No way in hell. To have internet police means there needs to be an internet government, internet laws and ultimately internet taxes. AND NOBODY LIKES TAXES.
Right here. This is exactly the answer. Police agencies already use the internet for research, to find suspects and already follow through when illegal activity does happen/is found on the internet. That is how it is now and that is how it should stay.CODE-D said:The police already use the internet, they don't need any power over it.
binnsyboy said:Edit: before I get flamed, I'd just like to add that if some highly regulated compromise between the metaphorical black and whites couldn't be found (in other words, one providing nearly limitless freedom, but just flagged things like CP and hacktivists, then I'd sooner have the internet as it exists today.
Indeed, which is why the internet police are impractical and unrealistic.JoJoDeathunter said:I'm pretty sure all those things you listed are illegal in most jurisdictions and are enforced to a certain extent, however there's only a certain amount the resource limited police can concentrate their energy on and often more serious real world crimes are higher priority. Internet crimes aren't easy to prosecute either even if you go to the effort of tracking the perps down either, as in most courts an IP address isn't enough evidence for a conviction so forensics are needed, pushing up the costs further. I'm going to be honest here and say the only one of those crimes you listed that I really think is worth tracking down is the CP. I have no love for pirates or hackers, but I don't think their crimes are normally worth spending our taxes to find, unless they've been stealing real money I suppose.
You could start killing everyone and desyncronize!Burst6 said:snip
HardkorSB said:What is also funny is the fact that even though we only have the "luxury" of presenting out thoughts to other people without "the man" shutting us up for a short period of time, some people think that it's wrong and we shouldn't be able to do that. Fuck those people.
I think you're all misunderstanding exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about a big censorship/surveillance initiative with a bunch of "cybercops" dedicated to spying on and censoring citizens like in China. You're all very quick to jump to that conclusion, that any attempts to clean up the Internet is inevitably part of some Orwellian conspiracy.Zachary Amaranth said:Indeed, which is why the internet police are impractical and unrealistic.JoJoDeathunter said:I'm pretty sure all those things you listed are illegal in most jurisdictions and are enforced to a certain extent
And the original post plays it up as though these things aren't crimes, when generally speaking they are.
But they don't get away with it because the police are okay with it, or even the general internet. It's virtually impossible to stop these crimes, or even to follow most of them.
^^ This. How do you propose to police the internet? There isn't a way to do it without a massive crackdown and the public won't stand for that.Antari said:The better question to ask yourself is CAN the internet be policed?
I think this kind of sums the thread up. Is it possible? How do we know such power couldn't be abused? How would we police such a thing - some kind of three strike system before your internet is turned off forever? We really need to answer such questions before we can say if it's right or wrong to do so.Antari said:The better question to ask yourself is CAN the internet be policed?
I like this idea, but who is going to pay for playground. If it's not commercialJesterRaiin said:Internet should be splitted on at least four divisions :
- Government
- Business
- News
- Playground
And that's all.
You're in the Playground, do whatever you want. Be anonymous, play, have fun, troll.
You're in News, behave. Be polite, or risk the wrath of banhammer.
You're in business - do the business. Use real credentials, e-signature, such stuff.
You're in gov... WHY THE HELL ARE YOU EVEN HERE ?
Simplicity.
Since I was quoted in that, I have to wonder if you even read what I said before you included me in "you're all" since I said LITERALLY NOTHING to that effect, but I'm lumped in there anyway.James Joseph Emerald said:I think you're all misunderstanding exactly what I'm talking about. I'm not talking about a big censorship/surveillance initiative with a bunch of "cybercops" dedicated to spying on and censoring citizens like in China. You're all very quick to jump to that conclusion, that any attempts to clean up the Internet is inevitably part of some Orwellian conspiracy.
no no no no no no no no no no no noJames Joseph Emerald said:-snip-
That's my opinion, anyway.
I'm interested to hear what you guys have to say, because I'm actually doing a thesis on this topic. So don't be afraid to disagree (as long as your counter-argument has a factual or logical basis).
See, this was the point I was making, too. Cybercimes are crimes and are enforced. They don't catch everyone, but then, the same is true of physical crimes. It's the same over here, where people who threaten stuff on facebook tend to get visits from men in vehicles with blinky lights.Helloo said:You're assuming that cyber crimes do not go unpunished. There have been many cases where people have been jailed for what they've posted on the internet.
For example, a number of people in England were found guilty when creating Facebook groups inciting more riots.
Not to mention all the hacking cases.