Here’s a very interesting piece on the very relevent issue of Web censorship and regulation: Control freaks want web licences to end bloggers’ anonymity – be very afraid.
I love how Google, Inc. pretends that they are the good guys in everything. Like in the China censorship fiasco, where Google, in China to tap into that gigantic market potential, was forced to reconcile their basic search engine model of “anything goes” in order to satisfy the demands of CCP authorities who wanted a Chinese “Google” with limits on pornography, and presumably political speech and other content. Google suddenly got self-righteous and backed out of the deal? But what is their standard?
Well, as anyone who has ever taken a cursory Google stroll in the web porn realm can testify, right now the standard is anything goes. One could argue that the simple reason for this is lack of regulation – that whereas the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers resides in California and is dominated by the English language, the World-Wide Web is just that, world-wide – oustide of LANs and corporate networks and the like, there is essentially no regulation. Contrary to Al Gore’s claims, the Internet is not and has not been created by any one nation or entity.
Now, at the 30th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution in Iran, Iran has come out with their own, completely filtered Internet safe for conservative Islam. We hear also that Australia is resorting to government controls to try to stamp out child pornography.
Are they on to something?
Is it maybe possible that the Internet can be – is – a diabolical phenomenon? If you believe in mind over matter; or consciousness over matter, i.e., that first there is consciousness and consciousness brings matter into being through a cosmic mind of sorts, then the World Wide Web becomes a most diabolical spider’s web because of this:
The force and power of intention.
There has been much research and thought put into the “power of intention” (there is a popular book and seminar series by the same name).
So my question is this: what megawattage of human intention is being poured into the Web in 2010? An astronomical, increasing amount – that is inarguable. What is the differential in what is then not going into the immediate, real-time environment, like your family in the other room or your coworkers in the adjacent cubicles? What can only be in totality a large, large negative sum.
Where is this lifeforce of human intention going that for millions of years only fed through the feedback system of the biosphere? It is being circulated on the Web, but it may also be undergoing conversion, being flipped when it hits the higher-dimensional universe and this human energy force may well be channeled off to other dimensions or parts of the universe. Either way, it does not remain on this Earth in original form. That’s the theory anyway. Hence the negative sum; the loss.
What is being lost?
An example: think of the intensity of human intention/lifeforce/whatever you want to call it, that is expended directly toward the computer screen by a man masturbating to Internet pornography? Here’s another thought: we know that with the close attention the opposite sex pays to this eternal dance – mating – they want to be where the men are; where the men are focusing their sexual energy. Hence we see this proliferation of women and girls posting themselves online in a provocative way.
Where does it end? What are the consequences for Gaia, our mother earth?
And people wonder why we are seeing a breakdown in social relations – including between the sexes in – and why we see accelerating earth changes, climate change, wars, political instability, etc.
This is why I have genuine fears that the very new phenomenon of the Internet is not at all entirely yet understood. But let’s hope that in the long-run, as things play out, we can make any necessary adjustments to harnass these technologies for the good of the Earth and humanity.