Home Law in IT Chemistry under lock and key

Chemistry under lock and key

by admin

Chemistry under lock and key
The day before yesterday (August 13) Vladimir Zykov In "Izvestia" announced Russian Interior Ministry plans (which, unfortunately, have reached the stage of being drafted) aimed at banning the mention in the media and on the Internet methods and technology of manufacturing explosives and explosive devices. The bill provides for fines of up to a million rubles, as well as for the blocking of websites and the seizure of computers.
On the surface, the purpose of this bill is well-intentioned:its official purpose is to prevent explosions. "Izvestia quotes Anton Korobkov-Zemlyansky (a member of the Public Chamber) as saying that just one schoolboy who has read the Internet can easily render an entire apartment building uninhabitable.
So why can and should this legislative initiative be deeply disliked by most internet dwellers?
First, because website blockades have no less destructive (though less deadly) effect on the Internet than explosives in the real world.
If a schoolboy can destroy a whole multi-storey building, then blocking by IP (and that, gentlemen readers, is the main method of blocking used in Russia today) easily destroys a whole hosting server, stopping work of a great many sites, most of which have no connection with the closed one – except that they all had the bad luck to use services of the same hoster (but most often had not the slightest opportunity to foresee and prevent what happened).
For example, Node.js programmers have recently become useless in any attempt to open nodewebmodules.com via Rostelecom (or even via another provider with Rostelecom in uplinks) – instead it opens a "white screen of death":
Chemistry under lock and key
Second, abuse is inevitable.
The custom of the present lawmakers, on the other hand, is that abuse is not prevented – rather, the practice of abuse is brought into the letter and spirit of the law over time.
Hasn’t it recently become known to all of us the preparation of precisely this kind of bill which would make legal the former practice of all abuses of the law to remove information from the Internet that is not appropriate for children?

  • For example, Habrahabr bloggers have struggled in court ([ 1 ], [ 2 ]) for the right to mock suicide – and the bill would officially equate that mockery with propaganda.
  • For example, jaws dropped at the sight of For "drugs." of a popular site about the game EVE Online (which merely described the application of fictional chemicals to fictional characters) – and now the bill would also ban information about the use of "substances that have similar effects to narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances on the human body."
  • The definition of "child pornography" has been expanded to such an extreme, that ksenobayt noted : this is being done as if on purpose to fit exactly my concerns about banning anime. The blocking initiative "audio-, video- and/or textual information aimed at inciting sexual feelings towards minors or justifying sexual behavior towards minors" will affect such a wide range of works that, under the letter of the law, it would not be difficult to block even Tatiana Larina’s letter to Onegin (because it is a love letter of the thirteen-year-old heroine ) or Shakespeare’s tragedy of the love of Romeo and Juliet. Law enforcement is unlikely to affect the classics, but a number of contemporary authors (or even ordinary fans of their works) who at least indirectly use similar plot elements will be indiscriminately labeled as pedophiles, and their websites will be subject to web-destructive IP blocking.

Is the new MIA bill free from the possibility of its abuse? In no way is it free. As we have seen in the EVE Online case, from catching real-life drug dealers who were importing drugs from a state-controlled Afghan territory by the pound, the repressive apparatus of the Russian state is suddenly distracted by the fight against online players who have made fictional bioactive chemistry part of their game’s storyline. And so the new bill from the Interior Ministry will inevitably replace the dangerous and bloody catching of real-life subversives (some religious fanatics in those southern Russian republics where the problem is still quite acute) into online repressions against random individuals with their references to chemical processes and explosive devices, sometimes again made up in whole or in part.
For example, " Fight Club " by Chuck Palahniuk (and even " Mysterious Island " Jules Verne) mentions nitroglycerin and gives a recipe for making it. (Think, anyone would look into the extent to which the author thoughtfully misrepresented the recipe so as not to lead readers into temptation?)
Will school chemistry textbooks be subject to the removal of references to the explosiveness of the simplest chemicals? For example, such as a mixture of hydrogen and oxygen in a known proportion? (This mixture, by the way, plays a plot-forming role in the finale of Julvern’s " Dr. Ox’s experience. ", e.g.)
A " Krakatite " Karel Chapek?
And those computer games about war (or other hostilities) in which the player doesn’t just plant a mine (or other "hell machine"), but assembles it first?
Many, very many abuses are possible. And the experience of enforcing previous laws to block Internet sites shows us most clearly that these abuses are inevitable after the law is passed, or even directly planned by the lawmakers.

You may also like