainly don't pretend to know everything that should or should not be in that set, but such a set does exist.

*I've seen various actions fall under the "female circumcision" flag, and yes, amputation of erogenous zones are among them.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (2)

PmanAce (1679902) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139380)

I have come to the conclusion that there are some traditions and cultures that need to die out sooner rather than later, and I'm willing to apply the necessary explosives to make it happen.

Some fundies from other cultures/religions have the same thinking like you...and some even put those words into action...something we can all agree that results in despicable actions.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139382)

Tell me, what proportion of infant boys have their genitals mutilated in the US?

Thread starter = fine troll, btw.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

Posting=!Working (197779) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139480)

You mean "how many infant boys have their genitals mutilated to prevent them from ever having pleasurable sex?"

None.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139516)

Actually, I wasn't aware that infant boys were capable of having pleasurable sex. Do you mean pleasurable for them, or for someone else?

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139628)

So nonconsenting nonmedical mutilation is acceptable providing you think it doesn't interfere with someone else's enjoyment of their own body?

Weird.

Also, I think you can function well enough without your tongue.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36143298)

Hmmm...comparing a needless bit of skin with the strongest organ of the body that assists in chewing and is necessary for talking? Ha!!

Here's an exercise: Put 2 penises in front of a woman -- one cut and one uncut. Then ask her which one she'd rather blow. THEN, when you stop feeling inferior, curse your parents for not circumcising you.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

pokerdad (1124121) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139802)

You mean "how many infant boys have their genitals mutilated to prevent them from ever having pleasurable sex?"

No, American boys have their genitals mutilated because of a myth that cutting off the foreskin somehow prevents infections, when the purpose of the foreskin is to prevent infections. That cutting off the foreskin reduces the pleasure gained from sex is just a side effect. http://www.homiegfunk.com/RIC2.htm [homiegfunk.com]

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139442)

Haa!!!
The typical dumb american slashdot occasional apparition!

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (2, Informative)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139446)

and I'm willing to apply the necessary explosives to make it happen.

So then go do it instead of threatening to do so. Oh right, you're another armchair soldier who in the end is nothing but a basement-dwelling pussy.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (4, Insightful)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139450)

. I have come to the conclusion that there are some traditions and cultures that need to die out sooner rather than later, and I'm willing to apply the necessary explosives to make it happen.

Ah! So it's okay for Americans to force their beliefs on people, but not for others. What god gave you that divine right?

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

udoschuermann (158146) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141486)

Ah! So it's okay for Americans to force their beliefs on people, but not for others.

I should think that there is a clear difference between forcing our belief on others that people should not be oppressed, injured, or even killed, versus forcing the spread of beliefs that support such ugliness.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36141658)

I should think that there is a clear difference between forcing our belief on others that people should not be oppressed, injured, or even killed, versus forcing the spread of beliefs that support such ugliness.

Really? Forcing one's beliefs on others is okay - so long as it is a belief you are comfortable with enforcing? I wonder what belief you would want to enforce if you were born and brought up in another culture, say one that supports such 'ugliness'.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36142216)

So you're threatening to kill anyone who threatens to kill anyone.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (3, Interesting)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140054)

I'm tired of religious despots. I'm fed up with tribes who circumcise infant girls. I'm real fucking annoyed with honor killings. I have come to the conclusion that there are some traditions and cultures that need to die out sooner rather than later, and I'm willing to apply the necessary explosives to make it happen.

I'm not willing to try to solve those problems with explosives when there are far better ways available. Compare, for instance, the conditions in Iraq (where heavy explosives were employed to oust a despot) to the conditions in Egypt (where a popular uprising ousted a despot): Things aren't perfect in Egypt, but you don't have thousands of people getting shot regularly. Similarly, if you want to go after female circumcision and honor killings, the best way to do that is to empower women to organize themselves and stand up against the men of their culture.

The basic method here is:
1. Give the people the knowledge that they're oppressed. That means getting Al Jazeera in there (because they regularly do investigative pieces on the leadership in that area), it means giving them the best Internet access you can, it means creating Radio Free Middle East, and it means Wikileaks.
2. Give the people a viable alternative to tolerating the oppression. There are lots of ways of doing that, but so far the most successful ones seem to be mass protests. It's far from a 100% success rate, but if they succeed they have the advantage of reducing the chance that the evil despot is replaced by another evil despot.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

Princeofcups (150855) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141192)

Bull crap.

The freedom we enjoy in the US means nothing in the end if we ignore oppression elsewhere.

I'm tired of religious despots. I'm fed up with tribes who circumcise infant girls. I'm real fucking annoyed with honor killings. I have come to the conclusion that there are some traditions and cultures that need to die out sooner rather than later, and I'm willing to apply the necessary explosives to make it happen.

And I'm tired of abortion restrictions, universal health care paranoia, intelligent design in schools, absurd restrictions on pain killers, worship of the rich and famous, government representatives owned by big business, an out of control military killing people by the thousands, etc. etc. Someone really needs to step in and erase the American culture and replace it with something sane.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141542)

Improve the world and start in your own backyard.
Start with privacy and implement it as it is INTENDED. I am also sick of the "War on drugs" that the US is imposing on the rest.

There are many other things, like no segregation of church and state (otherwise gay marriage would not be an issue) and the drinking age, but those first two should be a enough to get you started.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141628)

"Bullcrap" is all yours.

"The freedom we enjoy in the US means nothing in the end if we ignore oppression elsewhere." this is absurd.

Obviously the high moderation status of your comment is the result of political views of moderators, not it's actual value.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36142234)

I care. You may say I'm a dreamer. But I'm not the only one. I hope some day you will join us...and the world will live as one" JL

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

dargaud (518470) | more than 3 years ago | (#36142602)

I'm fed up with tribes who circumcise infant girls.

Funny, isn't the US one of the main countries the practice penis mutilation [circumstitions.com] on infant boys ?!?

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36142694)

I'm tired of religious despots. I'm fed up with these tribes that damage the genitals of their infant boys. I'm real fucking annoyed of these people who think it's okay to be imprisoned with the wink wink, nudge nudge threat of rape for growing the wrong plants. I have come to the conclusion that there are some traditions and cultures that need to die out sooner rather than later, and I'm willing to apply the necessary explosives to make that happen.

As Jesus said, take the mote out of your own eye before you remove the beam from your brother's. Yes, certain forms of female genital cutting do more damage and are thus worse than what Americans and Jews do to little boys, but bringing up the former without even mentioning the latter is rank hypocrisy. And don't say that male circumcision has medical benefits, because they will tell you the same thing about female circumcision.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

Meneth (872868) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139308)

Slashdot is not an America-only site, you know. Turks come here too.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139334)

But... but... I'm an American and I am reading this in the US. So that means it's all about me, right? Right? ME ME ME

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139348)

Slashdot is not an America-only site, you know. Turks come here too.

I think you're missing the point of the story ... "Turks come here too" ... "not for long!"

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36140554)

What about JDs?

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (2)

silanea (1241518) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139350)

Apparently a few thousand turks do share those "western" values.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

dsleif (2163084) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139360)

But they're my values! They can't have em! I know, I'll patent them. Ah, the American Way.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139402)

... people in more conservative or traditional countries in the world have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not.

How are they supposed to decide what is appropriate and what is not when they don't have access to the information necessary to make that decision?! Democracy without freedom of speech doesn't mean anything.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139404)

people ... have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not

Best ultra short summary of censorship I've seen in years, is censorship takes away that right.

Thanks for helping, although that's not what you intended.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

Posting=!Working (197779) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139420)

The fact is that our Western norms doesn't make it the right one and people in more conservative or traditional countries in the world have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not.

I agree, people do have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not. Unfortunately for the rest of your post, that means there can be no censorship at the government level, because then people are not given any choice in the matter. The fact they are demonstrating shows that the people want to choose for themselves, which requires unfiltered access to information.

Have you looked at any news this year? There are half a dozen of examples that refute nearly everything you said, not to mention the many dozens more in the past. Turkey shares a border with Syria. Syrians are using donkeys to smuggle videos and pictures out of the country to get the word out about their struggles. You still think government censorship is a good thing? Then you must be incredibly ignorant about the world and it's people.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (2)

nusuth (520833) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139422)

I am not allowing other people to decide what I should *know.* Turkish culture does not value intellectual freedoms as much as westerners do and the government might be acting to people's will (IMHO they don't. Those do not have a problem with current internet censorship are basically not interested in the issue. There is a very small minority pushing for less freedom, a much bigger minority pushing for more freedom while the real majority does not care) but that is beside the point. I don't care if I am in the minority, even if I am just one guy, I am not letting the other people or the government to decide what information I have access to, especially since the said information is freely available to remaining parts of the world. The censorship is a violation of my rights, majority cannot take away my rights.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140256)

Wait, what country are you describing? 2 minorities fighting over freedoms and an aPATHETIC majority... Sounds like Earth to me!

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139432)

So what you're saying is, much like the reason that Constantinople got "the works", this is nobody's business but the Turks?

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

1s44c (552956) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139434)

The fact is this should be none of the readers concern here. Leave these internal domestic matters to the Turks or whoever else.

We don't all live in the same 'here'.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

bhagwad (1426855) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139818)

But that's the whole point. These people who are marching are demanding the right to determine FOR THEMSELVES what is appropriate and inappropriate for them to watch. They just don't want the GOVERNMENT doing it.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139858)

more conservative or traditional countries in the world have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not.

Well, the *men* do, at least.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

morgauxo (974071) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140182)

It's our culture on Slashdot to hate censorship in all forms and in all places. Who are you to judge us? Hypocrite!

Actually, the "it's their values which are different from ours" argument, as often as it is spouted is wrong. If censorship is some people's culture, if it's their choice then it wouldn't exist. There would be no need. Nobody would be saying anything they would need to censor. Censorship is just one group, majority or not oppressing another. Attempts to redefine it around a different cultures values are nonsense.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

mapkinase (958129) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141646)

It's ironic how you posted anonymously, obviously expected down moderation from polically biased /. crowd.

That's what censorship actually is: when somebody's opinion is suppressed for political reasons.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (1)

mehrotra.akash (1539473) | more than 3 years ago | (#36142320)

"The fact is that our Western norms doesn't make it the right one and people in more conservative or traditional countries in the world have a right to decide for themselves what is appropriate or not. Who knows if the Turkish demonstrators represent the majority or whether its just a small section of the population?"

Exactly, people not the govt.

Re:Who Cares?? Its None Of Our Business (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36142930)

Maybe what's important for people to see is not so much "there is an internal debate about censorship in Turkey" as it is "there are ongoing debates about censorship that go on in many different countries, all the time".

This story is of interest to me not because I have a stake in the internal affairs of the Turkish government, or because I have a particular interest in the intellectual freedoms of the Turkish people (except in a vague and generalized sense in which I feel that international communication is important and that nationalized censorship may be detrimental to that), but because it helps put into context discussions that are happening about filtering/censorship in my own country, and prompts me to think further about the possible benefits* and detriments of these kinds of systems.

*(By benefits, I mean that it has to be beneficial to *somebody* -- i.e., the group who proposed/will be administering it -- or it wouldn't be worth the not-inconsiderable hassle; so what makes it worth that for them in each case? Also, what makes those who are not controlling the process go along with it? Surprisingly, these are not necessarily constant from case to case.)
 

First on the censorship list (all levels) (2)

FriendlyLurker (50431) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139212)

"Turkey's prime minister is threatening to sue over the recently released diplomatic cables on the website WikiLeaks. A cable written by former U.S. Ambassador Eric Edelman that alleged Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had eight Swiss bank accounts, struck a deep nerve."

http://www.voanews.com/english/news/europe/Turkish-PM-Threatens-to-Sue-Over-Wikileaks-Claims-111388889.html [voanews.com]

Re:First on the censorship list (all levels) (0, Offtopic)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139610)

Censorship is okay as long as you CHOOSE to have your web censored. For example I like the idea of a "child" filter or "parent" filter to screen-out the nasty stuff.

However I also want to keep the current option as well (no filtering - show me everything).

Re:First on the censorship list (all levels) (1)

lavagolemking (1352431) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139812)

However I also want to keep the current option as well (no filtering - show me everything).

Only criminals want to opt out of filtering!

Re:First on the censorship list (all levels) (-1, Troll)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139914)

-1 100% Offtopic

How is the parent post offtopic? Someone has been given mod points, and should not have been.

Re:First on the censorship list (all levels) (2)

misexistentialist (1537887) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140064)

If you want censorship you can install filtering on your own computers or maybe pay extra for a filtering plan from your ISP. Having the government involved means that you are choosing not to choose, which is pathetic in itself, but in addition too easily becomes not choosing not to choose.

Re:First on the censorship list (all levels) (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36140266)

Burn the Turkish flag [goo.gl] (Site censored in Turkey)

i don't get it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139226)

The arab world is boiling with protests and the goverment of Turkey couldn't imagine this happening?

citizens marching against censorship mistaken (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139238)

as our rulers lament; "we have no secrets" their black-ops 'security' force teams are killing the marchers to insure their security.

These are REAL men (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139240)

These are REAL men not like the wieners who threaten rebellion and repost that "tree of liberty" quote from Jefferson while sitting in their parent's basement with their cheetos-encrusted fingers typing at their computer. Take not Slashtards, this is how you get the government to listen to you and care. Posting crap on Slashdot where none of them are going to ever read or even know about it is for pansies. If you had real balls show it by standing up in person instead of hiding behind your Internet pseudonym.

Re:These are REAL men (0)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139322)

I can think of a few recent marches in London involving thousands or tens of thousands of people which have made no difference whatever. Some of them barely received a small article in the national press.

Speech and demonstration are important, but if you really want to make your country listen you have to refuse to work.

Re:These are REAL men (0)

cavreader (1903280) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139372)

The most effective and dangerous censorship is "self censorship". Most perople tend to limit themselves to information and opinions they happen to agree with and ignore any thing that might disrupt their current thinking. The current internet topology makes it very hard to censor information for long periods of time in countries with a robust internet and wireless communication networks. There are always ways to circumvent the blocks put in place by governments who seek to restrict information.

Re:These are REAL men (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139326)

Says the anonymous coward - I hope you were going for massively ironic. On a side note, around a million people in the UK (with a population of only circa 60m) marched against the war in Iraq. The government of the time took zero notice. If a supposedly progressive western government can ignore the protests of such a huge gathering of its populace on such a massively important topic as going to war, what makes you think any government is going to listen to "thousands" complaining about an internet rating system? I applaud their effort, I just think it will more likely than not fall on deaf ears.

Re:These are REAL men (1)

benjfowler (239527) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139368)

Thank you. I wish I had mod points to vote you up. There are too many basement-dwelling Internet libertarians who think that posting shit on the Internet will change the world.

Folks, wanna see how to really change the world? Follow the example of the brave men and women who are literally putting their bodies on the line to oppose tyranny and injustice in the Middle East. Not the semi-literate, Jon Katz-reading retards who hang out on places like Slashdot.

Re:These are REAL men (1)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139468)

Folks, wanna see how to really change the world? Follow the example of the brave men and women who are literally putting their bodies on the line to oppose tyranny and injustice in the Middle East

Nice ideal, but that change is still only happening when The Powers That Be in the West actually support the uprising. Witness the difference in fortunes between the West-supported Libyan rebels and the those in Bahrain, Yemen, and Syria.

Re:These are REAL men (1)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139740)

I agree, I mean if you can jump from a building and land on the piece of concrete you want to get rid of is your way of tackling a problem... then by all means, die to the bullet.
Unfortunately, you have to be alive to continue the fight.
Remember that guy that flew his plane into the IRS building?
Yeah... that protest went far... ppffttttt.

At least they're up-front about it (5, Insightful)

Tx (96709) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139264)

At least the Turkish government is taking responsibility for the censorship. Here in the UK, the Internet Watch Foundation basically has a free hand to censor the internet; the IWF has the blessing of the government, but it's not a government agency, so there's no parliamentary oversight, they're not required to answer to anybody as to what they blacklist, and unless they fuck up spectacularly [guardian.co.uk] , nobody actually knows what they're censoring. We just have to hope it's only actually nasty kiddie porn, but as the aforementioned fuck up illustrates, their judgement is open to question. Our government likes it this way because technically the government isn't censoring anything.

Re:At least they're up-front about it (1)

i ate my neighbour (1756816) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139392)

Actually, it currently works in a similar way here. The Information and Communications Technologies Authority(BTK) orders ISPs to block lots of websites without declaring any reason. The fact that the "Law regarding crimes committed on the Internet" (indirectly) requires the websites to prove their innocence, while they can be taken down without notice.

They screwed up big two weeks ago when they tried to take down a list of websites including the most popular domestic social portal, which has enough cashflow to defend itself and enough influence to organize such an event.

The website itself is strictly text only(besides a couple of logos) and strictly moderated against illegal content. The reason was child porn, and then BTK declared that the portal was added to the list by mistake, but for some reason the whole order got cancelled after the reactions.

Re:At least they're up-front about it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139460)

the IWF has the blessing of the government, but it's not a government agency, so everytime they view a child porn site to decide whether to block it they are breaking the law

FTFY.

Re:At least they're up-front about it (4, Informative)

Bogtha (906264) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139616)

ISPs aren't required to implement the IWF blacklist unless they want to provide services to the government. Individuals are free to use an ISP that doesn't implement the blacklist, such as AAISP [aaisp.net.uk] .

Re:At least they're up-front about it (1)

heathen_01 (1191043) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140292)

That kind of freedom is almost twice the price of living under the filter.

Re:At least they're up-front about it (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140730)

nobody actually knows what they're censoring.

The whole point of a censors office is that no-one should know anything about what, why, or how the are censoring anything.

A good censors office is unelected, unaccountable, opaque, and their decisions must not be subject to appeal. A good censors office is the exact opposite of an open court, a short circuiting of the rule of law.

The 3 packages are optional. (1)

will_die (586523) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139296)

Reading about it, if you don't make a selection then you are in the "standard" filter, which is the same a what is currently available [todayszaman.com] . However some sites are currently already blocked so would continue to be blocked in the "standard" package.
The guy pushing this, there is also some disagreement over if it is constitutional is doing on the basis that the free market has failed in this and the government needs to make sure that the filter options are provided and followed.

Re:The 3 packages are optional. (4, Informative)

nusuth (520833) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139552)

There used to be a very primitive way of enforcing blocking of sites: ttnet DNS's were not correctly resolving names. This lead to public aphaty on censorship issue, as anyone and their dog knew how to use alternate DNSes or if all else fails, TOR. The prime minister himself said "I can access the banned sites, you can too." The blocked site list (which must be constructed by internet users, as there is no transparency about the process at all) is absurdly long but most didn't care - they didn't even notice. Most sites are banned without a court order (not that those banned on court orders are more sensible) and on grounds of "obscenity" defined by middle aged religious conservative bureaucrat men. Now that the institutions, mechanisms and laws are in place, they are making the next step: trying to bypass filters becomes a crime. Moreover ISP passwords will be tied to RW ID, so you will use the same login if you are the same guy. No, thanks. Current situation is less than ideal, but the proposed one is a disaster.

How and what? (1)

vlm (69642) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139340)

will require Internet service providers to offer a choice of four filtering options

First, horrible word choice, such a nice green eco-policy of filtering clean spring water into crystal clear bottled water, or filtering sewage before pouring it into the noble savage wilderness. Instead of what it really is, which is top down totalitarian thought-crime enforcement.

Second, how? From a technical standpoint, I'm thinking segregate by mac address into certain ip pools, which then are censored by customized BGP feeds? Coming from an ISP background, I'm momentarily mystified about how I'd do it. Of course the way they'll PROBABLY do it, is postal mail one of 4 CDROMs to each subscriber containing MS windows only, MSIE only, censorship and keylogging and govt reporting and govt backdoor software, hopefully leaving mac / i-device / linux users completely and utterly alone...

family, child, domestic or standard

Whats the difference? Its an interesting insight into turkish culture that they can market four different versions. Here the mainstream marketing model does not acknowledge its even theoretically possible to separate those four groups. At least here, its a doublespeak concept that family = child = standard, don't know that domestic is, but I'm guessing it would be some patriotic middle america theme as opposed to foreign like foreign cars which are bad, unlike all Chinese junk at a walmart which is good, or something vague like that.

Re:How and what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36142982)

If it's DNS level filtering, you could just have the ISP DNS server respond differently based on the source IP address of the request. I believe this is possible with BIND and views.

If it's IP-level blocking they could handle it just by installing a bunch of packet filters. It'd likely be expensive, but that can be mitigated by spreading them out close to the edges of the network. They wouldn't need to be stateful, either, simple layer 3 filtering would suffice - again, with different rules matching different source IPs.

You could probably do this using cheap off-the-shelf commodity server hardware rather than paying big bucks for specialized firewalls. (I've deployed serveral entirely software-based firewall solutions in a virtualization environment that can easilly filter a respectable amount of traffic, just using some random corner of some virtualization iron.) If you don't want to virtualise, you might do something like diskless PXE-booted OpenBSD boxes grabbing a pf ruleset from a server on startup and with a cron job. That should be able to filter a gigabit a second easilly, especially statelessly. Might be able to do more even, with multiple network cards, or even 10 Gbit/s network cards (I have not had any experience with this past 1 Gbit/s).

Of course if they want to do application-level blocking, that would be a little more difficult. You'd have to run some kind of proxy - although you could cheat and assume that your entire HTTP request is going to fit into a single packet, and just drop packets with offending HTTP requests. Again - statelessly.

Of you could just do what the Chinese likely do for their great firewall, just use something like NetFlow to track connections, and if there are some connections you don't like, just spoof an RST for them after the fact. Censorship server offline or overloaded? No big deal, traffic just goes unmolested until they fix it.

how to do it (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139478)

how to improve a web ranking e.g. http://www.cn2009shoes.com it is not good ranking

ISP now stands for... (2)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139488)

...Internet Surveillance Protocol

Watch what you say, or they will be calling you a radical, a liberal, fanatical a CRIMINAL.

Re:ISP now stands for... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36140566)

Won't you sign up your name? [facebook.com]
We'd like to feel that you're acceptable [iwf.org.uk]
Respectable, [politicalquote.net]
presentable, [educate-yourself.org]
a vegetable... [wikipedia.org]

Re:ISP now stands for... (1)

udoschuermann (158146) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141766)

Oh, let's all be sensible, logical, responsible, practical!

Re:ISP now stands for... (1)

JockTroll (996521) | more than 3 years ago | (#36142724)

Since you all asked "please tell me who I am", I'm telling you: YOU ARE FAGS.

Censored (1)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 3 years ago | (#36139684)

"Thousands of Turkish demonstrators poured into central Istanbul yesterday to protest against the government's Internet censorship.

They did? I didn't hear anything about it.

Seriously, the BBC (in the UK) were very quiet about this happening, almost as if the BBC were censoring the news to show us populist garbage of football (soccer) results.

Re:Censored (1)

heathen_01 (1191043) | more than 3 years ago | (#36140440)

Forget about it, its not important. Why don't you read the story "Tarantulas eject silk from feet" instead? You can be assured that the BBC give you all the important information you need to know in an unbiased and factully complete way. After all they are independent.

Re:Censored (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36140670)

Quite frankly even the Turkish media didn't cover the story. It is speculated that most of major TV channels are either suppressed or partially owned by current government one way or another. Turkey is currently preparing for an election and media is only interested in politicians' tantrums.

There is even a joke spreading on internet. " 20 thousand that thought they joined the protest against censorship is trying to accept the awful truth that the protest didn't exist."

Example (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36139786)

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk is a gay Ottoman who secretly wore his mother's panties. Hurray! Now Slashdot can be put on a Turkish blacklist [ihbarweb.org.tr] as well!

Not just upcoming filters but existing censorship (1)

SD-Arcadia (1146999) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141406)

Let me point out that the protest was against existing arbitrary censorship as much as it was about the new 4 "filter packages" (child, family, .tr only, standard - you have to pick 1) that are to be introduced in August.
Already there are estimates of 80000 websites censored - estimated because the list is not made public, nor the reason for censoring. Typically, the targetted sites are around : porn (ALL porn, though they like to wave around child porn as an excuse), atheism (dawkins banned), communism, homosexuality (gay dating sites banned), kurdish nationalism, streaming sites (especially if live streams of a large pay tv channel are infringed), gambling-betting (the state sanctioned sport betting service runs full force ofcourse) and many others. One offending blog or clip can get entire domains banned (wordpress, youtube, etc. were at some point banned too).

Coming Soon (0)

ThatsNotPudding (1045640) | more than 3 years ago | (#36141706)

to a Republican-controlled country near you. #WhyBotherVoting

Thousands Marched Against Censorship (1)

FurtiveGlancer (1274746) | more than 3 years ago | (#36142144)

Not all their names were released.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>