• not me (unregistered)

    Now a lot of people in civilised countries regard the idea of censorship of some of the more extreme websites to be a very good one, in fact I cannot thinn of many good reasons not to censor some website that shouts etreme right wing views for example.

  • not me (unregistered)

    The idea that unpopular/dangerous ideas will be shouted down but a right thinking majority is willfully niave

  • uns (unregistered)

    Please unsubscribe me from your RSS feed. Thank you.

  • Cole (unregistered)

    Wow. I had to read that like five times before I concluded that it is satire. Hope this is an example of poe's law and not insanity.

  • Matt Westwood (unregistered) in reply to not me
    not me:
    It may come as some surprise to some of our American friends, but the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one, so the hysterical reaction to these proposed laws is pretty much confined to America. Most people living in civilised countries understand the need for censorship, for example in my country if I were to wonder down the road shouting that homosexuals should be hung I would be arrested, and quite rightly so. Any country that works on the principle that I should be allowed to do that and my actions would be countered by a vocal majority who did not agree with me is a country based somewhere near cloud cookoo land.

    " ...the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one ..."

    Only by fucking shithead cunts like you.

  • not me (unregistered) in reply to Cole
    Cole:
    Wow. I had to read that like five times before I concluded that it is satire. Hope this is an example of poe's law and not insanity.
    nope its not satire its the view of most people outside the good ole US of A.I can point so several million examples where halfwits use the internet to garner support for their crackpot ideas and then claim that they should be allowed to shout their crackpot ideas because its their right under US law.
  • Another Tom (unregistered) in reply to Tom

    I think you need to raise your hand when trying to be ironic.

  • not me (unregistered) in reply to Another Tom
    Another Tom:
    I think you need to raise your hand when trying to be ironic.
    Did you see me raise my hand? nope, you know why?
  • not me (unregistered)

    If it wasnt for the stupid idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law the good 'ol US of A wouldn't be half as fucked up it is.

  • JolleSax (unregistered) in reply to uns
    uns:
    Please unsubscribe me from your RSS feed. Thank you.
    I see what you did there.

    By the way, I'm absolutely in favour of the SOPA/PIPA acts, and so should everybody be who's not located in the US. Business will be booming here :-)

  • Tarellel (unregistered)

    Long Time reader and fan here, but this is a truely a disgraceful move toward your fellow techies, especially with a user and content based site like this. I am here by removing you from my favorites list and feedreader, hopefully the loss of several members of this site will open your eyes and widen your vision to what you're really supporting.

  • Another Dick: (unregistered) in reply to not me

    too busy jerking off?

  • (cs)

    I see spider man movie and he says "With great freedom come great responsibility".

    I say if you don't want responsibility, don't ask for freedom.

  • HereIAm (unregistered) in reply to Tom

    Please tell me you are kidding and realized this was a joke.

  • Another Harry (unregistered)

    What, to The Daily WTF? You must be kidding.

  • Blue Leader (unregistered) in reply to me
    Huzzah, death to domain names, death to the Internet, I want to search Wikipedia via the US Postal System!
    We had that when I was a kid. It was called Encyclopedia Brittanica.
  • Anonymous Bob (unregistered) in reply to hoodaticus

    If a site uses virtual hosting, just an IP address ain't gonna do it!

  • Ben Jammin (unregistered) in reply to Blue Leader
    Blue Leader:
    Huzzah, death to domain names, death to the Internet, I want to search Wikipedia via the US Postal System!
    We had that when I was a kid. It was called Encyclopedia Brittanica.
    I used my Encyclopedia Brittanica set to build hot wheels ramps.
  • Ancient Programmer (unregistered)

    Just a thought - if everyone enthusiastically supports the bills, maybe the politicians will start to wonder if they have it wrong? Sometimes reverse phsycology works.

  • anon#213 (unregistered)

    I can't believe people are still falling for this.

    [image]
  • Clbuttic Guy (unregistered) in reply to Tom

    Dumbasp. It was meant to be a joke, something along the lines of sarcasm.

  • not me (unregistered) in reply to Matt Westwood

    Being a fucking shit head cunt I live in a country where something like..... lets say supporters of westborough Bapist church... wouldnt be allowed to stand on the street corner and shout hate filled rasict and homophobic crap, however in the wonderous US of A they can do that with aplomb and hide beind the law, 'tis the same on t'interwebs.

  • (cs) in reply to Blue Leader
    Blue Leader:
    Huzzah, death to domain names, death to the Internet, I want to search Wikipedia via the US Postal System!
    We had that when I was a kid. It was called Encyclopedia Brittanica.
    Same here. And just like Wikipedia, I used to make corrections all the time.

    Except the admins (my parents) always called my changes "vandalism". We'd get into edit wars, and they'd eventually restrict my editing privileges (take away my magic markers) or temporarily ban me from the site (ground me to my room).

  • Knot Westwood (unregistered) in reply to Matt Westwood
    Matt Westwood:
    not me:
    It may come as some surprise to some of our American friends, but the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one, so the hysterical reaction to these proposed laws is pretty much confined to America. Most people living in civilised countries understand the need for censorship, for example in my country if I were to wonder down the road shouting that homosexuals should be hung I would be arrested, and quite rightly so. Any country that works on the principle that I should be allowed to do that and my actions would be countered by a vocal majority who did not agree with me is a country based somewhere near cloud cookoo land.

    " ...the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one ..."

    Only by fucking shithead cunts like you.

    Your impression is spot on.

  • Maurizio (unregistered) in reply to quollism

    Port numbers ?

  • (cs) in reply to Nagesh
    Nagesh:
    I see spider man movie and he says "With great freedom come great responsibility".
    You remember that saying very incorrectly!

    See! It's a link to xkcd and it's not about Bobby tables!

  • Commentary (unregistered)

    When I was a kid, we didn't have pacifiers. We had to suck on pieces of wood. - Grandpa Simspon

  • WizardStan (unregistered) in reply to not me

    not me, there is one flaw in your logic: who decides what is a stupid movement that should be censored, and which are reasonable protests that should not be hindered? I am not in the USA, I am not a US citizen, I have no direct affiliation with the United States other than the company I work for having most of their offices there, but the idea that anyone would have the power to decide that my ideas are "too radical" and I need to be shut away is downright scary. Consider, your opinion that free speech is bad should pretty obviously be seen as an unsupported opinion by now. In an ironic twist, it is only by free speech that you are even allowed to suggest it. Free speech allows jerks such as the Westborough Baptist church to continue to spread their hate, but it also allows unpopular yet entirely correct opinion, such as criticism of SOPA and PIPA, to continue. If the government had the ability to silence one protest group, what keeps them from silencing another? Drawing the line between dangerous radical and opinioned protester is muddy at best and outright dangerous at worst. I would fear living in a country where the government has the power to shut down "dangerous radicals" with no clear definition of what a dangerous radical is because I have no idea if that label might never apply to me. Right now, you are a dangerous radical with your opinions on freedom of speech and if it weren't for that freedom then by your own admission you should be locked up. Of course, the specifics of this example are paradoxical so you wouldn't be locked up, but hopefully you understand the intention.

  • Cbuttius (unregistered)

    How did this article get comments on it before it was posted?

    It was posted on Wednesday 18 January 2012 and the comments begin on Tuesday 17 January 2012.

  • Cbuttius (unregistered)

    and now I would like to say I hope SOPA happens. Then maybe all the big dotcom companies will move over to England. Well except Wikipedia which should move to Wales, after its founder.

    Making all the new exciting computer development will start happening here instead of over there.

  • Get off my lawn (unregistered) in reply to synp

    Damn skippy.

  • Get off my lawn (unregistered) in reply to synp
    synp:
    Rasmus Lerdorf:
    We can only hope that our legislators introduce common sense guidelines to ban ASP (and .NET/ASP.NET) as well so we can all return to the more sensible PHP standard.

    Nope, just CGIs written in C. Anything else is just fluff.

    D'oh, damn skippy.

  • RonPaii (unregistered) in reply to Captain Obvious
    Captain Obvious:
    If JavaScript is outlawed, won't this site lose its main source of material??

    GO VB

  • (cs)

    If yesterday's 'whiteout' page was intended to be sarcastic, then it should have been more obviously sarcastic.

    It was definitely ambiguous at best.

    And FWIW, I agree with those who oppose the ridiculous notion of 'free speech no matter what,' and I do also hope that the SOPA and PIPA become law. As others have said more eloquently, it's the 'poetic justice' come-uppance that the USA sorely needs.

  • Spike (unregistered) in reply to Casey B
    Casey B:
    I can certainly appreciate sarcasm, but I think the implications of SOPA / PIPA are topics that are already so misunderstood by the typical reader (let alone Congressmen) that this kind of misdirection is entirely inappropriate.

    The blackout is a serious protest to dangerous legislation. The Daily WTF is turning it into a joke.

    I second this opinion

  • Bananas (unregistered) in reply to Spike
    Spike:
    Casey B:
    I can certainly appreciate sarcasm, but I think the implications of SOPA / PIPA are topics that are already so misunderstood by the typical reader (let alone Congressmen) that this kind of misdirection is entirely inappropriate.

    The blackout is a serious protest to dangerous legislation. The Daily WTF is turning it into a joke.

    I second this opinion

    Okay, maybe the typical Facebook user doesn't comprehend the issues, but I bet the TDWTF readership for the most part grasps the implications. I see the white-out page as sarcastic humor targeted to the computer literate.

    IOW, Harry Reid probably does not read TDWTF.

  • Bananas (unregistered)

    Alex, you probably should have logged out before capturing the screen shot to use as the background image.

  • Calli Arcale (unregistered) in reply to not me
    not me:
    It may come as some surprise to some of our American friends, but the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one, so the hysterical reaction to these proposed laws is pretty much confined to America. Most people living in civilised countries understand the need for censorship, for example in my country if I were to wonder down the road shouting that homosexuals should be hung I would be arrested, and quite rightly so. Any country that works on the principle that I should be allowed to do that and my actions would be countered by a vocal majority who did not agree with me is a country based somewhere near cloud cookoo land.

    Ah, I see you have fallen for the common misunderstanding of what the First Amendment actually means. It does not mean you get to say anything you like whenever you like. It means you have a right to speak your mind; it doesn't mean all speech is fundamentally protected. You can get in serious trouble for inciting a revolution, for creating a panic that ends up injuring or killing people, for forgery, for fraud, for committing perjury, for lying to police ("obstruction of justice" would be the usual charge, though it sometimes goes as far as "accomplice to murder" if you lie to cover for someone), or for stealing and/or redistributing intellectual property without the owner's permission.

    So SOPA doesn't change what's illegal. It just replaces the current system of attacking piracy with a massive sledgehammer that will probably take out everybody around the pirate while the pirate slips away to continue his mischief elsewhere. It increases the penalties, and defines even a link to infringing material as being equivalent to the material itself. And it will be ripe for abuse; all you need to do is have a credible claim of copyright violation and you can get a foreign website taken offline. Anyone who doesn't think this will be used to silence criticism (protected speech) and manipulate the market hasn't been paying attention to what's happened since DMCA was passed.

  • (cs) in reply to no laughing matter
    no laughing matter:
    Nagesh:
    I see spider man movie and he says "With great freedom come great responsibility".
    You remember that saying very incorrectly!

    See! It's a link to xkcd and it's not about Bobby tables!

    That is one funny carton.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to Jellineck
    Jellineck:
    ... This is what happens when people start having knee-jerk reactions to bills that are still in committee and aren't even close to their final form.

    I'm looking forward to the next internet blackout based on conjecture and out-of-date information.

    You cannot be sure that any bill is in its "final form" until after versions have been passed by both houses of Congress and differences reconciled in a conference committee, that version sent to the president, possibly vetoed, and then amended to address the president's objections. That is, (a) at best a bill is not in its final form until days before it is passed, and (b) as a bill MIGHT be vetoed and amended and vetoed again etc any number of times, you cannot KNOW that a bill is in its final form until after it has passed and NOT been vetoed. That is, you can't know that a bill is in its final form until it is too late to do anything about it.

    The best sense I can make out of your post is that no one should make any comment on pending legislation until days before the bill is voted on, at which time it is very late to mobilize any opposition.

    If a lunatic breaks into your house with a machine gun and threatens to kill your family, do you wait to take any action until after he starts shooting before calling the police or taking any action to defend yourself, on the reasoning that he MIGHT change his mind and leave peacefully? You certainly wouldn't want to make a knee-jerk reaction based on premature information.

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to not me
    not me:
    It may come as some surprise to some of our American friends, but the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one, so the hysterical reaction to these proposed laws is pretty much confined to America. Most people living in civilised countries understand the need for censorship, for example in my country if I were to wonder down the road shouting that homosexuals should be hung I would be arrested, and quite rightly so. Any country that works on the principle that I should be allowed to do that and my actions would be countered by a vocal majority who did not agree with me is a country based somewhere near cloud cookoo land.

    Absolutely true. That is why the United States still has some vestige of freedom, while in most of the rest of the world a small elite decides which thoughts and ideas are acceptable and which are not.

  • me (unregistered) in reply to Jay
    Jay:
    not me:
    It may come as some surprise to some of our American friends, but the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one, so the hysterical reaction to these proposed laws is pretty much confined to America. Most people living in civilised countries understand the need for censorship, for example in my country if I were to wonder down the road shouting that homosexuals should be hung I would be arrested, and quite rightly so. Any country that works on the principle that I should be allowed to do that and my actions would be countered by a vocal majority who did not agree with me is a country based somewhere near cloud cookoo land.

    Absolutely true. That is why the United States still has some vestige of freedom, while in most of the rest of the world a small elite decides which thoughts and ideas are acceptable and which are not.

    Really? i hadn't noticed any elite doing that what I had notice while working in America is that the people who shout about freedom most of all are the ones with the most extreme views, i mean there is the freedom to think what you like and then there is the freedom not to have some lunatic religious nutter on his own telly program broadcasting whatever his rice crispies told him to say to the nation 24 hours a day.

  • me (unregistered)

    America is in no position to dictate to the rest of the world what freedom is, this obsession with free speech and democracy is ridiculous when 95% of the population has a lower I.Q than their breakfast.

  • Boog, I Am Your Father! (aka Behold The Return Of Zunesis!)! (unregistered) in reply to not me
    not me:
    It may come as some surprise to some of our American friends, but the idea of freedom of speech being enshrined in law is regraded in most countries as a very silly one, so the hysterical reaction to these proposed laws is pretty much confined to America. Most people living in civilised countries understand the need for censorship, for example in my country of Iran if I were to wonder down the road shouting that homosexuals shouldn't be hung I would be arrested, and quite rightly so. Any country that works on the principle that I should be allowed to do that and my actions would be countered by a vocal majority who did not agree with me is a country based somewhere near cloud cookoo land.
    FTFY
  • cdmiller (unregistered) in reply to Ban JavaScript? You've got my vote

    Archie here I come...

  • (cs) in reply to Kyanar
    Kyanar:
    PiisAWheeL:
    Notice the key word "CAN". If you "CAN" use it to get by the protocol, then it is illegal, regardless of its legitimate uses.
    Since a VPN can be used to bypass blockades...

    They can have my hosts file when they can pry it from my cold dead hands.

    Also, what about all the ISPs with their DNS caching? Sometimes it takes a while for DNS entries to be forgotten. (See story about the ISP I used to work for, coworker handling a call that got escalated (3x) about a porn site which their neighbor on rival ISP could still get to as rival ISP cached the website and the DNS as well, although site had been taken down by the FBIs.)

  • Sydlecix (unregistered) in reply to Red is not an option
    Red is not an option:
    SOPA is racist! SOPA makes Blakcs blakcer. SOPA makes Wigths Wighter. SOPA makes Brwons Brwoner. Everyone should stop using SOPA and accumulate enough grime to hide your true coulrs.
    Oh...the article is mazking more sense now - he's talking about SOAP?
  • Bobbie (unregistered) in reply to Chris
    Chris:
    Although I appreciate the joke, and lol @ the people who don't get it, I think even the appearance of support can damage the cause. People will point to whatever they can to say 'see? they think its good' and then read the first sentence and move on. This is a war for eyeballs and you have 15 seconds to make an impact.
    You're joking right? Since when has anyone misunderstood something on the internet that is clearly intended as a joke.

    Plus, none of the kids on this site would know what proponent meant anyways....

  • Brian White (unregistered)

    TRWTF is that politicians seriously believe this to be true: "While these laws will make such acts more illegal (and therefore reduce infringement)". Not just for SOPA, for anything. I have heard a politician state that lowering speed limits is the best way to reduce a speeding problem.

  • Dogga (unregistered)

    Talks about "Sites Directed at the US" and one of the criteria is marketing using USD. Why not simply list prices in AUD (Australian dollars) you get (give or take) one for one on it these days, so same.....

    Plus all the notes are different colours when you pay (Wiki: Polymer Banknotes) so it's great fun/

Leave a comment on “Support The Daily WTF in Supporting the Support SOPA Movement”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article