Neat. <3

What really amuses me is I didn’t vote Franken in when I voted in Minnesota last. Feel like a dolt for not knowing all his views last time. :/

Video after the break.

This frightens me beyond means.

While I believe that Free Speech is not entitled to you automatically on the Internet (it’s an international stage that has no set boundaries and it comes down to a local area to deal with it..) but I strongly believe that if somebody is against it, they can block it themselves and that they cannot sue/hurt/remove my work because it offends them. If you are offended, you don’t go there. It’s the Internet ffs, you are not forced to go somewhere and you can chose to ignore something or censor yourself from it (if you want to just not ignore it and go on with your day).

So this little step in the direction of censorship truly frightens me. I’m already srsly annoyed that ISP want to deny usage of BitTorrent (which has legal uses.. a vast number that can equally combat the illegal uses) but this idea of complete censorship back at the publisher of some online content (which is all the porn is in this story) because somebody doesn’t like it makes me shit bricks. “That guy there has an insulting website.. sue sue sue!” >.>

This unconstitutional bullspit (as this story deals directly with the US of A, but the Globe indirectly nonetheless) should be publicized so that people can stand up against it. Net neutrality and non-censorship _at the source_ (the publisher as in this story) should be an everyday idea. Or at least, that’s how I like my cookie to crumble.