Comments on: Twitter CEO says SOPA blackout protest idea "silly"

By: Stephen Rice

Stephen Rice — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 19:25:00 +0000

Yes, let’s not sacrifice accuracy. That’s why you can’t ignore that the organisation which you want to route communications to avoid the US is actually based *IN* the US and is therefore subject to the laws of the US.

You can’t just focus on servers because that misses an awful lot of how the world works.

By: thomas vesely

thomas vesely — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 08:44:00 +0000

that is its supranational power/ essence.
rock breaks scissors.

By: thomas vesely

thomas vesely — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 06:21:00 +0000

we do, but, we got our idiots too.

By: thomas vesely

thomas vesely — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 06:20:00 +0000

see Conroy’s proposals to do just that in australia.

By: thomas vesely

thomas vesely — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 06:12:00 +0000

what if the ISPs turned the servers off to protest. watch the world of instant money crash.
ATMs…not/ EFTPOS…..not/ STOCK EXs……not./REALTIME BATTLEFIELD……not.
electronic fucking apocalypse.

By: thomas vesely

thomas vesely — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 06:05:00 +0000

oh, shit! i just bought a rock to do just that.

By: mikbe

mikbe — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:39:00 +0000

Dick Costolo makes an excellent point. Twitter is often used specifically to protest governments so disabling it even for a day would be giving oppressive governments exactly what they want.

By: Hex

Hex — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:02:00 +0000

(Replying here as no link below)

Whim? Owners? …No.

This is the combined will of over 1,800 Wikipedia editors, by far the single largest decision ever made by the community.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:SOPA_initiative/Action

Next time try getting the facts before commenting.

By: hostile_17

hostile_17 — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:09:00 +0000

When those that provide information can turn it off at the whim of its owner(s)… dangerous path.

By: Hex

Hex — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:25:00 +0000

Thanks for sharing.

By: Hex

Hex — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 22:17:00 +0000

Uh, no.

The neutrality of the project is in its coverage of subjects for encyclopedic purposes. Making a loud statement to defend its very existence does nothing to change that.

By: Antinous / Moderator

Antinous / Moderator — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:39:00 +0000

Thanks!

By: Gustavo Gomes

Gustavo Gomes — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 20:37:00 +0000

Maybe using twiter is silly ya prick

By: hostile_17

hostile_17 — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:23:00 +0000

Yes it is. English worldwide.

The neutrality of the project is now in tatters.

By: Gilleathain McLean

Gilleathain McLean — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 19:15:00 +0000

No, the author is to blame for basing an article on a quote, which is obviously a reply to someone, without checking out the rest of the conversation – as is the Guardian author. Therefore, both articles initially misinterpreted the quote and showcased how easy it is to take something out of context if you’re too lazy to do even the simplest bit of research. And, given that most visitors will simply follow a link directly to this page, not mentioning BoingBoing going dark gives the casual reader no indication that it will be happening.

Fair enough, a moderator pointed out that the information can be found on another page. A website isn’t like a magazine though, just because I’ve read this article doesn’t mean I’m likely to ever have seen the home page.

So, I made the mistake of thinking the author would be logical enough to include a line like “boingboing will also be going dark”, lack of that line giving the appearance that it wasn’t happening.

By: guanto

guanto — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:58:00 +0000

Yeah, at the expense of almost every fucking business in the world that has fuck all to do with the US but has been conditioned to rely on Google’s services for their daily work. Google has some real responsibility there; you can’t just say “fuck you” to your business partners just to make a point that most of them won’t even understand. They aren’t some random blog.

Having a prominent message on their site (as they plan to do now) is the right thing to do. Betraying your users’ trust is not (just talking about Google here).

By: Thebes42

Thebes42 — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:50:00 +0000

Twitter and Facebook have nothing to worry about, they are useful tools for the CIA and even if they blatantly infringed under the new law, no action would be taken against them in particular.

By: Thebes42

Thebes42 — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:48:00 +0000

Do you realize how US politics could effect Wikipedia?
Do you realize that if this crap passes and is enforced that Wikipedia would be forever blocked in the USA and any other nation we force this upon?

By: Matthew J. Houdersheldt

Matthew J. Houdersheldt — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:30:00 +0000

Explain to me this….how will twitter going dark cause problems? All twitter is for is letting people know your taking a shit!

By: C W

C W — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:22:00 +0000

“Why not let them dig their own grave?”

Because we’ll force it on you. Thanks for your passive support.

By: mkultra

mkultra — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:58:00 +0000

Oh, they know. They just don’t, you know, care. As far as they are concerned anything outside the beltway is Outer Butfuckistan.

By: mkultra

mkultra — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:56:00 +0000

Thank for getting that song stuck in my head. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wvgap8p0tkM

By: Diana Winters

Diana Winters — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:47:00 +0000

It’s not blacking out worldwide

By: masamunecyrus

masamunecyrus — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:26:00 +0000

After the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake in China, half of the Chinese internet went black and white in a sign of respect and mourning for those who had suffered and died.

It’s understandable if people don’t want to blackout their sites tomorrow, but can’t they “blackout” their sites? That is, Google, put up a big, black logo. Change your background to a dull gray. Twitter, change your shades of blue to shades of gray. This is a simple thing to do that would bring the bills to the attention of everyone without disrupting their service.

By: artbyjcm

artbyjcm — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:26:00 +0000

Google could settle for a full page explaining pipa-sopa, with a button that says “continue to google search” and would store a cookie so you wouldn’t see it again. Then the logo would have the black bar on it. At the VERY least the black bar. I think every website (twitter included) should do the black bar.

But I don’t want twitter to shut down. That and facebook is where everyone would be asking why all the other websites are shut down. So even if someone doesn’t go online that day, the next day there will still be trending topics and facebook messages all over.

By: Vincent Von Dudler

Vincent Von Dudler — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 17:22:00 +0000

Just post the list of politicians that support SOPA and PIPA and ensure people know those politicians should be voted out of office as soon as possible.

By: toyg

toyg — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:59:00 +0000

Twitter could easily black out the website and let the API online — wouldn’t break anything and would achieve the required result.

The truth is, Twitter is too close to Big Media and they’re afraid to stick their necks out. I think the word “scabs” applies in this case.

By: C W

C W — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:49:00 +0000

“Let’s make sure we keep this in mind when Twitter needs something from the Internet”

You need Twitter a lot more than Twitter needs you, and he knows that.

By: C W

C W — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:46:00 +0000

“Get #SillyBlackout to trend”

Aren’t “trending topics” censored or selected by Twitter?

By: Bill Walsh

Bill Walsh — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 15:20:00 +0000

If you made an “off the top of my head” category on wordpress people could subscribe to that specific feed and it’d basically be the same as twitter.