It has been a self-policing, anarchic environment where you can do and say practically anything that technology permits.
Self-policing? In what way? The internet has allowed everything from financial scams to letting bullies manipulate kids into suicide, along with providing easy access to things like child porn.
In fact, in my 25 years on the internet, I have yet to come across even one image or video of child pornography.
I’m sure it does exist somewhere. And usually, it is the FBI operating the sites where it exists, interestingly enough.
That literally only means you haven't tried to look for it. I commend you for that, but if you were being even a little honest you'd admit it can be found. There was actually a guy at my old job who got arrested for hosting a bunch of child porn. But please, show us your actual evidence that the FBI was actually running those sites.
And, with cryptocurrencies on the verge of upsetting the entire communist style central banking system, they are looking for any excuse to do so.
I work for a bank. Our higher ups in IT are actually directing us to learn more about cryptocurrencies so we can start using it. Plenty of investment banks and other entities are starting to turn their attention to cryptocurrency.
It's not upset about cryptocurrency, they are turned on by it. It represents a whole new way to take peoples' money because it's unregulated.
The anarchy of the internet has already given us how many crypto scams?
As if regulating the entire internet would stop someone from driving over or stabbing a few people.
Google "ISIS recruits internet" then get back to us on that.
With mainstream, or as we call it fakestream, media dying and people getting the majority of their information from truthful alternative sources, the globalists are trying to find some way to put the internet genie back in its bottle.
You mean the same news sources that talk about lizard people? Or the ones trying to convince people there's a flat earth? Or maybe the ones trying to convince everyone they need to buy shiny metal because it will definitely hold it's value after an economic collapse?
As we noted, last year, on the last day of the Jubilee, in the beginning of October, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN, was handed over to the UN by the US’s own Nobel Peace Prize winner, Barack O’Bomber.
Are you seriously referencing one of your failed predictions? At least you're showing us you were wrong I guess. You predicted the internet being shut down several times last year, yet here we are subjected to your fearmongering yet again.
Except, they don’t want to “regulate” the internet to make it safer - it’s already as safe as can be. The internet has yet to kill or even bruise one person - excluding egos, of course, which get bruised all the time on social media.
Except, they don’t want to “regulate” the internet to make it safer - it’s already as safe as can be.
Sure if you don't mind financial scams, child porn and ransomware. Perfectly safe!
“This political rhetoric and political discourse that has led to hate, has led to gunfire,” the congressman from Illinois said. “I never thought I’d go to baseball practice for charity and have to dodge bullets. This has got to stop and it has got to stop today […] We got to ratchet down the rhetoric that we’ve seen, not only in the social media but in the media, in the 24-hour news cycle.”
You realize that has nothing to do with regulating the internet, right? He just things we need to tone down the rhetoric. I can see how that would scare you, since rhetoric is all you've got.
An asshole like you works for a bank? No way.
Asshole why? For pointing out actual facts that are inconvenient to TDV's narrative?
actual facts... explain the upside of fractional reserve lending for me.
Nowhere was fractional reserve lending mentioned by TDV or by me. My comment entirely and completely about whether or not banks are "scared" of cryptocurrencies.
They are not. They are going to use cryptocurrencies.
Ok. I take back half my offensive language. I shouldn't have said "bank". Only kidding. Too much caffeine. Just hate to hear a guy promo fiat.
Then only thing that holds value is belief. Belief in gold is no different than belief in bits, or in "fiat."
I've read that when the first king tried to use gold as a currency he had to back it with livestock because everyone knew they could use the livestock for food.
Nothing other than food, water and possibly shelter has any actual inherent value.
Some people believe we are made safer by being treated as children told what to do when to do it how to do it, nothing could be further from the truth. The internet is no more dangerous than real life, you can mitigate risk with knowledge but you can not eliminate it. Most people believe there will be someone there in their greatest time of need yet sadly they often find out when it's too late that this is not the case. Things happen fast and no government regulation can stop that but they will make us weaker and less able to react when the time arises. Some people believe the Earth is flat or they are trying to get other's to believe. So what, should that be removed from the internet because it flies in the face of everything we have been taught to believe? You don't give up your right to freedom of speech just because you have nothing to say. In life people walk in to the street believing my 3 tonne truck will magically stop just shy of running them over. Government regulation has given them a false sense of security in that regard. In reality all it takes is a slight lapse of attention on my part and they will learn very quickly how mistaken they were. Instead of relying on paper regulation to stop my truck they should rely on common sense that states 3 tonnes wins over 150/lbs every time and pay attention to their surrounding's. On the internet where there is largely no regulations average people take much more precaution and protect them selves from the metaphorical 3 tonne truck. I don't agree with all of Jeff's talking point's his view's are extremely anarchistic, but I do agree that a bloated unsustainable government coupled with a debt based ponzi scheme of an economic system are in large part to blame for the woes we face as a species not lack of regulation. There are crimes we can all agree are crimes and should be investigated and the perpetrators brought to justice, then there is this whole other set of regulation's pertaining to modifying people's behavior and government can't possible say with a straight face that they have any kind of moral authority or even suggest that it is their responsibility to impose their sense of morality on the people. It was never intended for government to be the arbiters of morality, their sole function is to safe guard our inalienable human right's and they are failing miserably at the one job we the people have tasked them with. Not to mention they are failing miserably at everything they take upon their selves to "improve" Be sure regulating the internet will not have the effect of eliminating scam's, porn, or ransomware, the regulations imposed will just give you a false sense that it won't happen to you. Then you will let your guard down believing that regulations on a piece of paper will protect you, and you will be wrong. But you will give up a lot of freedom and security for those paper regulation's. Are you prepared to deal with the consequences of a crime against you after the fact or would it be preferable to be ready and able to deal with or prevent said crime in the first place. If you leave your safety and security in the hand's of other's you are surely to be disappointed with the result.
The dangers are different, and real life is more dangerous. The safety you enjoy in real life is in large part due to regulations.
I didn't get much further. You should do some reading on the internet about "paragraphs." They are magical beasts that let someone actually read what you write.
Lastly, I'm not stating the internet should or should not be regulated. I was only pointing out the bullshitiness of TDV's claim that the internet is self-policing.
I will look up those magical little beast's you are referring to. Perhaps regulation's make us safer. My kids can no longer play ball hockey due to regulation's, so I guess you could say they are safer. I would say they have lost the freedom to enjoy a pass time we enjoyed as kids as did our father's before us. As for TDV I did say his belief's are extreme, maybe my broken English should be regulated?
I agree it's ridiculous if your kids can't play ball hockey, but that's a case of over-regulation.
I was thinking more along the lines of companies not being allowed to dump toxic waste in our drinking water. That prevents rivers from getting filled with so many chemicals they catch on f ire. Of course, you could also say that the company has lost its freedom to poison rivers... but I'm ok with that because it keeps our rivers fire free.
In internet terms, it also at least reduces the amount of child porn out there. Sure, it still exists... but literally every legal type of porn can be found on any porn site. TDV thinks it's self-policing but there's every reason to believe that, if it were legal, child porn would be just as common.
And sure, pedophiles have "lost the freedom" to look at child porn... but again I'm ok with that. It means fewer children being exploited by the makers of child porn.
Agreed, I will point out the exploitation of children is a crime we can all agree is a crime that needs to be investigated and perpetrators need to be brought to justice with the full extent of the law.
Will further regulation make it more of a crime? Will internet regulation's have the desired effect?
I would argue freedom makes us safer. Those who exploit children are not free to do so because of the internet, and broad sweeping regulation's would make the vast majority of us less free and barely hinder the criminals that perpetrate these crimes at all.
Pollution is highly regulated, and it is a wonderful thing, except the major polluters have simply moved to a part of the world where pollution is not regulated, or they buy carbon credits from good steward's of the environment, or they simply hide their evil deed's better. The regulation's just ensure that smaller players with amazing insight and idea's never get to participate.
Regulation's make people feel good but rarely make any kind of significant change. There are countless examples of government reg's counting for squat. BP oil disaster comes to mind.
Regulation's are followed voluntarily by good people and ignored or bypassed completely by the people those regulation's are aimed at. Will making more regulation's suddenly make these people realize they have no conscience and perhaps should change their ways?
I will reiterate TDV views are extreme anarchism which I don't subscribe to I believe more in balance. Leadership is very important, but as long as the political class exists there will be no leadership. Asking the government to regulate anything is like asking the fox's to guard the chicken coop. Good for the fox, bad for the chicken.
and look paragraphs huu huu. Im working on it.
Excellent explanation~