
Popular porn sites blocked in Philippines - greenvaio
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38637003
======
beardog

        Instead, users see a message saying the sites have been blocked because of anti-child-pornography laws.
     

Although this is likely done out of incompetence rather than malice, this is
how they erode freedom. They pick one thing that the large majority of people
are generally against, find one instance of it on a public website, and use
that to justify censorship of the entire platform. This happened with reddit
in Russia, and it almost became widespread with SOPA/PIPA in the US.

Edit: reddit is unblocked in Russia but it was blocked for a time:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/3grpdf/tifu_by_gettin...](https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/3grpdf/tifu_by_getting_reddit_banned_in_russia/)

~~~
ue_
In 2009 the UK made illegal drawings of fictional characters that
"predominantly convey" the impression that they are younger than 18. I've
heard no complaints about it, either people people seem to be fine with making
things illegal so long as they're disgusting (i.e people who don't care about
their freedom at all), or because people don't know about it.

Just as you said - they come after the 'disgusting' things first. However I
think that it should be a serious consideration as to whether a government is
going to toe the line to make illegal drawings.

~~~
rm_-rf_slash
It's illegal for the same reason it is illegal in many countries to grow
cannabis and smoke it in one's own household: it is all about accumulating
power and the incriminating evidence that can be planted on a dissident to
imprison and silence them.

Edit: Apparently some evicence of these claims might be in order:

\--

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two
enemies: the antiwar left and black people," former Nixon domestic policy
chief John Ehrlichman told Harper's writer Dan Baum for the April cover story
published Tuesday.

"You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be
either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the
hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin. And then criminalizing both
heavily, we could disrupt those communities," Ehrlichman said. "We could
arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify
them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about
the drugs? Of course we did."

[https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/03/23/poli...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/03/23/politics/john-
ehrlichman-richard-nixon-drug-war-blacks-hippie/index.html?client=safari)

~~~
beardog
The CFAA does this very thing[1]. Violate a terms of service? You're now
potentially a felon! But everyone violates TOS sometimes, especially with
ridiculous rules like 'no rudeness', so prosecutors pick & choose their
targets. (Though there has been some precedence set not to consider TOS
violations alone to be breaking the CFAA)[2]

[https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/01/aaron...](https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/01/aarons-
law-violating-a-sites-terms-of-service-should-not-land-you-in-jail/267247/)

[https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/07/court-violating-
terms-...](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2010/07/court-violating-terms-
service-not-crime-bypassing)

------
rm_-rf_slash
Ah, the classic fascist escalation. They already came for the drug dealers,
but many did not speak up, for they were not drug dealers, nor did they want
to be labeled as such or targeted by death squads. Then they came for the
wankers, but indeed many still did not speak up, for they were not wankers,
nor did they want to be labeled as such nor targeted by death squads.

There are only two logical questions to this whole affair: which groups are
next, and when it all stops, who will be left?

