Here is a link to a wikipedia article:
Do not click on it!
That link leads to child pornography! And is potentially illegal depending on where you live. Some members of this forum will not actually be able to see that link, it'll show an error 404 or something.
Here's a full story: British ISPs restrict access to Wikipedia amid child pornography allegations - Wikinews, the free news source
(Warning, this also contains the image in question)
What is your view on this?
I'm all for blocking child porn pictures in theory (although see the pedophile thread for my views on faked images that contain no real children), but that depends on what is meant by "child porn". I think blocking wikipedia because of cover ART is just plain censorship.
And once again nobody is going to say "wait, hold on!" because you can't stick your net out in things like this without looking like a paedo.
Although the child porn thing I can live with because it's not a big deal, however I'm more concerned about the fact that other sites can be blocked because of 'offensive' material. This includes written (typed) words.
Don't get me wrong, I hate racism and all that, but I think people have right to write and publish whatever they want. You don't have to read anything you don't want to.
This just seems like book burning.
I think that people have seriously lost respect for the freedom of speech/expression. I don't know why I care about this stuff, but it really bugs the hell out of me whenever stuff like this happens... whenever any rights are denied, no matter how trivial. I can't help but take it personally, I don't understand how people can let this stuff go.
Although it hasn't been all bad, there has been one victory this week.