# data[].attributes.body
I am choosing more privacy. As we have discussed before, most regulations are done in order to protect us from terrorism and terrorism-propaganda. However, in order to protect people from dangers government don't need to check everybody's email, bank accounts and the web-sites, which persons uses.If government does it, government directly violates human rights for privacy, which is written in the Universal declaration of Human Rights, amendment 12 (http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/) , because government questions person's honesty, honor and reputation.

Second reason, why I think government should not interfere in its people privacy because government is people itself; and therefore it is bias. Government can exceed its authority. There is no guarantee that government (people) will not use the information it has in order to pursuit its own aims and purposes.

The story which occurred in 2013 with Snowden and National Agent Security can show that government is not honest with his people. In June 2013, National Security Agency analyst Edward Snowden revealed the existence of clandestine government programs, code named PRISM and XKeyscore, designed to collect and aggregate information from numerous service providers into a single searchable database.The need for a program was realized after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.The purpose of PRISM program was to protect American people from foreign threats. However, government used the program to track its own people too.

# data[].attributes.body
Nurzada:

Internet was originally invented to be used as a nuclear resistant network but nowadays it transformed in uncensored speech. On the one hand, this unlimited speech is good, it helps to improve and increase global human development through easy transmission of ideas and thoughts. But on the other hand, free internet has negative side. Because of it security aspect of internet is very important.

One of the bad consequences of free internet is a piracy.

The examples are Thepiratebay and Wikilleaks. The government use DNS (Domain Name System) , SOPA (stop online piracy act) to fight against piracy. The government could shut down many websites that were hosted on the domains of the other countries. DNS and SOPA helps to prevent conflict of interests, to guarantee safeguard from the digital piracy.

Another bad consequence is that terrorists use internet for their purposes.

Nowadays terrorists are technologically advanced. They can use free internet for propaganda the activities and dissemination the information through media. So, censorship of internet could prevent propaganda.

# data[].attributes.body
Why are we against privacy? As Raul said every country should have ability to protect its citizens from outward and inward dangers. Some of them are terrorism and piracy.

Terrorism attacks have to be regulated in order to protect lives of people, so it touches social factor of country. At the same time state should control its economic part from piracy because piracy destroys small businesses and, consequently, it will negatively impact on whole economy of the country.

1.  The internet is a crucial tool for global terrorism. The Internet is a commercial network which gives advantages to the enlarging terroristic attacks. Terrorists can use websites, e-mails, chatroom for propaganda. The key of effective observation of terroristic attacks will be to monitor e-mails and chatroom, even though it touches the problem of privacy. It is important to pay attention that we gain more from openness in policy but we lose from allowing terrorists to have access to information. Any government’s control damages democracy but free speeches and easy access to sources costs life of innocent people. However, Internet should be carefully limited in the area of free speech in order to secure from censorship. The Internet is the main tool of terrorists and government should have access to any sort of information to protect public safety and give quiet life.

2. In the field of piracy, government also have to be careful since piracy  products can enter to market and destroy economic system, to bankrupt important for state companies and spread nonqualified and no legislated goods among the society.

# data[].attributes.body
2. Internet censorship lacks effectiveness. Those who are involved in illegal activities will find a way to by-pass internet censorship. Shutting down local websites will lead to finding alternatives abroad. Blocking these alternatives for local users will fail due to existence of circumvention techniques. Thus, censorship will work only on general public who are not willing to spend their resources on circumventing. Detailed ways of circumventing can be found in attached file. (“Everyone’s guide to by-passing internet censorship”).

# data[].attributes.body
1. Internet censorship bears dangers related to its legal implementation. Terms used to describe limitations imposed by government could be vague and lead to banning websites, which do not aim at breeding hate, promoting terrorism, etc. For instance, term “propaganda of terrorism” can be interpreted by judicial system so that even mentioning word “terrorism” would lead to negative consequences for owners of a website. And here comes the second threat – content management. Law does not take into account the fact that owners are not the only source of content appearing on their websites. User-generated content is not always controlled by owners to provide users with freedom to express their opinions. Thus, such legal acts in favor of censorship force owners to moderate the content, which is costly for owners and repellent for users. Another concern has technical basis – blocking websites, which were rightly accused in violation of new law, can lead to blocking all the sub-domains that are not involved in this violation and could even have different owners. It again leads to discontentment of internet community. These disadvantages were among arguments of opposition during hearing of US legislative projects Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA). Source is attached (“The US SOPA and PIPA – a European perspective”).

# data[].attributes.headline
What if everybody' s information is made publicly available? Would that somehow stop corruption?

# data[].attributes.subject
What if everybody' s information is made publicly available? Would that somehow stop corruption?

# data[].attributes.body
What about biometric passports?- You can't travel to some countries if you don't have a biometric passport. Where does this information go to? You are not checked only by your own government, but also by any other government which borders you cross.

Press freedom index 2013:

Kyrgyzstan: 106

USA: 32

Out of 179

# data[].attributes.body
The tree of freedom should be watered by blood of the tyrans.

Bekzat: how tracking people is not censorship? it is violation of human rights.

Privacy is the right of a person or a group to seclude themselves or express themselves selectively.

The right to privacy should be guaranteed by the law.

In the case of Kyrgyzstan, the government is not able to protect effectively minority groups , hence censorship should not exist

With so much corruption, what happens to the information from surveillance.

NSA in the US forces Google and other major IT companies to give them information about citizens.

It is not the fault of the social networks, but the fault of the corrupted governments.

Bekzat: if government surveys, then right to information is violated

Government should not assume that a person in a terrorist if the person has not committed an act of terrorism

# data[].attributes.body
Internet censorship should be stronger- protection from inward and outward dangers, such as terrorism, revolution, hate- base meetings (sexism, racism, drug propagation, child pornography). SME and big business from internet piracy.

Censorship of terrorist propaganda.

Track people who start terrorist actions. Aim is to prevent possible revolution.

Surveillance- it is a way to secure

Examples around the region: China, Tibet, Taiwan, South Korea, Japan (?)- more "Security" because of historical experience with extremist religious groups.

If no Twitter and Facebook, less people would have the time and place of the riots in Cairo (less people would have died).

(Nurzada) DNS: