How self-funky filters depicts on the plain of software companies and providers can be seen in the case of aol and cyber patrol: political one-sidedness
With populist arance, federal minister of justice herta daeller-gmelin wants to better combat crime and right-wing extremism on the internet in order to accelerate the flat enforcement of filters for the german burger. Of course, one seems to be in the delusion, technically all problems can bring to the world. On the internet are the filter or other possibilities how to block access to content.
If one sees once of the question as to whether some neonazi has emerged less due to any ban, the whole line seems to be very questionable, which the federal minister of justice. Since they obviously returned to censance content at the legal level on the internet, this should come from a kind of a voluntary code of conduct of the internet companies and providers. The short-handed hand then the content of which content should be blocked so as not to get into potential difficulties with the law. It is also intended for a direct cooperation between providers and burger organizations that the providers can point out directly on websites and did not have to accept the detour over or take media. Anyway, there is a risk that this could ame a wild censor campaign.
Such censor decreases with one-sided cuts are already in the children’s filters, such as aol this with the software "cyber patrol" for "kids only"-offers websites. Unlegst it has come to a conflict between hackers who cracked the filter software and then published the list of locked pages, and come to mattel, which is now apparently the learning company, the manufacturer of cyber patrol, wants to be relayed. Hacker and mattel came out of court to an agreement, but the court had forbidden due to a violation against copyright for reverse engineering, offering the bypass program for the filter in the network.
In the case of "kids only" or "young teens" but these are not black lists of blocked websites, but about "soft" lists of those websites, on the children and adolescents access are thirst. As brian livingston has found in an article, but here again strange preferences also appear political. Although children can access the republican national committee, but the corresponding democratic national committee is denied them. The american green party or the reform party of ross perot do not seem to be a self-surprise for the children’s gravities of aol and cyber patrol. With the filter for the "young teens" remains this political inclination to the conservative warehouse, which is pursued by commercial censorship for the protection of children, continue. Here, the young people can easily access the manufacturers of weapons or the national rifle association, but burger organizations to pronounce that for a stronger control as the coalition to stop gun violence or safer guns nov remain inaccessible to the adolescents. Livingston ironically points out that the blocked pages contain neither pictures of naked nudges nor those of swimmers in bathtugs.
Aol spokesman rich d’amato meander only, one is no favor of conservative websites. Susan getwood from cyber patrol resists every political journal. You can see regular websites that are submitted for blocking. If you meet the criteria, you will be blocked: "if some websites obedience, then the reason is likely that someone has submitted them."
Is that the solution, the federal minister of justice daeller-gmelin aims? Then rather a few neo-nazis, whose slogans and arguments can be discussed at least, rather than censoring a surplant and wild.