Are you concerned?
0
What i'm talking about
While i don't go on /b/ often, i still find the news disconcerting. Internet providers trying to police the internet is something i do not want. We have a judical system to decide that. The job of a internet provider is to provide access to the internet, not try to play internet police. Anyways, that's just my opinion on the whole thing
While i don't go on /b/ often, i still find the news disconcerting. Internet providers trying to police the internet is something i do not want. We have a judical system to decide that. The job of a internet provider is to provide access to the internet, not try to play internet police. Anyways, that's just my opinion on the whole thing
0
I suppose if there's one thing I'm known for, it's my dislike for 4Chan's /b/. That probably will lead to my post being made invalid or considered completely biased, but I'll post anyway.
The site, as a whole can be good. I have 150MB of wallpapers that I gained from /wg/. I have over 100MB of pornographic images that I gained from /s/. And the same goes for /h/ over 100MB of pornographic images (specifically hentai). There are loads of sections on 4Chan which prove to be very helpful, if you ask me.
And then there's /b/. Despite what it may seem like, I don't have a distaste for 4Chan material for no reason at all. I've actually lurked 4Chan for over a year now. I found out about it before Fakku. Because of that, I feel that I can justifiably say that /b/ is the worst part of the site (opinion), though it is famous and regarded as the best by many.
/b/ does produce material that is laughable but a lot of the things found there aren't, especially not to the average person.
Sexism is something that few men have the balls to walk around displaying in real life. I suppose that's why it's on /b/. Because that's one place where men can openly say things about women without being afraid. I don't think many males are willing to refer to women, while outside the internet, as "cumdumpsters". (Not while women are around)
Racism is the same. People are racist toward several groups on /b/, though mainly blacks (even if it's not serious). Something tells me that 90%+ of /b/ would never approach a black man and say "nigger" loud enough for him to hear it or call an Asian a "chink", Latino/Mexican a "spic'... and so on.
Let's not forget the child porn, though something tells me a few of Fakku's users may support that. CP is found often, on /b/.
There's also the ability to post whatever shit you like there, shit that can be taken offensively. So basically, in my opinion, /b/ isn't all that great a part of 4Chan. So blocking that part of it is understandable.
And no, I'm not concerned. I don't know why /r9k/ was blocked though.
The site, as a whole can be good. I have 150MB of wallpapers that I gained from /wg/. I have over 100MB of pornographic images that I gained from /s/. And the same goes for /h/ over 100MB of pornographic images (specifically hentai). There are loads of sections on 4Chan which prove to be very helpful, if you ask me.
And then there's /b/. Despite what it may seem like, I don't have a distaste for 4Chan material for no reason at all. I've actually lurked 4Chan for over a year now. I found out about it before Fakku. Because of that, I feel that I can justifiably say that /b/ is the worst part of the site (opinion), though it is famous and regarded as the best by many.
/b/ does produce material that is laughable but a lot of the things found there aren't, especially not to the average person.
Sexism is something that few men have the balls to walk around displaying in real life. I suppose that's why it's on /b/. Because that's one place where men can openly say things about women without being afraid. I don't think many males are willing to refer to women, while outside the internet, as "cumdumpsters". (Not while women are around)
Racism is the same. People are racist toward several groups on /b/, though mainly blacks (even if it's not serious). Something tells me that 90%+ of /b/ would never approach a black man and say "nigger" loud enough for him to hear it or call an Asian a "chink", Latino/Mexican a "spic'... and so on.
Let's not forget the child porn, though something tells me a few of Fakku's users may support that. CP is found often, on /b/.
There's also the ability to post whatever shit you like there, shit that can be taken offensively. So basically, in my opinion, /b/ isn't all that great a part of 4Chan. So blocking that part of it is understandable.
And no, I'm not concerned. I don't know why /r9k/ was blocked though.
0
I could have sworn child porn was the one thing that couldn't be posted on 4chan. And anyways, while i normally don't use "slipper slope" arguments, i felt this was valid here.
0
Black Jesus JC wrote...
I could have sworn child porn was the one thing that couldn't be posted on 4chan.You can be banned for posting it there but that doesn't mean it isn't posted there. Lol, surely you must have seen at least a few cp threads, haven't you? But I don't want to turn this into a cp discussion, otherwise we'll end up having the Efff Beee Eye watching us in no time.
0
Yeah, i don't want that discussion either. I just feel that the act of deciding whether a site is ok or not should be left up to the judical system
0
I think it is bull shit that the company would block some web sights. Even thew they r bad or do bad stuff or just have Racism or sexism.
0
The internet should be free for any paying customer.
I'm not against installing filters, or having a filtration option, but involuntarily crimping my tubes is against the spirit the internet was founded under.
I'm not against installing filters, or having a filtration option, but involuntarily crimping my tubes is against the spirit the internet was founded under.
0
Black Jesus JC wrote...
Yeah, i don't want that discussion either. I just feel that the act of deciding whether a site is ok or not should be left up to the judical systemfor me i don't but if they censored anything and everything then i will have to prepared a full scale war against them,.
0
HentaiElder wrote...
Black Jesus JC wrote...
I could have sworn child porn was the one thing that couldn't be posted on 4chan.You can be banned for posting it there but that doesn't mean it isn't posted there. Lol, surely you must have seen at least a few cp threads, haven't you? But I don't want to turn this into a cp discussion, otherwise we'll end up having the Efff Beee Eye watching us in no time.
i remember /b/ going down cus of cp threads lol thats y i go to 99chan.org it has some nice sections like /zom/ which i like to go through
0
Oh god /b/ lurked on there for the majority of years 11~12 then gave up when Uni started.
That place is the cesspool of the internet >_>
Otherwise a lot of 4chan has gone to shit, /hr/ has newfags posting 800x600 pictures in it and /k/ has airsoft kiddies.
Pretty much the only place that's loaded with decent high res material is /e/.
That place is the cesspool of the internet >_>
Otherwise a lot of 4chan has gone to shit, /hr/ has newfags posting 800x600 pictures in it and /k/ has airsoft kiddies.
Pretty much the only place that's loaded with decent high res material is /e/.
0
Aud1o Blood wrote...
The internet should be free for any paying customer.I'm not against installing filters, or having a filtration option, but involuntarily crimping my tubes is against the spirit the internet was founded under.
This more or less.
If you don't like /b/ don't go to /b/ simple as that, its not if you go on 4Chan you're forced to go to it. What an annoyance companies can be. This is the internet, it is available to all, and no company should be anyone personal filter w/o their own permission first.
Oh boy Socialism
0
swordmanXIII
FAKKU's Breaker
I am not that worried though it does make you wonder if this will spread. Censership should only be used it a rightfull cause such as keepong five year olds from seeing a gore film or something that will fuck up thier minds. but not on the freaken internet. the internet is someting that should not be censer if you son't want a kid to see a site thats the pearnts freaken responsability to block that site.
oh and
"There is also the question of why censor /b/ now and not previously? Could a third party such as Scientology have lobbied for the decision?"
FUCK Tom cruse and his freaken UFO's too!!
oh and
"There is also the question of why censor /b/ now and not previously? Could a third party such as Scientology have lobbied for the decision?"
FUCK Tom cruse and his freaken UFO's too!!
0
Hmm.
I'd like to say, I'm not, but in actuality, I am.
While I don't care much for 4chan, and /b/ in general, I can't help but feel that if a major ISP decides, on an apparent whim, to block an appallingly but undeniably popular website, the one can't help but wonder if that doesn't set a rather dangerous precedent.
I mean, I see it like this. "Oh, 4chan? Fuck that...wait, what if, at some point, I decided to go on Fakku and pretend to say something witty, and it was blocked?
That would suck.
So fucking much."
I'd like to say, I'm not, but in actuality, I am.
While I don't care much for 4chan, and /b/ in general, I can't help but feel that if a major ISP decides, on an apparent whim, to block an appallingly but undeniably popular website, the one can't help but wonder if that doesn't set a rather dangerous precedent.
I mean, I see it like this. "Oh, 4chan? Fuck that...wait, what if, at some point, I decided to go on Fakku and pretend to say something witty, and it was blocked?
That would suck.
So fucking much."
0
Censorship in the U.S.? Unpossible. Just let the free market take care of it.
Hahahahaha. Ha.
While I'm all for the populace of /b being summarily executed by means of collapsing an exhausted mineshaft on top of them, censorship is like pregnancy: You can't be "just a little bit" pregnant; you can't have "just a little bit" of censorship.
However, the most grave source of concern in this matter is the 40% of /bidiot gerbils now leaving the playpen and swarming all over the internet for places to defecate their vile shit on, as they can no longer get to their usual habitat.
Providers vigilante-policing the internet certainly is nothing new, nor is law-and-order-asskissing from ATT's side. Nor is, really, the general push all over the world to finally rein in that evil, anarchist internet.
There is also the question of why censor /b/ now and not previously? Could a third party such as Scientology have lobbied for the decision?
Hahahahaha. Ha.
While I'm all for the populace of /b being summarily executed by means of collapsing an exhausted mineshaft on top of them, censorship is like pregnancy: You can't be "just a little bit" pregnant; you can't have "just a little bit" of censorship.
However, the most grave source of concern in this matter is the 40% of /bidiot gerbils now leaving the playpen and swarming all over the internet for places to defecate their vile shit on, as they can no longer get to their usual habitat.
Providers vigilante-policing the internet certainly is nothing new, nor is law-and-order-asskissing from ATT's side. Nor is, really, the general push all over the world to finally rein in that evil, anarchist internet.
0
Gibbous pretty much just voiced all my opinions on this matter. /b/ of course does deserve to die a horrible death with all its rabid fans being publicly exposed for all the shit they've said but it shouldn't be killed by censorship because those doing the censorship are just going to use /b/ as an excuse to get their foot in the door of censoring anything they feel like. This will (possibly) harm society as a whole more than /b/ ever could. And honestly I'd prefer to curse /b/ forever because it's horrible trash than to have to curse /b/ forever because it caused the internet to become G rated.
0
Meh mixed bag. 4chan used to have all kinds of illegal material on their site, but I question the legality of AT&T that could be considered violating Network Neutrality, and they can be sued for it as Comcast has been several times.
0
So, has AT&T gone out of business yet?
Edit: Looks like not yet....
http://www.pcworld.com/article/169124/atandt_and_4chan_fuss_gets_ugly_then_despicable.html
It's unblocked now, but is this still a precedent?
Edit: Looks like not yet....
http://www.pcworld.com/article/169124/atandt_and_4chan_fuss_gets_ugly_then_despicable.html
It's unblocked now, but is this still a precedent?
0
The fact of the matter is that no one has ever been forced to go to /b/ or look at /b/'s material, so what they are saying by mass banning it is that their company officially believes that 1. that some material should not even be available to those who wish to veiw it and that 2. they are qualified to arbitrate what such material is.
Which needless to say is wildly arrogant and fundamentally wrong.
Which needless to say is wildly arrogant and fundamentally wrong.
