Who Owns the Internet?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
R

Rachel20

Senior Member
#1
May 7, 2013
1,639
105
63
#1
An article by Jullian Assange for NY Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/04/o...on-living-in-a-surveillance-society.html?_r=0

Other than decrying the surveillance state of the Internet, it seems he doesn't offer any solution or alternative.
Nor does he elaborate on his starting question "Who owns the Internet?"


However I found the article made me ponder on a few questions of my own, ones that I've been mulling over for years.

The internet is both a service and medium .

As a service provided by ISPs run over internationally laid down infrastructure, customers are required to pay for the infrastructure provided.

The internet though is also a medium of communication joining and interlinking people from different cultures and countries.

Seeing it in these perspectives is it right for the government or any authority figure to "control" the flow of the internet? Should it restrict usage /monitor user activities?

Is accountability an infringement of any freedom?


Just some thoughts, and hopefully some of you would share yours!

Though, I know, I am very notorious for making unpopular threads :)

Enjoy!
 
Last edited:
U

Ugly

Guest
#2
#2
Well, the 'control/monitoring' aspect is a two edged sword. On one hand such things as illegal activities can be limited such as child porn, sex or drug trafficking, hiring a hitman and a myriad of other significant crimes.

The counter point is it also runs the risk of if we allow some things to be monitored/controlled then that's often the beginning of a gradual loss of freedoms in other areas of the internet. Once a government decides a belief system, religion or whatever it dubs wrong as being wrong then it allows the excuse of more control until we are only given access to what the government feels is best.
 
A

Anonimous

Guest
#3
#3
Me and everyone owes me $1.00 each.
 
maxwel

maxwel

Senior Member
#4
Apr 18, 2013
9,367
2,444
113
#4
If we're going to function in the real world, we need to always make the distinction between "what seems fair", and "how the world really works".
 
dcontroversal

dcontroversal

Banned
#5
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,395
113
#5
Whoever owns and controls the satellites.......... ;)
 
R

Rachel20

Senior Member
#12
May 7, 2013
1,639
105
63
#12
Ugly said:
Well, the 'control/monitoring' aspect is a two edged sword. On one hand such things as illegal activities can be limited such as child porn, sex or drug trafficking, hiring a hitman and a myriad of other significant crimes.

The counter point is it also runs the risk of if we allow some things to be monitored/controlled then that's often the beginning of a gradual loss of freedoms in other areas of the internet. Once a government decides a belief system, religion or whatever it dubs wrong as being wrong then it allows the excuse of more control until we are only given access to what the government feels is best.
Click to expand...

Yes, completely agree and there are so many countries that restrict internet access/usage.

China and Pakistan are so infamous for this.

While I agree that crime and dubious sites should be monitored, having the government restrict the internet usage is just like restricting the press. Even India is pretty bad when it comes to muzzling free speech.

Personally, I believe the internet is for everyone. It was created to connect everyone and so no government/authority should deny that access.

I do think a government can -
* Monitor it - yes (even individuals can do that)
* take punitive action against wrongdoers - yes.


Google is planning to come up with web browsers aimed at children 12 and below. I think these kind of initiatives are very positive, because -

1. it understands certain things are not "safe" for kids. (if we can agree with that, isn't it ironic how people still want to make sexual expression and all kinds of stuff open in society? If it's not safe for a child, then it's not safe for anyone too)


2. It takes away the responsibility of the government to overseer these things and puts it in the hands of individuals.




PS - a few countries, like Finland and Spain, consider the right to high speed internet as a fundamental right :)
 
Last edited:
p_rehbein

p_rehbein

Senior Member
#13
Sep 4, 2013
30,213
6,548
113
#13
I do............but, it's for sale..........interested?
 
crossnote

crossnote

Senior Member
#14
Nov 24, 2012
30,707
3,650
113
#14
Eventually the internet will be runned by BB.
I've seen too many large enterprises go from private ownership to governmental control.

Who is BB?

1984.jpg
 

Attachments

H

Human

Banned
#15
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#15
Nobody owns the internet, and that's why it's important. A person can (with the correct technical knowledge) create their own link-up, buy their own hardware and bypass ISP's altogether, however it's incrediby complex. Buying a linkage service from an ISP means you don't have to go to the trouble, but it also means you have to abide by their terms of service, which in my opinion should be governmentally regulated to be as free as legally possible, because criminal activities should be the only things a person shouldn't be able to use the internet for.
 
A

Atwood

Senior Member
#16
May 1, 2014
4,995
53
48
#16
Human said:
Buying a linkage service from an ISP means you don't have to go to the trouble, but it also means you have to abide by their terms of service, which in my opinion
should be governmentally regulated to be as free as legally possible,
Click to expand...
very interesting
 
A

Atwood

Senior Member
#19
May 1, 2014
4,995
53
48
#19
Rachel20 said:
Google is planning to come up with web browsers aimed at children 12 and below. I think these kind of initiatives are very positive,
Click to expand...
Well Rachel, maybe. And thanks for this info.

But I don't trust Google.

And IMHO:

all this "adult" business is a big scam and a deflection.
I don't know of any Bible passage where sin is defined by how old someone is.
The whole idea of "adult books," "adult entertainment," "adult beverages" "adult movies," etc. is a big smoke screen for excusing sin while allowing persons to still call things inappropriate rather than sin with the claim that they are only inappropriate if children are exposed to it. And if you expose both children & adults to pornography, the adults are more likely to be moved to fornicate than are children.

Creating web browsers for children, is unlikely to result in children not getting access to sex & violence via regular browsers.

YouTube (owned by Google) has pornography on it.

Pandora's box has been opened. I doubt it will be closed until civilization is destroyed or Christ returns.
 
H

Human

Banned
#20
Oct 30, 2014
1,150
7
0
#20
Atwood said:
very interesting
Click to expand...
Context. Government are the only parties able to implement law that says ''ISP's must not interfere in any internet usage except that which falls into the realm of criminality''. The internet shouldn't be regulated by ISP's to give quicker speeds to companies who pay for it, but it SHOULD be regulated by government so that ISP's CANT give quicker speeds to companies who pay for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.