ISP Censorship
Options
AndyPix
Posts: 4,847 Forumite
in Techie Stuff
Hi Guys 
Has anyone else read this info with a bit of trepidation ??
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/14/uk_new_realtime_live_server_blocking_order/
It seems to me this is an initial test of real-time censorship , which is a sad day for the internet
Has anyone else read this info with a bit of trepidation ??
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/14/uk_new_realtime_live_server_blocking_order/
It seems to me this is an initial test of real-time censorship , which is a sad day for the internet
0
Comments
-
Why not just switch off the entire internet when live football is on?
I wonder if its possibly to fake the initial stream source to something that could cause widespread outages of the net? Source appears to be from google so google gets banned whilst live football is on?
Curious to see what the other side come up with to combat it.Censorship Reigns Supreme in Troll City...0 -
VPNforgotmyname wrote: »
Curious to see what the other side come up with to combat it.
Problem solved... :rotfl:
:j
:beer:Laters
Sol
"Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"0 -
@ forgotmyname Hehe yes that would stick it to them !!
Its not going to stop the determined streamer obviously as vpn's and alternate DNS servers are readily available but I think this sets a worrying precedent ..
Once it becomes "the norm" to do this kind of thing it's a slippery slope into "them" turning off services whenever something they don't like is happening.
Copyright infringement has always been a game of cat and mouse but I think this oversteps the mark a bit0 -
Its not going to stop the determined streamer obviously as vpn's and alternate DNS servers are readily available....
Exactly, but any ideas on how to get a VPN onto an Amazon Fire TV stick.
A theoretical exercise only as I would never consider streaming copyrighted material, or encourage others to do so
0 -
VPN
Problem solved... :rotfl:
:j
:beer:
They'll be outright blocking VPNs next, that's is what all of this is working up to, complete and total control over what we can and can't access online. It depresses me thinking of an England where our only source of information/news is the British Brainwashing Corporation and the tabloid press, it'll be like going back 70 years.
Not only this, but with "Brexit" and Trump, the main UK political parties are fully aware that the public is slowly starting to wake up. Taking control of the internet is a sure way to ensure they can bury any political competition in the same way as happens in Russia. If not for the internet, I don't think we'd be facing "Brexit" right now.“I may not agree with you, but I will defend to the death your right to make an a** of yourself.”
<><><><><><><><><<><><><><><><><><><><><><> Don't forget to like and subscribe \/ \/ \/0 -
Strider590 wrote: »They'll be outright blocking VPNs next, that's is what all of this is working up to, complete and total control over what we can and can't access online. It depresses me thinking of an England where our only source of information/news is the British Brainwashing Corporation and the tabloid press, it'll be like going back 70 years.
Not only this, but with "Brexit" and Trump, the main UK political parties are fully aware that the public is slowly starting to wake up. Taking control of the internet is a sure way to ensure they can bury any political competition in the same way as happens in Russia. If not for the internet, I don't think we'd be facing "Brexit" right now.
And what arm of the Russian government do you work for?0 -
Hi Guys
Has anyone else read this info with a bit of trepidation ??
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/03/14/uk_new_realtime_live_server_blocking_order/
It seems to me this is an initial test of real-time censorship , which is a sad day for the internet
I'm a bit confused by this. How does this differ from the powers that already exist?
Are ISPs now taking the incentive to block servers without a court order to block them?
Is this a new tactic, where content providers identify illegal streams and, rather than just blocking them, leave them up until a "pinnacle moment" (like an important football match) and then shut them down, hoping to cause the most disruption before the pirates have a chance to host the content on unblocked servers...?
I mean... if they've identified an illegal stream, why block it for minutes instead of indefinitely...? Are they taking a heavy-handed approach and, essentially, blocking anything that might vaguely be related to live-streaming during important events? They might as well just turn off the internet during the World Cup!
And what's the distinction in the article between shutting down "servers" as opposed to shutting down "websites"...?
Interesting... :-/0 -
Don't think Sky actually blocked mine, they just severely limited the throughput, basically told me after a good few calls to go an f??? myself as they do not support vpn traffic, and got nowhere other than their mainl help desk. Their contract ended soon after.Strider590 wrote: »They'll be outright blocking VPNs next
Here is another write up. https://torrentfreak.com/new-uk-kodi-piracy-blocking-injunction-is-a-pretty-scary-beast-170314/
AP, welcome back!0 -
I'm a bit confused by this. How does this differ from the powers that already exist?
Are ISPs now taking the incentive to block servers without a court order to block them?
Is this a new tactic, where content providers identify illegal streams and, rather than just blocking them, leave them up until a "pinnacle moment" (like an important football match) and then shut them down, hoping to cause the most disruption before the pirates have a chance to host the content on unblocked servers...?
I mean... if they've identified an illegal stream, why block it for minutes instead of indefinitely...? Are they taking a heavy-handed approach and, essentially, blocking anything that might vaguely be related to live-streaming during important events? They might as well just turn off the internet during the World Cup!
And what's the distinction in the article between shutting down "servers" as opposed to shutting down "websites"...?
Interesting... :-/
At the moment, they only block websites, not servers.
The worrying thing about this is that they are allowed to block which servers they see fit "on the fly"
rather than having to apply for court order for each one, and prove that it breaking the law in some way, in front of an actual judge.
Imagine a peaceful anti government process breaking out, they would then have the ability to block any info on it instantly ... for example0 -
isp's are rolling over and not contesting this because they are also the content providers that are losing out. surely a conflict of interest and not good for the freedom of the internet?
soccer has itself to blame from creating a crazy situation where the rest of the world can watch a game live on tv but its local supports can't
the obscene greed of soccer will continue until its supports put a stop to it"The Holy Writ of Gloucester Rugby Club demands: first, that the forwards shall win the ball; second, that the forwards shall keep the ball; and third, the backs shall buy the beer." - Doug Ibbotson0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards