Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Internet Riot/Revolt on Digg

CanadaRAM said:
If you are using the dictionary definition of the verb "to censor" as "to selectivley prevent some written material from being published" then of course you are right, and proof reader is a censor by that definition when they correct an author's bad grammar.

But I suspect you are using the perjorative sense of the word censorship, which like discrimination, liberal, and conservative, have acquired bargeloads of hidden meaning, mainly that it is unacceptable in a 'free' society to censor or discriminate. Which is a load of bollocks. If that were the case, television, radio and newspapers would be unwatch/listen/able because anything and everything regardless of interest, merit or value would have to be published.

Freedom of speech does NOT confer upon a media outlet the OBLIGATION to publish every iota of material that correspondents submit. Surely you will agree to that.

It also doesn't mean you can plaster a poster with your free expression onto a shop window, or a transit bus. Nor can you use a megaphone in a theatre to express yourself to the audience who is there to watch Pirates 3.

Digg, like every other website, has terms of use which the users of that website agree to in order to use it. It is just as applicable for restricting postings deemed to contain infringing code, as it is for restricting ads for blue pills or penny stock frauds.

And who said that any given website, newspaper or other media is obligated to be balanced and unbiased? The only person completely without bias is a person without any understanding whatsoever of the subject. That is the last person I would want to get information from on that subject.

Bollocks. You are introducing an absolutist and artificial ultimatum which invalidates your argument.

Furthermore, there are well established limits to free speech, based on that speech being harmful to society. The classic example is shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theatre and starting a panic. Hate literature. Incitement to riot. Disclosing of trade / national secrets. Slander and libel. Perjury. Conspiring to commit a crime. Uttering threats. Do I need to go on? In Diggs case, it quite clearly, from the events, is a case of a minority of people damaging the community through their abuse of the priviledge.
Click to expand...

QFTT CanadaRAM
 
thejadedmonkey said:
I'm just having fun digging up all the stories that have that key in it...
Click to expand...
The key was widely known before the events of the past couple of days.

killr_b said:
No, it's censorship. Whether one person uses a black marker or a whole media conglomerate choose to ignore/ remove/ block any info whatsoever, you are censoring the data/ media/ facts, ect.
Click to expand...
katie ta achoo said:
Censorship? It's a privately run company. They can do what they want, when they want, however they want with their servers and the data contained there-on.
Click to expand...
 
killr_b said:
Some people who don't have/ understand having a first amendment may not get it that it is indeed censorship…
Click to expand...
You obviously don't understand the 1st Amendment. There was no government intervention here. It's a private business that you can either visit or don't. As has been said, no matter what they claim, they own the site and can do as you wish. If you don't like it, you can join the rest of us and not go there. As owners, they can get sued if someone posts something illegal like cracks or kiddie porn, so it's not only their responsibility to self censor, but it's also their right as private owners. Macrumors does this, and it's better for it. We don't have to deal with the spam fests and hate speech as on other, completely uncensored sites. Yes, free speech is great in the real world, I am in full support of it. In cyber world too. But while we have a right, we also have a responsibility. And so do they.

That being said, I couldn't care less about that site, but luck to them in the future, or whatever.
 
Kevin Rose said:
Today was an insane day. And as the founder of Digg, I just wanted to post my thoughts…

In building and shaping the site I’ve always tried to stay as hands on as possible. We’ve always given site moderation (digging/burying) power to the community. Occasionally we step in to remove stories that violate our terms of use (eg. linking to pornography, illegal downloads, racial hate sites, etc.). So today was a difficult day for us. We had to decide whether to remove stories containing a single code based on a cease and desist declaration. We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code.

But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you’ve made it clear. You’d rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won’t delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be.

If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying.

Digg on,

Kevin
Click to expand...

Guess the riot wasn't so dumb afterall...
 
I highly doubt some random code will cause digg to be [successfully] sued.

Any judging by its story submission history, people will forget that they once bent over for the media corporations, and just be all happy that they 'stuck it to the man'
 
blaskillet4 said:
I highly doubt some random code will cause digg to be [successfully] sued.
Click to expand...
The code is essentially useless. It can be used to decrypt any current HD-DVD and BluRay movie, but give it a month, and newer HD-DVD/BluRay disks will have revoked that particular key. That's what makes AACS more challenging than CSS with DVDs. Keys can be revoked, and therefore in a couple of months, this will have been entirely useless as the key in question will be useless. None of this will have happened because of what happened at Digg.

This doesn't mean that it won't happen again...but...

Not that I support what the MAFIAA is doing as well...but...
 
Ah, the curious wonders that the Internet age have spawned...

I didn't realize people were so passionate about 1. the ability to post their own comments/opinions to a website, and 2. DRM issues. Perhaps this will be the deathknell for Digg. If that's the case, then they, along with everyone else, will be unable to post comments to their beloved website.

All because of a stupid decryption key that can be found at various other locations. Such as, like, the first google hit for certain obvious search terms.

EDIT: At least, I wish it'd be the deathknell of Digg... in dreams, maybe.
 
damn, when I read the first post in this thread I just kinda assumed it was a small group making a lot of noise. But looking at the #'s on the front page of digg it's apparently a lot more than a few.

Reminds me of the fun that ensued over that psp site alliwantforxmasisapsp.com
 
Lixivial said:
2. DRM issues.
Click to expand...
Seemingly nobody at Digg cared much about it. This key was known months ago, but this whole fiasco was caused by the MAFIAA sending out letters asking people to remove the key or face legal consequences. And then someone at Digg started removing some links, and then this whole thing blew up..

Why they couldnt've done this with something everyone's experienced before, like DMCA notices from ISPs+MAFIAA regarding p2p downloads, is beyond me.
 
Even with everything I said above, I guess I can respect someone who would rather bow to their users than the tactics of the MPAA. The customer isn't always right, we don't always know what we want, and won't have to face the same consequences the owners of Digg will now, if any, but it's a +1 for him that he sides with his community first. Well, eventually.

Still not a fan of the Digg though.
 
solvs said:
You obviously don't understand the 1st Amendment. There was no government intervention here. It's a private business that you can either visit or don't. As has been said, no matter what they claim, they own the site and can do as you wish. If you don't like it, you can join the rest of us and not go there. As owners, they can get sued if someone posts something illegal like cracks or kiddie porn, so it's not only their responsibility to self censor, but it's also their right as private owners. Macrumors does this, and it's better for it. We don't have to deal with the spam fests and hate speech as on other, completely uncensored sites. Yes, free speech is great in the real world, I am in full support of it. In cyber world too. But while we have a right, we also have a responsibility. And so do they.
Click to expand...
It is true that like Macrumors, Digg is a private site and they can do whatever they want. but however, Digg and Macrumors are user driven site, without the users to frequent the site, they will be useless. Unless they are bent on destroying their site, it would only make sense to at least make the users comfortable in the site.
 
arn said:
As long as there are enough of them, the only other option is to lock down the site, and then the whole site screeches to a halt.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly what they should have done IMO.


I have enjoyed some digg stories in the past, and the concept of digg is genius, but digg users as a whole are absolute idiots. If you take the time to read which comments gut dugg and which get buried, you'll soon realize that most digg users are just plain stupid. ...Today's events just prove it.

Now join me and start reporting this Spam! :D
 
angelneo said:
It is true that like Macrumors, Digg is a private site and they can do whatever they want. but however, Digg and Macrumors are user driven site, without the users to frequent the site, they will be useless. Unless they are bent on destroying their site, it would only make sense to at least make the users comfortable in the site.
Click to expand...

Both do. And we are better for it. We self moderate to a point, and if you follow the rules, you'll be fine. Go visit someplace like Uselessjunk.com (warning: graphic, NSFW) to see something completely unmoderated (despite their claims) and tell me that's better. Trust me, it isn't. I've seen other sites that are really completely unmoderated, and there's worse than racism and kiddie porn combined. Seriously, you don't want to know.

Freedom is great, but there are also rules we all have to follow, and as I said, responsibility that comes with it. ;)
 
i for one like Digg , but i think this maybe the end of digg

"Today was an insane day. And as the founder of Digg, I just wanted to post my thoughts…

In building and shaping the site I’ve always tried to stay as hands on as possible. We’ve always given site moderation (digging/burying) power to the community. Occasionally we step in to remove stories that violate our terms of use (eg. linking to pornography, illegal downloads, racial hate sites, etc.). So today was a difficult day for us. We had to decide whether to remove stories containing a single code based on a cease and desist declaration. We had to make a call, and in our desire to avoid a scenario where Digg would be interrupted or shut down, we decided to comply and remove the stories with the code.

But now, after seeing hundreds of stories and reading thousands of comments, you’ve made it clear. You’d rather see Digg go down fighting than bow down to a bigger company. We hear you, and effective immediately we won’t delete stories or comments containing the code and will deal with whatever the consequences might be.

If we lose, then what the hell, at least we died trying.

Digg on,

Kevin "
 
EricNau said:
I have enjoyed some digg stories in the past, and the concept of digg is genius, but digg users as a whole are absolute idiots. If you take the time to read which comments gut dugg and which get buried, you'll soon realize that most digg users are just plain stupid.
Click to expand...
Users on Digg have always been stupid. Add to the mix a few things, like mob mentality, and you get something insanely sickening and disturbing.

Digg to an extent is a great idea, but thanks to its inherent "qualities", I've read more than my fair share of disgustingly discriminatory comments on Digg that I've never read on most other sites. Not even /. and other similar sites compare. The only thing Digg does well is to further perpetrate stupidity.

Before someone goes on and tells me to bury stories and digg down offensive comments, the crap ones are usually the ones with like hundreds if not thousands of diggs. Like this recent insanely offensive dumb one with the equally as dumb comments: http://digg.com/health/Breaking_News_Lesbians_are_fat

I think a couple minutes with Google or just searching on Digg could turn up hundreds more equally if not more offensive stories.
 
solvs said:
Both do. And we are better for it. We self moderate to a point, and if you follow the rules, you'll be fine. Go visit someplace like Uselessjunk.com (warning: graphic, NSFW) to see something completely unmoderated (despite their claims) and tell me that's better. Trust me, it isn't. I've seen other sites that are really completely unmoderated, and there's worse than racism and kiddie porn combined. Seriously, you don't want to know.

Freedom is great, but there are also rules we all have to follow, and as I said, responsibility that comes with it. ;)
Click to expand...
I agreed partially with it. That's part of the reason why users come back to Macrumors. This place is pretty well-moderated, keeping out the junk. and as some posters have mentioned Digg is full of trashy comments, shadowing those meaningful ones.

I'm sure Digg has censored pornographic post, or hate speech post, but why is there a huge uproar over this particular issue? The most likely reason could be that Digg is now censoring something that is a common knowledge on the internet. And the censorship came from pressure from other authorities which everyone (almost) hates.

PS: I have not visit Digg before so I couldn't care less actually.
 
Digg was in a rough position. They were under a cease and desist order and were doing their best to comply. At the same time though the way their model works puts them at the mercy of the users and there is no way they could take down the data as fast as users could put it up.

All sorts of historical analogies are coming to mind. For Digg this is like Robbespierre realizing just how uncontrollable the country he is running is. For the MPAA this could be Berlin in '89 or it could just be a Tiananmen Square.
 
katie ta achoo said:
IMO, digg has been going downhill for the last few months:
Nothing but n00bs calling other people n00bs and jokes about their mothers;
An environment that is hostile toward women, making it nearly impossible for women to post without getting harassed;
pictures of scantily clad women getting dugg up, while stories with real merit sit in the gutter.

I hope that this all blows over in a few weeks--I enjoyed digg before it turned into this.
Click to expand...

If digg survive this maybe the site will get cleaned up....I highly doubt it from reading everyone post here it seems as digg is nothing more than a stupid useless info site...but to call the members idiots(Not you KT) is another story I won't touch.


Bless
 
Yeah, that is pretty crazy. I myself don't use digg.com regularly but some of my buds worship the site for their source of information.
 
The whole situation is incredible.
First they crack HD-DVD and post it all over Digg, then Digg turn on the posters, so theres a revolt. And now the Digg guy is opening the doors again?

This is quite huge. I don't care much for Digg but the way this story has unfolded is quite spectacular. Even Wikipedia's entry for Digg has been locked down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back