Back to oDesk.com » Love the way you work.

Welcome to the oDesk Community! Connect here with fellow clients, contractors, and oDesk staff. Please review our Usage Policy.

Can't open youtube in Pakistan.

Hi Youtube has been banned in Pakistan for over 3 weeks now. I could open it using proxies at first but now it won't open. I tried using TOR Browser as well but it doesn't support the latest version of flash player and hence a lot of videos don't play. My client has been waiting so long and I can't keep him waiting any longer. Any help would be deeply appreciated.

Vote Result

+++-------
Score: 3.0, Votes: 2
I don't think so either.

-Darren- J. wrote:
Not that I think the maker could have possibly anticipated the strength of the reaction.

I assume he had an idea, but not to the extent to which it has become.

Darren, what do you think about this?

When the violence erupted, “the press, the president, secretary of state were blaming my client for the violence in the Mid-East, and then a week later we learned that it was all pre-planned attacks to coincide with 9/11.

Maybe the maker was hoping

Maybe the maker was hoping for a frothing beard on TV; maybe even burning a flag. I don't think anybody could have anticipated what actually happened because there was so many other contributing factors. Who could have anticipated all the deaths...over a YouTube video...that's just silly. On the other hand, if you're insulting a religion with 1.5 billion followers, then statistically you're going to get a few nutters in there.

Limiting free speech is almost always a bad idea though...I have no intention whatsoever of censoring myself due to someone else's beliefs. Especially when the problem is self-solving...if you truly believe; then you also have to believe that blasphemers will spend eternity roasting in Hull, or somewhere equally insalubrious. Problem solved. The basic tenets of pretty well every religion are faith-based...or from my point of view, imaginary. If you choose to follow a religion and accept limitations to your behaviour because of that, then that's absolutely fine: but it's unreasonable to expect other people to accept those same limitations just because of your beliefs.

The Muslim faith is notably bad at this; attempting to censor and shut people down on anything they don't agree with. Indeed, this whole thread kicked off because Mohammad T attempted to shut down the OP and then me. Apart from the "What are you trying to hide?" and the "Your argument is clearly unsustainable if that's your first reaction" arguments, censorship just plainly and simply cannot work in this era of global communications. It's like trying to plug a large sieve with a small blob of Blu-Tac...you're always going to get leaks.

The way forward is education and working with people...that way people *may choose* to limit themselves out of politeness; and from knowledge of -and a degree of sympathy with- your ideals. Setting light to each other in some insane idea of 'protest' just doesn't work or have any of the desired effects on any level. Muslims also have to learn to deal with naysayers...because you're outnumbered if for no other reason. Forbidding people to behave in a certain way "because I say so, and so does my imaginary friend" is just going to be met with an upraised middle finger and even more mockery. That's basic human nature and if your religion can't cope with it, then it's maybe time to have a good, hard look at the ground rules.

The thing is, these people heard about an offensive video; decided to watch it; decided to get offended; and then decided to protest and then to riot. Blaming everything on the video maker is 3-year-old thinking, if that: "Older boys made me do it". There are several stages and each decision to continue is just that...a decision. There was a protest outside Google's offices in London on Sunday with between 3,500 and 10,000 people and nobody was hurt, so the rioting stage is demonstrably optional.

Please Delete this thread ...

-Darren- J.][quote wrote:

Quote:
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"

-Evelyn Beatrice Hall - The Friends of Voltaire - 1906

Think of it this way. Your belief in favor of free for all, chaotic freedom of speech is also just another belief. Others might not agree with it.

How would you feel If I quote Hitler? I think there are still some things that should better be left untouched. not to be spoken about for a greater good of society.

Just because you can say it/do it, you should not say it/do it. Personal freedom should always give way to public safety and peace.

Its not about freedom of speech. Its about hate mongering and provocation.

As Ayesha rightly said, workplace is not a place to discuss political issue. I think this thread should be deleted/closed. I would go ahead and flag this too.

And that is exactly the wrong way to think.

By not openly discussing issues, by keeping things hidden from view, by "having secrets," so is dysfunction made normal.

The more educated, the more informed a person is, the less likely they are to make assumptions about other people, regardless of the other person's religion, race, nationality or color.

There are always going to be bigots -- but they tend to be of the less-educated, the less-informed variety. By shutting things down for fear of disagreement, you're shutting down the ideas that can change a bigot's mindset.

There is no hate mongering going on here that I can see. In fact, what is happening, is a nice, open, friendly discussion about an abhorrent issue -- and not something abhorrent to Muslims only.

There is no universal right or wrong

There is no universal right or wrong. Good or Bad. It all depends on personal ethics and belief system upon which you view the world.

If you read history, The most educated, the most informed people brought havoc on innocent and less informed people. information is a deadly weapon in wrong hands.

Discuss what you wish to discuss, to your hearts content. But there is a place and time for each discussion.

After dinner, over the drinks chats should not be held in children class room.

If you are trying to build an argument that there should be no limit or restriction to information, Then I am sorry, At this moment, the world outside your room does not work this way. There is a limit to which you will allow access to information. Society as a whole or state on behalf of society would decide that limit.

It also means that you are against current censorship by Western Governments that deny any access to information like bo-mb making tutorials, child po-n and punish denial of ho---cast.

Youtube ban in Pakistan is not due to the fact that we disagree. It is for public safety. It is to limit access to a piece of information that is so provocative, disgusting and insulting that even sanest of Muslims will go out and blow that bigot if they can. Others will go out in rage and blow the embassies etc. and many many innocent people can get hurt.

We and our govt do not want that to happen. Our People are behind this decision. It is our right as a society to make this decision. It is just like we close our doors when wind is too cold.

I have yet to see anyone from my part of world who disagree with the ban.

If we adapt your point of view, World will come to an end sooner than it should be & I want to live and make some money here. Smile

I have seen many

Rana Mansoor Akbar Khan wrote:

I have yet to see anyone from my part of world who disagree with the ban.

By someone from Pakistan:
You do realize that blocking YouTube in a tiny country like Pakistan will not even have a marginal effect on their profitability right ? Instead it will harm our ownselves and push us back another 100 years.

Another one:
I don't get that--- blocking YouTube will prevent us from ?
You block something to prevent access. So if we don't have access to YouTube we will not watch that video? We're not the ones watching and enjoying it to begin with, this stupid Zardari Administration needs to understand that. Blocking it does nothing at all. Solution --- educate the masses not to burn our home to try and hurt somebody/people far away! Give them an outlet to voice their dismay. Perhaps somebody in the government should make a 1 minute (no more) video to the international community (which we should make viral) condemning the blasphemous video. Don't block YouTube it does nothing---

Another one:

What I REALLY want to know is what will be achieved even if youtube did block the video in Pakistan? Who in Pakistan is trying to see the video??? What will change if WE can’t see the video and everyone else in the world can??

This request is absolutely pointless and makes no sense at all.

Another one:
Has any one ever thought that Quran is also available on youtube with translation and recitation, thousands of ahadis with explanations can also be found on youtube besides this there are thousands of sensible muslims all over the world making videos explaining the true nature of islam to the world. by banning youtube in pakistan we are not just limiting access to that stupid video but we are also limiting access to quran we are denying our people a chance to come up with a proper reply to that video. We as a nation have become so ignorant and helpless that we start to take out our frustrations on anything that comes before us.

Another one:
Please please open the YouTube Please do block that film but please open the you tube. Thankyou.........

There are a lot more..just surf the internet.

Argument for sake of argument

You are just trying to find flaws in my statements. Not trying to understand what I wish to put across. let me modify the sentence you don't like.

"Almost all of the people in my part of world are for the ban on the Youtube. There are some who disagree the way it has been implemented"

You vote to cut yourselves

You vote to cut yourselves off from information? That is more stupid than I can believe is feasible. How can that possibly make things better? In any circumstances you choose? How? Surely the better informed you are; the better you can cope with whatever life throws at you.

Roits have stopped

Ever since the ban on youtube, the riots have stopped and there is a relative peace in my country.
So, In our humble opinion, If you allow us to have it... The ban was most feasible option for us. It did stop the chaos that could have brought down everything with it.

Rana, honestly, the riots are

Rana, honestly, the riots are our own stupidity our rather the political mishandling of a sensitive issue. Breaking your own home gets you no where but certain political elements exploit such issues simply to portray the govt.'s short coming.
Secondly the rioting basically stopped after the arrest rather than the ban itself.

oDesk Forum Moderator

Always reach for the skies, for even if you fall, you'll still be on the top of the world...

I think the actual arrest was

I think the actual arrest was the reason rather than the ban.

oDesk Forum Moderator

Always reach for the skies, for even if you fall, you'll still be on the top of the world...

I did not try to find flaws.

You said > I have yet to see anyone from my part of world who disagree with the ban.

I shared some comments made by people from your country, with a different opinion than yours. Personally, i can understand their frustration.

It was not my intention to offend you, i am sorry.

I think you're purposely misunderstanding me.

I am not against the banning of YouTube in your country. At least when it comes to that particular video, that was probably the smart thing to do. We've already seen the outrage, the anger, and the outright terrorism it induces...and IMO, the producer should be prosecuted for putting it out there inciting those incidents.

On the other hand, what I am saying, is that honest discourse about differences between educated, sane, well-read people is important in that it educates the bigots and haters among us who want to hide that bigotry and hatred under pretty words and speeches.

When you want to shut down discussions because you're afraid a) you're personal feeling might get hurt, or b) you might hurt someone else's feelings, then all you're doing is allowing the bigotry to continue. By opening up to talking and -- most importantly -- LISTENING to others who might disagree with you, you take a chance on changing someone's mindset.

And the world will NOT come to an end if we discuss things, instead of blowing up buildings, and tearing down embassies.

You know what happens when...

I think you already know what happens when educated, sane, well-read people try to reason with people who are not..

Rana, you have a point, to some degree.

Rana Mansoor Akbar Khan wrote:
I think you already know what happens when educated, sane, well-read people try to reason with people who are not..

You're very correct in that those who "are not," tend to get defensive and "dig in their heels," so to speak even more. And, in some cases, that can be dangerous.

But, every now and then, someone gets a spark of knowledge which leads them to changing their opinion, really looking at the situation (whatever it is), and finding a way to bridge the gaps, not continue them.

And, to me, if intelligent dialogue means finding that one person, it is worth it.

I'm not naive. I know the odds on this are long, particularly when it happens in today's world. But I know this for a fact. My father, who I mentioned earlier, was an Arkansas "cracker." A poor white trash sharecropper's kid who joined the Air Force to get an education and get out or Arkansas. For all intents and purposes, he should have been just like his brothers and sisters and parents who stayed uneducated and afraid of everyone who wasn't like them, white, poor, and fundamentally Christian.

Because he got that education, and read, and travelled, my dad taught his children that to judge a man by the color of his skin or his nationality or his religion was the wrong way to take his measure. How hard he worked, how he treated his family were far more important assets than anything else.

So you saying that having a civil discussion never works, tells me that maybe YOU should be one to actually stop being so naive. Maybe you're the one needing to have enough faith to trust that what you say is important to someone enough for you to actually try to build bridges from YOUR end - not tear them down.

My 2 cents

Cate B. wrote:

You're very correct in that those who "are not," tend to get defensive and "dig in their heels," so to speak even more. And, in some cases, that can be dangerous.

But, every now and then, someone gets a spark of knowledge which leads them to changing their opinion, really looking at the situation (whatever it is), and finding a way to bridge the gaps, not continue them.

And, to me, if intelligent dialogue means finding that one person, it is worth it.

In defense of those who are on this forum, in this thread, voicing their acceptance (if not outright support) of this ban, some people (who I well respect) are missing the point.

The point is that the one whose thoughts might change through such discussions may indeed be a precious soul. But the families of all those who die as a result of the "dangerous" acts of the first group you mention may not consider that one soul's enlightenment more precious than their loved one's life (wow, that reads so new agey. Don't worry, I am just tired, not "enlightened").

Free speech does not stand for freedom to say things that will insight violence or in other ways do harm. As much as we would love them too, thoughts don't easily change through the simple sharing of knowledge. The knowledge has to be packaged in a way that will be readily accepted. We typically call this propaganda. Most consider it dangerous. Some countries ban YouTube because they view such a ban as a legitimate way to protest it.

We can love free speech as much as we want, but if we vehemently fight for the right for anyone to say anything, we have missed the point. Words hurt. Movies can kill.

All you said was a kind of

All you said was a kind of wallpaper to information; rather than the information itself.

Quote:How would you feel If I

Quote:
How would you feel If I quote Hitler?

Well. I'd be worried about your ethics, for a start.
Quote:
Its not about freedom of speech. Its about hate mongering and provocation.

I should be free to draw attention to the flaws in your religion; just as you are free to point out the flaws in mine. I believe in freedom.

United States free speech exceptions

-Darren- J.]<br /> [quote wrote:
Well. I'd be worried about your ethics, for a start.

So, you agree there would be a reaction against me.

This is what is called Communicative Impact of a statement. I don't know where you are from but In United state constitution, First amendment gives a right of Free Speech.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exceptions

There are some exceptions/restrictions to that.

1 Communicative impact restrictions

1.1 Incitement
1.2 False statements of fact
1.3 Obscenity
1.4 Child pornography
1.5 Fighting words and offensive speech
1.6 Threats
1.7 Speech owned by others
1.8 Commercial speech

Quote:
I should be free to draw attention to the flaws in your religion; just as you are free to point out the flaws in mine. I believe in freedom.

Yes, you are free but within framework of above restrictions.

That's still more free than

That's still more free than having our information blocked. Anyway, you're still doing US laws. Not my laws.

Its not about particular Law. Its about Principal of Law

You are missing the important point, I wish to put across.

If something is inherently likely to provoke a violent reaction OR intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly inflicts severe emotional distress. Libertad de expresión does not and should not apply for greater good of society and humanity.

Do you want riots in streets?
Do you want to see building and vehicles burnt down?
Do you want a third world war?
Do you want to see innocent people die in vain?

If your answer is Yes! I would not question your ethics. I will just ask.

For What?

You are also missing a point

You are also missing a point in that this:

Quote:
If something is inherently likely to provoke a violent reaction OR intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly inflicts severe emotional distress.

...applies to everyone, several times a day.

So far, I have not rioted in the streets; burned a building or vehicle down; seen an innocent person die in vain; or had anything to do with any world wars but ancestors.

You live on another extreme

If despite all my arguments, you still insist on a right of free speech without any restrictions, I think you have taken a very extreme position on the subject.

I will have to leave this thread now, Monday has started. Have to earn a living.

Who said there wasn't

Who said there wasn't restrictions? Take responsibility for what you say. There's a restriction.

Quote:
We have to put a stop to the idea that it is a part of everybody's civil rights to say whatever he pleases.

Adolf Hitler transcript of a conversation (22 February 1942)

Why oh WHY does "Hitler" have to be dragged into this?

I find it offensive.

As far as I am concerned ANYone - potitician or otherwise, on either side of ANY given discussion has instantly lost any given argument the second they drag up Adolf. It's an instant "disqualified!!!!!!!!!!!" as far as I am concerned.

I have stayed pretty much out of this but, please guys, leave Adolf where he is. It's nothing to do with the current conversation and once it deteriorates to that kind of level it becomes no more than a p***ing contest.

Thank you.

Godwin's law.
And "Petra's Law"...

........... states that anyone scraping the barrel of usable arguments and coming up with nothing better than something that serves to p*ss me off royally, involving some vertically challenged but long dead Austrian megalomaniac with a bad taste in facial hair, will henceforth be slapped over the gills with a (virtual) wet noodle.

On that note - "Carry on!" - Preferably without cheap shots about ugly dead little Austrian men.

When you're right, you're

When you're right, you're right. Except for the dead part.

yuck

-Darren- J. wrote:
When you're right, you're right. Except for the dead part.

That put me off my dinner.

Moving conversation to Coffee Break

This conversation has evolved beyond the original technical question and has been moved to Coffee Break.