"Most importantly, malware found a business model in the late 1990s. The fragility of the monoculture could be exploited for profit. Spamming – junk emailing – could now be done on a truly gigantic scale. Hitherto, it had required identifiable servers with broadband access to the net. But the new broadband environment offered a better infrastructure. All you had to do was find machines with fast connections, unpatched security vulnerabilities and non-savvy owners and infect them with a Trojan that would turn them into relay stations for spam (and which could be turned off just as easily, to avoid detection)."
Mike: "Let me get this straight, you want them all locked up just because they're making idle death threats? Meanwhile, the FBI can actually look at everything they're posting build a case and later indict and prosecute because it's out in the open."
Ha ha ha. The FBI has such poor surveillance of the internet its not funny.
Your point is ridiculous because its like saying: Let death threats be posted which threaten the life of the President and other Americans. The FBI will take care of them. Not.
Meanwhile, those threats of violence stand.
"Not to mention that in a free society, so long as none of them post "I'm getting a gun and shooting the president", it's still protected speech."
They do post that and close to it, all the time. To say that this is freedom just proves how dense you are, either that or that you support American Terrorism.
Freedom for what? Violence? yeah, the rats like that a whole lot also.
Perhaps Mike has the same conception of death threats on the internet as the Topix moderators do. Anything can be white-washed, even death threats.
Topix Moderator: "these "death threats" that you have brought to our attention were people saying that you would be better off if you killed yourself. Now it wasn't a nice thing to say by any means but unless you are actually afraid of yourself then it can't really be considered a death threat."
Mike Masnick: "The internet isn't some wild west that needs taming. It's a new and different system that is sometimes used for bad purposes, but much more frequently used for very, very good purposes."
Yes it does need taming and your naive assumption that it is regulating itself is contrary to the proof that it is not staring you right in the face.
A very good question is why you are blind to this.
"If you cannot work out the difference between 'right and wrong' or 'good and bad' or 'legal and illegal' then you lose the right to act on your own behalf, you therefore are 'out of control' and that is why there are laws, for morons who cannot themselves conduct their lives in an honest and ethical, and socially acceptable manner."
Those who blindly tout the unregulated internet have a very naive idea that it can regulate itself.
The proof that is it NOT doing this, is staring them right in the face, yet they refuse to recognize it.
It has also spread so much bad in the world. Hate speech is out of control and violence of the tongue is VERY real. Real violence is happening thanks to this unregulated Wild Wild West, people are being harmed.
The lawlessness of it and near-to-impossibility of applying the laws that do exist has enabled organized crime - not called that of course since there aren't laws in place - to exist like never before.
"I really hope that NO regulations"
That is suicide. That ignores the fact that Corporate America can and is taking advantage of this. That is another Wall Street in the making and has equal potential to harm our Country.