Wikipedia is up

[Supertegwyn]

Well, I just checked and Wikipedia has just come back up from the blackout.

So tell me Escapists, what are your thoughts of the Blackout?

 

[Ham_authority95]

The Blackout was a great move. It got the attention of congress, even made several repeal their support.

Only bad thing about it was that I realized how much I'm addicted to Wikipedia...

 

[Tartarga]

Now I want to see the reactions of all those people who where so distraught about it being down on Twitter earlier. Considering how many of them seemed unable to function without it should be quite hilarious.

 

[Bagged Milk]

oh man, I could not function AT ALL without Wikipedia today.

 

[Supertegwyn]

oh man, I could not function AT ALL without Wikipedia today.

I know, I can't believe how many people were whining about it. It's not even school yet, grow a pair and go outside.

 

[staika]

I just hate the fact that the only time I wanted to use wikipedia in about 3 weeks happened to be today. Other than that it wasn't so bad and I got my info a while ago

 

[chadachada123]

For anyone that looked into it, the Wiki blackout was easily circumventable. They even provided the instructions for how to do it on the SOPA info page. The actual blackout shouldn't have affected anyone except the lazy or those that give up easily (no offense to those that did give up without attempting to circumvent it).

I thought that the blackout was a roaring success, and am glad that the internet actually joined forces in opposition to something for once. Great show, internet denizens.

 

[chadachada123]

I have mixed feelings on the blackout and the protests in general. I agree that SOPA is flawed and should not be passed, and I'm glad it got all of this exposure, but everybody seems to be screaming about censorship. I maintain this stance, SOPA even if abused is not a censorship act, it's a different kind of repression and people need to understand the difference.

The argument I've heard every single time is weak and based only on assumptions that poorly worded definitions equate to unlimited power in the hands of those with authority to act.

A poorly-worded definition (even a blanket-statement) CAN lead to near-unlimited power in the hands of authority. The federal marijuana ban is completely outside of Congress/executive powers, yet the law is still in place. The Constitution is very clear on what Congress has the ability to regulate, and the growing of a plant within a state is not one of them. Even though anyone with a basic understanding of the English language can see that the ban violates the US Constitution, it stands.

No matter how you word the definition, it will be abused, even blatantly violated. That's how Congress can pass essentially anything and just claim that the "Commerce Clause" gives them the authority to do so, even when it doesn't.

Besides, our problem with SOPA is that it gives rich IP-owners too much power in essentially shutting down foreign websites without a trial, without being innocent-until-proven-guilty, and without a clarified standard of evidence.

It's not that it's giving Congress more power against the internet that is the problem. It's the possibility of rich corporations (and the MPAA/RIAA) abusing the justice system (as they already do) to squash the small man. We already have multi-million dollar punishments for infringers that shared 10 or 15 songs; we do NOT want to give the RIAA/MPAA more sway in our justice department.