Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

India Lurches Toward Internet Censorship

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the history-of-the-world dept.

Censorship 86

First time accepted submitter ixarux writes "India is at a crucial crossroad at the moment. Internet censorship laws are getting stricter as it begins to ban file-sharing and video-sharing websites. It started with Indian courts allowing censorship of Google, Facebook, etc. It has now gone one step ahead and decided to ask ISPs to block file-sharing sites. It is the movie industry which is again at the forefront of this. Anonymous retaliated, and targeted the websites of various Indian government websites in protest. What India lacks at this crucial juncture are debates in the public domain about this and citizens actually organizing protests as seen in the West."

cancel ×

86 comments

OK! (-1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#40047923)

WHO drank my BARF BAG?!

Re:OK! (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40047947)

Pretty sure it was India. No one drinking anything else, could come up with something so cockbrained otherwise.

Re:OK! (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048323)

No one drinking anything else, could come up with something so cockbrained otherwise.

Oh, come on, you haven't been watching. I can easily see the same sort of crap coming from Pakistan, the Saudis, China, North Korea, the USA, (soon) Canada, the UK, France, Italy, ...

One word: OpenNic.

Re:OK! (1)

thej1nx (763573) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049197)

Aww don't sell USA short!
.

Think about it. If the country where internet originated from, and which pretty much controls the internet, wants to monitor and control it, why wouldn't other countries want to follow suit?

In fact the very excused used by Indian government and the courts in most of above cases was "Well, these companies are doing the surveillance and censoring for USA, so how dare they deny us, when they do business on our soil?".

And considering that even Indians politicians are poor compared to their US counterparts, while being almost equally corrupt, media companies find it much easier and cheaper to bribe them to get the kind of laws they want. Bollywood media companies couldn't care less about internet piracy, since internet speed being what it is in India, it takes days to download movies and people find it cheaper to go watch a movie for just 1USD equivalent. The media companies in question here, are again the US ones.

So it seems like if you must blame anyone at all, it would be USA for starting this shit, and exporting it to other countries as well, thanks to its utterly corrupt for-corporates-and-rich-people government.

On top of that, the ruling congress party tried to play communal politics by trying to appease the muslim population which votes en masse. Muslims have always wanted to control the internet after the mohammed cartoons saga(something again started by the west... go ahead, poke a few more sleeping bears please). So there is that missing part of the equation as well.

Re:cheaper to bribe them to get the kind of laws t (2)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049409)

Brilliant connecting of the dots, that if we outsource everything else, one day we will outsource bribery, and get nice new laws in India nice and cheap.

Re:OK! (1)

ganesh.rao (1581043) | more than 2 years ago | (#40057419)

And considering that even Indians politicians are poor compared to their US counterparts, while being almost equally corrupt, media companies find it much easier and cheaper to bribe them to get the kind of laws they want. Bollywood media companies couldn't care less about internet piracy, since internet speed being what it is in India, it takes days to download movies and people find it cheaper to go watch a movie for just 1USD equivalent. The media companies in question here, are again the US ones.

Slight change in the information you have.

10 Mbps is now available for 20 USD/m in many parts of India; no contracts. Most connected users around the country have atleast 2 Mbps for less than 5-6 USD/m. Thats fast enough to download your movies in a few hours. Watching a movie in the theaters still costs 6-10 USD per person per movie.

Re:OK! (1)

thej1nx (763573) | more than 2 years ago | (#40133995)

Nonsense. Perhaps you should actually go and check the rates of Airtel broadband, Tata or even BSNL broadband services, instead of making things up. Here is news, most of them do not even offer speed above 4MB to home users. As for movies, you are seriously telling me that a guy in Banaras or say Damanjodi even, pays 500 INR to watch a movie? Perhaps you should come out of your fantasy world and start using the actual forex-exchange ratio that the rest of us use.

India's Congress Party = One Party State (5, Interesting)

sanman2 (928866) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048145)

It's the ruling Indian Congress Party which is supporting moves to crack down on the internet, because they view the internet as a threat to their continued rule. The Indian Congress Party likes to outwardly market itself to the world as democratic, but inwardly they really want a One Party State, with a mere token opposition as a figleaf.

The ruling party has been making a lot of predatory moves since it took office - like trying to get its own men onto the Election Commission, which under the constitution is supposed to be an independent oversight body for elections. They've also brought in dubious new inventions like Electronic Voting Machines, which they claim will allow elections to be conducted more efficiently, but which could dangerously be used to rig votes, since they could easily be tampered with while offering no paper trail.

The Congress Party has increasingly been using the courts to harass members of political opposition parties, even while blocking any criminal investigation into their own party members. They are also engaging in rampant wiretapping and eavesdropping on opposition party members. The ruling party also wants to create new security agencies which are directly under the control of the central govt where the party currently holds power, while diminishing the rights of the states.

They are doing all these things because they want to keep themselves in power in perpetuity. Oh, and this is the same party that invokes Mahatma Gandhi's name at every opportunity, since they figure that by doing so, it gives them unlimited carte blanche to do whatever they want. They're just trying to keep India safely in the arms of Gandhi, you see. :p

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (3, Interesting)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048523)

It won't work for very long. The Mahatma Gandhi angle only works for the older folks. The young folks are not going to be that affected by it. They will not be pleased with the govt changing their lifestyle. There will be definitely some issues.. and if they get mad enough they'll vote en masse.

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (3, Informative)

rtb61 (674572) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049213)

The censorship is targeted at the impoverished masses, the cheap labour base the creates Indian multi-millionaires while that labour is dresses in rags. With access to internet cafes available every where, the ruling elite do not want the labour base to become to aware of the gap between rich and poor in India and of course the gap between India workers and first world workers doing the same work.

They have quite successfully be divided up by castes, religion and ethnicity, to keep them struggling amongst themselves but eventually they would work together to tackle those they keep them impoverished and a free and open internet would accelerate that.

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049257)

The censorship is targeted at the impoverished masses, the cheap labour base the creates Indian multi-millionaires while that labour is dresses in rags. With access to internet cafes available every where, the ruling elite do not want the labour base to become to aware of the gap between rich and poor in India and of course the gap between India workers and first world workers doing the same work.

They have quite successfully be divided up by castes, religion and ethnicity, to keep them struggling amongst themselves but eventually they would work together to tackle those they keep them impoverished and a free and open internet would accelerate that.

it's a bunch of dune coons. who cares?

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (2)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049453)

Part of it is is the Hindu religion. But mostly it is corruption and a middle class that does not seem to care. The middle class can bring about a lot of change since they are primarily what makes the economy go.

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (1)

sanman2 (928866) | more than 2 years ago | (#40054543)

It's the rising middle class who pose the greatest threat to Congress Party rule, since they aren't so poor that they're easily cowed by the state and yet not wealthy enough to float above the fray. While the poor don't have sufficient internet access to be a threat, it's the middle class who make the most use of the internet, and are increasingly bold in their criticisms of Congress Party rule. Furthermore, Indian ex-pats living and working abroad are the most vocal critics of Congress Party rule, since they're beyond the reach of the govt to retaliate against.

History around the world has shown that it's a strong middle class which ensures the protection of democracy and democratic rights. It was during recent protests led by an old man named Anna Hazare that the Indian middle class rallied around him to support his protest against govt corruption and the ruling Congress Party's connivance in it.

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | more than 2 years ago | (#40060093)

I agree 100%, as an ex-pat. I've never liked Congress I. You know things are bullshit every time they invoke the founding fathers. While the BJP isn't exactly the bastion of goodness either, I trust them more than I would trust Congress I.

USA = Two Party State (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049219)

The ruling party has been making a lot of predatory moves since it took office - like trying to get its own men onto the Election Commission, which under the constitution is supposed to be an independent oversight body for elections.

On a related note, 3 FEC Commissioners are Democrats and 3 are Republicans. The Commissioners are appointed by the President, thus ensuring that a third party will never gain a seat on the FEC.

Re:USA = Two Party State (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049607)

I don't think the FEC matters on that issue. Since the constitution sets up a first-past-the-post, winner take all system, there will never be enough of a third party for that to come up.

We could change it so that parties wouldn't have to reach for at least half the political spectrum, allowing room for third and however many parties to spring up, but that would require a change in the constitution, which WOULD be blocked by the two parties.

Of course, I have yet to see a real problem with the two party system. It's worked thus far. I see no evidence that the two party system suppresses good people from running or that multiparty systems create great politicians. And since every democracy with more than two parties ALSO has corruption, bribery, and representatives being bought with campaign contributions or other legal bribes, I think it's pretty clear it wouldn't fix that either.

Frankly, I have no idea why so many slashdotters are convinced that a third party is so important. There are a lot of barriers to getting one, and there would be little value in doing so.

Re:USA = Two Party State (1)

sgtrock (191182) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050815)

You need to study our political history more. (I'm assuming that you're an American as well.)

Virtually every major shift in Federal policy was initially driven by a third party introducing an idea or set of ideas that were inimical to the entrenched interests of the two dominating parties. In the past couple of hundred years, successful third parties have either become powerful enough to displace one of the two major players or they have seen their ideas co-opted by one or both of the two major parties. In the past, we've seen strong third parties show up every twenty to fifty years. It looks to me that we're long, LONG overdue for a real challenge to the two ruling parties.

The real weakness with a two party system is that really does divide us artificially into just two camps. Almost everyone has to pretty much accept a lot of crap that they disagree with in order to advance their own agenda. (Look at what the Tea Party has done to the Republicans in the past few years, for example.)

By contrast, multiparty systems allow a citizen the opportunity to vote for a paty that aligns much more closely with their own political views. This means that a much stronger political voice is granted to minority views because it is much more difficult for one strong minority to suppress debate. This in turn means that you end up with a government that is much more responsive to its citizenry. As long as you have a well educated nation, a multiparty system is inherently more flexible and paradoxically, more stable than a more rigid system like ours.

That, in a nutshell, is why so many of us would like to see us move to a multiparty system.

Re:USA = Two Party State (1)

ultranova (717540) | more than 2 years ago | (#40051047)

I see no evidence that the two party system suppresses good people from running or that multiparty systems create great politicians.

What a multi-party system does is give a credible threat of revolution.

In a two-party system your choices are bad and worse (from your point of view), and the parties know this. What do they care about pleasing their base; where is it going to - to the even worse party? No, all that matters are the swing voters and unaligned groups.

On the other hand, in a multi-party system there are always opportunistic smaller parties ready to capitalize on dissatisfaction and welcome defectors. And if there's not, you can simply find one yourself, based on whatever ideals you seem fit.

So, in other words, a multi-party system encourages political involvement by the general public, while a two-party system encourages darkness induced audience apathy [tvtropes.org] . A multi-party system is great if you trust your fellow citizens more than politicians, and a two-party works wonders if you want the plebes to keep their filthy paws off of power while still giving lip service to democracy.

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (2)

oiron (697563) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050023)

What a lot of crap in a single post!

It's the ruling Indian Congress Party which is supporting moves to crack down on the internet, because they view the internet as a threat to their continued rule. The Indian Congress Party likes to outwardly market itself to the world as democratic, but inwardly they really want a One Party State, with a mere token opposition as a figleaf.

I won't pretend that certain politicians *cough*Chidu*cough* wouldn't have wet dreams, but that's hardly the reality; their current standing is below even a simple majority [wikipedia.org] , and they need coalition partners to survive. These coalition partners are basically a bunch of regionals who have their own agendas, and probably aren't that strong in the states anyway (DMK was booted out of power, for example. They won't get much in the next General Elections). They're also notoriously unreliable and difficult to control (Trinamool). I think I just named the two biggest members of the UPA besides the INC.

This government is being propped up by strange deals with "outside supporters" like the Samajwadi, who aren't reliable in the best of circumstances, and now? Ha!

The ruling party has been making a lot of predatory moves since it took office - like trying to get its own men onto the Election Commission, which under the constitution is supposed to be an independent oversight body for elections. They've also brought in dubious new inventions like Electronic Voting Machines, which they claim will allow elections to be conducted more efficiently, but which could dangerously be used to rig votes, since they could easily be tampered with while offering no paper trail.

The EC is appointed "by the President" according to the constitution. This (India being a Westminister-style democracy) effectively means by the Cabinet. The interesting thing is that one of the strongest ECs (Gopalaswami) was appointed during the Congress tenure! To be fair, they also appointed Chawla, who's a rat's ass...

The EVMs were introduced (on the national level) in the 2004 General Election, when the BJP was in power. But thanks for playing that game anyway...

The Congress Party has increasingly been using the courts to harass members of political opposition parties, even while blocking any criminal investigation into their own party members.

Kalmadi investigation was blocked? Spectrum was blocked?

Yeah, they try to defend their own people and vilify their opposition. Which political party doesn't? The BJP tried the same tactics in Karnataka and are in trouble over it...

The ruling party also wants to create new security agencies which are directly under the control of the central govt where the party currently holds power, while diminishing the rights of the states.

Um, they haven't exactly been successful, have they? Anyway, sharing of intelligence on a national level may not be a bad thing, if we can enforce separation from the politicians...

They are doing all these things because they want to keep themselves in power in perpetuity.

Which is the end-game of every political party...

Oh, and this is the same party that invokes Mahatma Gandhi's name at every opportunity, since they figure that by doing so, it gives them unlimited carte blanche to do whatever they want. They're just trying to keep India safely in the arms of Gandhi, you see. :p

Which party wouldn't tout its most famous leader?

They also have enough opposition from the actual Gandhian community.

Anyway, they haven't been very successful in the last couple of decades, have they? I count the VP Singh government, the 3rd front government in the late 90s, two bouts of BJP/NDA rule, and three of Congress rule. Not something that screams "one party state", eh?

Look, I'm not trying to defend the Congress as the font of all virtue, but please don't spread outright falsehoods in public forums (yeah, I know this is asking for a lot).

For the record, I'm firmly against any attempt, by whomever it may be, to regulate the Internet in any way further than the old IT act in India. I just don't believe that the Congress party is this incredibly efficient instrument of oppression that you seem to think it is.

Re:India's Congress Party = One Party State (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40058961)

troll much?

Isn't India the one asking the UN to take up the (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40047941)

role of Internet Stewardship?

No thanks.

Re:Isn't India the one asking the UN to take up th (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048123)

Lol , perhaps India will let the U.N.run their business from now on.
That really is a lot of people to piss off all at once.
Has India ever had a revolution?
I for one welcome the entertainment of giving the U.N. enough rope to really fuck up like the bureaucratic clusterwank it is.
The revolution will be streamed live!

Re:Isn't India the one asking the UN to take up th (3, Informative)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048415)

Has India ever had a revolution?

Wow. Go read some history [wikipedia.org] . Does the name Mahatma Gandhi ring any bells?

Re:Isn't India the one asking the UN to take up th (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049021)

That was british india not india.

Re:Isn't India the one asking the UN to take up th (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049631)

Has India ever had a revolution?

Wow. Go read some history [wikipedia.org] . Does the name Mahatma Gandhi ring any bells?

That was british india not india.

India's history is just as old and colorful and barbaric and glorious as China's, Japan's, Thailand's, Indonesia's, ... Just like Europe, the despots ruled with absolute power over their peasants, and lots of peasants died for them, whether Indian Raj despots or British India despots. The peasants died. Plus ca change, ...

Alexander "The Great" showed up in India, did you know?

He who fails to learn from history, ...

Remind me, what is it we're disagreeing about? I tend to lose track ...

Re:Isn't India the one asking the UN to take up th (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 2 years ago | (#40059979)

I always figured that was some religious war where they finally gave the Muslims the back 40 just to go away.
Never really thought of it as being against the English.
Jolly good point watching that one "sober" this time. Pip pip.

Re:Isn't India the one asking the UN to take up th (1)

tqk (413719) | more than 2 years ago | (#40060659)

I always figured that was some religious war where they finally gave the Muslims the back 40 just to go away.

My recollection is the Indians were bending over backwards to attempt to accomodate the Muslim side, but the latter were having none of it. Perhaps they'd just run out of patience suffering under the British. I can respect that. Perfidious Albion's got a lot to apologize for (they were vicious brutes in so damned many ways). Then you end up with the mess of millions of people moving to "their" new country from wherever they happened to be when the starter pistol went off.

I also often puzzled over the fact that not even Bangladeshi's could stand Pakistan. That says something there, what I'm not sure.

By the way, I've no irons in that fire. I've had good friends from both camps, and known jerks from both camps as well. I look forward to learning more about both. I also look forward to hearing that the whole subcontinent has decided to stop shooting at each other. :-| Yankee, go home, please and thank you.

Jolly good point watching that one "sober" this time. Pip pip.

Er, what? And do people really still say "pip pip"?!?

India (3, Insightful)

Intrepid imaginaut (1970940) | more than 2 years ago | (#40047961)

What India lacks is indoor plumbing for much of the population. I don't even know where to start with that place, but internet censorship isn't high on the to do list. Don't get me wrong, I love India, some of the most beautiful women in the world, ancient culture etc, but so many of them are living the exact same lifestyles as people did there a thousand years ago.

This case in particular is a prime example, the sites blocked were only in certain regions and at the behest of a production studio that had a new movie coming out while also owning several ISPs. Corruption that would stagger most of us in the west is everday life in India.

Re:India (3, Interesting)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048045)

Well, this is a case of trying to block "see how much better the rest of the world looks" after all, if your neighbors next door in S.Korea and Japan have indoor running water and toilets that wash your backside, you might just have riots when the people figure out that the government has been spending money on who knows what instead of infrastructure.

Re:India (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048167)

Well, this is a case of trying to block "see how much better the rest of the world looks" after all, if your neighbors next door in S.Korea and Japan have indoor running water and toilets that wash your backside, you might just have riots when the people figure out that the government has been spending money on who knows what instead of infrastructure.

I think you're on the nose.

To quote an Indian-born programmmer friend of mine (who grew up from age 2 here in an afluent "western" country), after he went back there recently for a visit, "a lot of people still shit in the ditch there".

That kind of said it all to me.

Re:India (1)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048545)

I went to China and it's like wow.. and here we are in the Indian subcontinent has not gone much further. The internet does expose Indians to all kinds of things that they would not normally be exposed to. Gives them all kinds of ideas. Good for them!

Re:India (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048721)

I've traveled all over this rock myself, exploring other places is a great experience. For those that can't experience it though the internet does really expose others to other ideas, and that does make it worthwhile.

Re:India (1)

ixarux (1652631) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049773)

I do not think people in the west understand economies of developing countries. To talk about sanitation, and use that to judge a country is very myopic. There is a massive schism in India between the rich and the poor. India do have poor people, and sanitary conditions are not ok. But it also have some of the richest business houses around, like the Tatas and Reliance. Like all countries, it takes time for it to find its feet. All countries go through this. For a country which is as massive as India, and with only 60 years since independence, it has done well when compared to the other countries around it. Considering that it is still a functional democracy. But since liberalization policies were followed a few decades ago, corporations are getting powerful, and they ARE at the moment trying to control internet censorship. Reliance, an ISP, which also produces movies blocked it's internet subscribers from any file-sharing websites a long while ago.

Re:India (1)

kermidge (2221646) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050455)

A bagatelle, but India gained independence the year I was born, which I reckon makes it and me 65.

Anyway, I suspect that "democracy" has as many meanings as those states claiming that's what they are.

Re:India (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40052007)

I do not think people in the west understand economies of developing countries.

Canada was a developing country 200 years ago, back when this stuff was shiny and new or not even developed, and changing so fast your eyes would pop. Usually in under 30 year time spans, the entire country was hooked into it, or it was easily available.

What it requires is vision and the desire to deploy it. As for India being massive? Meh, tiny when compared to Canada or Russia. What India has is population, meaning an easy and available workforce. Something is fundamentally broken within the state.

Re:India (1)

zlives (2009072) | more than 2 years ago | (#40052553)

so an indian company can own a britsh company (cause they have the money) while failing to provide for its people (cause they don;t have the money)

yes yes its not this simple a situation, however, it does make you wonder about what the priorities are.

Re:India (1)

oiron (697563) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050047)

To quote an Indian-born programmmer friend of mine (who grew up from age 2 here in an afluent "western" country), after he went back there recently for a visit, "a lot of people still shit in the ditch there".

That kind of said it all to me.

Yes, but it's not like people aren't aware that this isn't the best thing to do.

The problem is that infrastructure development takes time and effort and vision. What we've got is a bunch of do-gooders and money-grubbing politicians. And a few people like Sreedharan who are really trying to do the right thing!

In the meantime, there's no reason we can't work towards both sanitation and Internet freedom, don't you? One of the advantages of a huge population is that we can split the work-load to different groups!

Re:India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048055)

"so many of them are living the exact same lifestyles as people did there a thousand years ago."

Ah, a simple life. Instead, we subject ourselves to video and audio beamed into our heads under the lie of entertainment. Imagine how many frames of video are inside our heads, constributing to our daily stress. How many jingles? How many ads?

Re:India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048113)

"Corruption"

You mean like the Masons and other secret societies JFK complained about? Plenty of them in many natio@#

NO CARRIER

Re:India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048225)

This is one of the dumbest, most short-sighted comments I've seen in a while.

I'd rather live in some amount of poverty (as in struggling to have enough food to not feel hungry all the time) than to have all freedom of expression and freedom of political opposition leeched from my community, town, state, or nation.

Without this freedom, a nation marches further down the road to rule-by-faith for the few instead of rule-by-compassion or rule-by-logic for the many.

Re:India (3, Interesting)

perryizgr8 (1370173) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048267)

this. people here simply don't care about concepts such as internet censorship. most are just managing to survive.

Re:India (1)

oiron (697563) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050053)

We've got about 120 million Internet users [google.co.in] in India. Chances are, a large proportion of those people would care...

That's larger than most countries, for those of you keeping track at home...

Re:India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40052397)

... and to silence the ones who may cry afoul against censorship, tell them about obscene pictures of gods, terrorist attacks, and as a last resort, pornography.

And there will not be a single Indian who will not agree to censorship proposals

-- An Indian

Re:India (2)

Sri Ramkrishna (1856) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048535)

What India needs is a robust justice system that can quickly make fair decisions. That is the root cause of everything. You cannot have justice without money and that is the main issue. You can punish corruption without a fair justice system. If we can fix that, in about a generation or so things will be a lot better.

Re:India (3, Informative)

bhagwad (1426855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048687)

This might come as a surprise to you, but not all Indians live that way. And those of us who're not piss poor care deeply about a censor free Internet.

Re:India (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049059)

But how many of you are there compared to the "piss poor" who don't give a damn because they're too busy worrying about where their next meal is coming from to worry about your freedom to view porn on the internet?

Re:India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049785)

(121 millions internet users at the moment.)

no different (2)

MadMaverick9 (1470565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40047979)

and how is this different from internet censorship in belgium, the uk and the netherlands?

https://depiratenpartij.wordpress.com/2012/05/10/brein-wins-democracy-loses/ [wordpress.com]

Re:no different (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048313)

They did not block vimeo, dailymotion pastebin or xmarks.

Re:no different (1)

MadMaverick9 (1470565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048839)

correct - in the netherlands "the pirate bay" and parts of the website of a political party are censored.

https://depiratenpartij.wordpress.com/2012/05/10/brein-wins-democracy-loses/ [wordpress.com]

As long as lobbyists can censor political parties with the copyright law at their side

you tell me which is worse.

Rich Corporations (5, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 2 years ago | (#40047985)

If the movie companies have enough money to bribe the number of governments that they seem to, people are not illegally downloading nearly enough movies.

Re:Rich Corporations (3, Funny)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048151)

I'd get right on that, but honestly, there haven't been many movies that have looked interesting enough to even pirate.

Re:Rich Corporations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049855)

I don't care for your lame excuses. Every movie that you don't pirate means millions of revenue for the studios, according to their lawyers. By not pirating you're aiding them in their quest for a worse tomorrow.

Re:Rich Corporations (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40053029)

Funny? This should be rated insightful...

Is that wrong? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40047987)

Isn't social stability more important? [slashdot.org] Also, Anonymous should really stop being such tools of Western cultural hegemony, they should be more sensitive towards Indian culture.

Am I right guys?

Re:Is that wrong? (4, Insightful)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048541)

Once you start arguing over collective vs individual rights, you start down a slippery slope. You allow every petty tyrant to fence off their group against the influence of the one in the next country, the next city, just down the road, etc. Pretty soon, its the Hatfields and the McCoys. Everyone devolves into little fiefdoms and its back to tribalism.

India, or better yet, Indians, have the right to publicize their culture and ideology on the 'Net. And the rest of the world can take it, leave it, or adopt parts of it as they see fit. This is all good. Likewise, The West can do the same and Indians can adopt it or ignore it by voting with their mouse button. If Indian culture is so weak that it can't survive or adapt in the face of others, perhaps it shouldn't survive.

Re:Is that wrong? (2)

bhagwad (1426855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048711)

I'm an Indian and I couldn't give a fuck about "social stability". If adults can't control themselves and go on a rampage, they need to be removed from the rest of us civilized people.

Re:Is that wrong? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048803)

I'm an Indian and I couldn't give a fuck about "social stability". If adults can't control themselves and go on a rampage, they need to be removed from the rest of us civilized people.

70 years ago, the adults who went "on a rampage" were the ones who gave India its independence.
There are plenty of psychopaths who desperately want a large population of "civilized" slave labor to control.

Re:Is that wrong? (1)

oiron (697563) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050059)

Who divided the country, you mean...

Unless you're talking about Satyagraha, in which case that was one peaceful, disciplined "rampage" there...

rampage on the what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40050701)

explain who one rampages on the net as an adult , sounds like fun more fun then hollywood gives us...

You are my heart, my universe, MY UNIVERSE!!!!!!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40047993)

The solution is within their grasp!

Tag every wild animal, especially monkeys, with Raspberry Pi's
and have some of them piggybacking the real internet, and some
an internal network where citizens may share ideas and files through a private or the regular Tor network consisting of .onion sites.

It is not just India (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048019)

Almost all countries have started with some form of Internet Censorship. I guess it is nature of the people in power to have more control. Slowly govt. has started letting the people know what they can and cannot do.

this is how it begins (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048209)

the west should take note: this is how it begins

First there's censorship under the guise of child porn. Then copyright, then national security, then whatever they want.

Trolls Needed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048339)

Trolls are needed at this forum [stltoday.com] . It's been overtaken by fundamentalist religious zealots who are trying to impose their beliefs on everyone else. Please consider creating an account and trolling this forum in the name of freedom.

Human copyrights have a 0 dollar value (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048533)

Saw a dude in SF with the sign: human rights violation, fine= 0 cents, copyright violation of 99 cents, fine = 2000 dollars, why?

Tor Zindabad! (2)

abjbhat (1203056) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048553)

They're only blocking the more popular sites. You can still use Tor to access the blocked sites. And don't forget that if the ISPs throttle torrent file transfers, you can always point out that perfectly legitimate torrents such as Linux ISOs are being blocked. That's how I got Airtel to remove torrent throttling from my connection.

Re:Tor Zindabad! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049261)

But Sir, according to your usage it looks like you downloaded over 600 linux isos last month

Re:Tor Zindabad! (1)

Quillem (2641391) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049769)

I'm sure that watching videos on Vimeo via Tor is a pleasant experience for you :S

Re:Tor Zindabad! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40052371)

Do you want them to block torproject.org too?

However, if the Indian government does this, it will be perfect reason for me to leave to somewhere else like the Netherlands or Switzerland.

Re:Tor Zindabad! (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | more than 2 years ago | (#40054899)

You got them to remove throttling from just your connection, or from all connections (either in the country or your service area)?

mod 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048767)

Re:mod 0p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048883)

You do know that troll only works if the website in question actually consists of images of Kirk Johnson's distended anus, not some lame image of a pumpkin.

Spammers (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40048853)

So to keep all the Indian spammers away, all I need to do is make sure my website is offensive to India?

Google accomodates (1)

singlevalley (1368965) | more than 2 years ago | (#40048855)

Blogger now has .in domain at the highest level, so it makes it convenient for google to implement india specific restrictions. Common indians don't care much about the internet, it is only companies with huge warchets that have to fight this battle, in the hope of getting a much wider userbase at a future time. But given that the american law is being de-facto exported across the world, all victories will be short-lived. YMMV...

Should we really worry about the US at this point? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049099)

I doubt that the US will be a problem soon. If they'd been more fiscally conservative, less concerned with policing the world, they might have lasted for a while yet but, as it is, they've such a debt built up that they cannot keep going they way they have been. I expect that the US will soon start to break up into smaller confederacies issuing their own currencies and having their own armies. One state just about passed their own legislation to create a state currency and standing army. If one is thinking of such a thing then others must be concerned as well.

The only way they'll be able to remain a single country would be to impose martial law. But, this will have a backlash as well and may just accelerate the process.

Blame the corporates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049201)

Government controlled BSNL did not block any sites. Its the private controlled Reliance, Airtel who are blocking certain sites.

India, neutral internet, and open source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049397)

I believe the uncensored internet and open source operating systems are the last best hope for economic justice and true democracy for humanity on this planet. In view of this, I would have thought that it would be easy to equate the significance of the spinning wheel in India's recent history as somewhat analogous to the open source technologies to which the neutrality of networks and availability of the means to compete with entrenched interests is so important. I believe The Gan would agree with this position.

Some facts and why this is a big deal... (3, Interesting)

ixarux (1652631) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049503)

People in the developed world, in line with their general ignorance of developing countries, seem to not be aware of some important facts. India is set to overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest Facebook market by number of users as early as 2015. [thenextweb.com] 7% of India has internet access, and given India's population, even 7% of its population amounts to more people than many Western European countries. Internet censorship is therefore a big deal and it will affect the lives of millions. Like all developing countries, India grapples with poverty. But on the other end, the rich and middle-class in India are at levels of Western society, in terms of both awareness and with a very major stake in the internet.

Sounds like a bunch of hacks in government ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40049595)

Dear Indians: you're getting the government you deserve!

Now, stop conforming and start non-violent resisting, you ding-a-ling bunch of ding dongs!

Re:Sounds like a bunch of hacks in government ... (1)

oiron (697563) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050075)

*ahem* [indiaagain...uption.org]

A little clarification (5, Informative)

Quillem (2641391) | more than 2 years ago | (#40049751)

The Indian courts have not explicitly blocked file sharing sites. All they have provided is a generic order [google.com] to stop the copyright infringement. The company Copyright Labs [facebook.com] which is looking to stop the piracy of its films, maintain that they provided the ISPs with a list of specific URLs that were to be blocked. The ISPs have apparently decided (40 days after the blocks were requested) to block entire domains rather than individual URLs. One of these parties is liable for damages for the blanket blocks.

The courts haven't necessarily done anything wrong here besides being ingenuous.

Why don't they pray the offending sites away? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40050411)

Why don't they pray the offending sites away?

By asking for a law, they are admitting that their gods have no power over the internet while Anonymous does.

All religion is mental illness and should be treated as such.

Indira Gandhi's Nanny State (3, Interesting)

retroworks (652802) | more than 2 years ago | (#40050413)

Free internet poses risks. Risks are an opportunity for regulators to expand their fiefdom. The risk-averse public sector, if left unchecked (by unbalanced budgets) will take over the free economy like a bad antibiotic-immune staph infection, or auto-immune disease.

I deal internationally with many nations, and have repeatedly tried, but have never been able to do anything successfully in India. Despite low linguistic barriers, savvy businesspeople, educated populace, and an adorably intelligent PM (Singh), there is just an impossible number of bureaucrats to obtain approval from. I attribute it to a tipping-scale of public-sector employees set up by Indira Gandhi. Once you create a certain ratio of regulator jobs to the private sector jobs, it's very difficult to reverse it.

By 2nd analogy, regulators are like basketball referees, you need a few. but too many make it impossible to navigate the basketball court.

Public sector regulators do not get rewarded when things go right in the private sector (what did they have to do with it but stay out of the way?) but are punished for allowing it if something went wrong. It's by nature risk averse, and prone to setting limits on everything. It's easier for a public sector manager to hire a new person than to undertake the unpleasant and near-impossible task of laying off an unproductive person. To get new hires, you need a risk or danger (or type of foul) to protect the public from. At some point the public has such a stake in public sector job security (family with salaries from referee jobs) that it's nearly impossible to reverse, and the economy - the basketball game - slows and stagnates. Africa has the same problem.

Eventually, (my theory goes) incompetence sets in and almost appears to heal the public sector employment imbalance. The public bureaucracy becomes so crowded that nothing gets done, and the regulators start to feel anonymous and disenfranchised by the command-and-control network. China's Communist Party had so much corruption in the 1980s that the regulations were completely randomized, and the economy grew by accepted practice of ignoring entrenched regulators. The refs in China were blowing whistles that everyone ignored, basketball players passed and circled around them, or paid the regulator to sit off the court. Unfortunately, like (analogy 3) Lyme disease, the idled refs never really go away. Indira created lots of public sector employment. Hiring public employees is like feeding a (#4) dragon that gets bigger with every bite, and even if it's a nice dragon now, you will still be in the cage with it tomorrow.

the jester is indian govt guy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40050687)

the jester is indian govt guy ...just so ya know

Anonympous hit what? (1)

Weatherlawyer (2596357) | more than 2 years ago | (#40053259)

> Anonymous retaliated, and targeted the websites of various Indian government websites.

Shouldn't they have attacked film websites?

the jews are gaining a stronghold in india (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40057451)

damn

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...