SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Indian government has ordered a large number of porn websites to be blocked, creating an uproar among users and civil rights groups in the country. The Department of Telecommunications has issued orders for the blocking of 857 websites serving pornography, said two persons familiar with the matter, who declined to be named.
Section 69 (A) of India’s Information Technology Act allows the government to order blocking of public access to websites and other information through computer resources, though this section appears to be designed to be invoked when a threat is perceived to the sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the state, friendly relations with foreign states or public order.
“The government cannot on its own block private access to pornography under current statutes,” said Pranesh Prakash, policy director of the Centre for Internet and Society in Bangalore. “Parliament has not authorized the government to ban porn on its own... However, courts have in the past ordered specific websites to be blocked for specific offences such as defamation, though as far as I know not for obscenity,” Prakash added. Viewing pornography privately is not a crime in the country, though its sale and distribution is an offense.
Some porn websites were still accessible through certain Internet service providers on Monday, as some ISPs took some time to implement the order. “All the 857 websites will be blocked by all ISPs today,” said a source in the ISP industry, who requested anonymity. “As licensees we have to follow the orders.” The government could not be immediately reached for comment.
Reports of the blocks created a furore among Internet users in the country, who criticized the move on Reddit, Twitter and other social media.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by cubancigar11 on Tuesday August 04 2015, @11:39AM
You have a wiff of craziness about you, as if you are not serious enough for anything. If you wanted me to stick to one question you should have stuck to asking one question.
But before I 'bite', where have I mentioned that westerners have had some influence on view of sexuality in India? I said this "India of today has got nothing to do with Hinduism as it has been popularized in the West." which literally means westerners have had some influence on view of sexuality OF India IN the west. It also said that such view has got nothing to do with ground reality. I will also add that this is because of orientalist [wikipedia.org] approach.
Saying that, now I will say that westerners have had A LOT of influence on the very culture of India. British basically dug all the forgotten glory of ancient India and molded it according to their convenience. One convenience was in creating a class of rulers who do their bidding. And at the time of independence, British left these people in charge.
Now before anyone says that Congress is not in government but ultra-nationalistic-hindu-anti-muslim-bla-bla-bla BJP is, I will just say this - both are of part of the system that British left.
Slavery is not just lack of freedom. It creates a culture of surviving masters among slaves, a culture which then requires a brutal master to stay relevant.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday August 04 2015, @08:56PM
Sorry about the smell. What is a "wiff"?
westerners have had some influence on view of sexuality OF India IN the west.
Ok, this is the standard Orientalist critique. But then you accuse poor India of reverse orientialism?
westerners have had A LOT of influence on the very culture of India.
So, which is it? And how do you know so much about ancient Hinduism? Inquiring minds want to know!
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday August 05 2015, @08:12AM
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Wednesday August 05 2015, @08:16AM
Both?
Study? :)
Seriously though, I haven't talked about ancient India so far. I talked about India under British Raj and how it affected India of tofay. I hope you don't consider British Raj ancient?
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday August 06 2015, @06:09AM
Ah! So you do realize that the debate here was whether this was Indian prudishness or some other sort? And your position:
Seriously though, I haven't talked about ancient India so far. I talked about India under British Raj and how it affected India of tofay. I hope you don't consider British Raj ancient?
No, the Raj was not ancient. It was, however, untouchable. The Brits, since they were outside of the caste system, were considered as the lowest caste. Same went for the poor Muslims, thought they never quite understood it. So, now, you are saying you know knothing of HInduism prior to the English (or more properly, the East India Company) take-over of India, but that Hinduism prior to that is nothing like the Western idea of Hinduism, even though you have no idea of what Hinduism was?
Sorry, cuban_cigar_of some number, this is not a credible position to take. Are you saying the censorship is only due to "western" influence, and not the traditional values? Or the other way? Since you know nothing of ancient Hinduism, why should we take your word for any possible changes? All in all, I am confused about why you would intervene in this discussion at all.
(Score: 2) by cubancigar11 on Thursday August 06 2015, @07:28AM
Citation please. And this has got to be the most retarded thing I have ever heard in my entire life. Now I am going to take a screenshot and post it on Facebook just to track this encounter.
The first step to correct comprehension skills is to read carefully. Here is what I wrote: India of today has got nothing to do with Hinduism as it has been popularized in the West.
Now you may carry on as you please. I cannot talk to someone who is not willing to listen. Unless you were trolling, in which case, you may carry on as you please.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday August 07 2015, @07:39AM
Pardone, moi scholare!
Citation please. And this has got to be the most retarded thing I have ever heard in my entire life. Now I am going to take a screenshot and post it on Facebook just to track this encounter.
Only now, at the end, do you realize the full power of actually knowing what you are talking about! Of course the Brits were outcastes, since they came from outside the Hindu world! Same thing applied to the Moghul Raj earlier on. I have to cite this for you, who know that early Hinduism has nothing to do with modern India? I would suggest you NOT post this to anywhere, since inadvertently displaying your ignorance is almost always a bad thing. Just saying.
The first step to correct comprehension skills is to read carefully. Here is what I wrote: India of today has got nothing to do with Hinduism as it has been popularized in the West.
Yes, read carefully, several times. Is this supposed to make the statement make sense? It would if you knew something of ancient Indian religions, of Jainism, Buddhism, Advaita Vendanta, and so forth. But since you don't, we will have to disregard what you say, until you provide some credentials. Here's my counter-thesis: "India of Today has quite a lot to do with Hinduism, and even thought much of it has be misinterpreted by other cultures, it is mostly spot on and that is why they think they should ban pron." Discuss. Citations, please.