Group items tagged

OIX is a new organization that will try to provide identity credentials that can be accepted by both the private and public sectors. But, like some of this initiatives, government-wise it will only work, initially, in the U.S. Questions on privacy can also be raised? Wouldn't OIX allow for easier access to the whereabouts of an individual's online persona? 

"Cyberattacks aren't confined to governmental/national boundaries and neither should cybersecurity programs." Finally a forward-thinking idea about what needs to happen in order to make an effective cybersecurity plan. This is a statement by Sen. Jay Rockefeller in which he also discussed the need to eliminate the government vs. market solutions. Neither can create a solution independent of the other..."we will only succeed if we do work together." He recognizes the importance of creating an environment in which the private sector can have the resources it needs to work within itself and with the government.

This article is a case against the FCC and the broadband plan as it doesn't support the building of an extensive network accessible to all. The author however shows how the private sector could come up with solutions to that problem. It is a very interesting point of view on the digital divide as well as on internet governance issues.

International network, local lawsuit and regulation. The Australian Government is asked to justify the business deal with Google for it's privacy issue. Since google revealed to mistakenly capture private information from it's street scanning.

A really interesting piece from Matt Yglesias, who points out that a bunch of private corporations are advising on a policy agency, which could possibly be behind the Gizmodo raid. Fascinating to see the way public governance can be shaped by private corporations- and rather scary!

The increasing use of 'free' webmail services, and indeed full office suites, from online providers by business and governments means an increasing amount of funding for encryption and ad free internets. This potentially leads to a new digital divide. The corporate or private internet of the wealthy, and the hyper surveilled commercial internet of the many.

The Mexican government approved a law that creates a national registry of mobile phone users, forcing people to provide their private information to associate mobile numbers with a registrated customer. More than 30m citizens are facing the possibility of service disruption if they don't comply with the forced registration.

Glad I am here!

Government and industry leaders in the US call for international cooperation on internet security. The three-day conference discussed issues ranging from cyberterrorism to organised cybercrime. Measures suggested included "cyber defense exercises" and enlisting the support of the private sector.

This study explores an under-studied layer of Chinese Internet censorship: how Chinese Internet companies censor user-generated content, usually by deleting it or preventing its publication. Systematic testing of Chinese blog service providers reveals that domestic censorship is very decentralized with wide variation from company to company. Test results also showed that a great deal of politically sensitive material survives in the Chinese blogosphere, and that chances for its survival can likely be improved with knowledge and strategy. The study concludes that choices and actions by private individuals and companies can have a significant impact on the overall balance of freedom and control in the Chinese blogosphere.

Digital Due Process is the name of a new coalition composed among other companies by Google, Microsoft and AT&T advocationg for a new legislation to strenght online privacy laws to prevent government access to private digital information in the US

facebook fixed the bug that allow users to view the instant message from their friend. Privacy issued rised again for Facebook.

Google has mistakenly collect private unsecured Wi-Fi payload data from their street view car that was meant to collect mapping data. It may be hard for google to earn back our trust after this event.

There has been some controversy about Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg's comments in an online chat from 2006 that surfaced recently. He told a friend that Facebook users were dumb for trusting him and submitting private, personal information on his then-fledgling website. An initiative by four young programmers to counteract the negative effects that Facebook has had on privacy and the ability of users to control the data they put online is Diaspora. It is a decentralised, open source social network that wants to compete with centralised social networks that allow "spying for free". It will be interesting to see whether the initiative really takes off as a viable alternative to Facebook.

Google and Facebook are both fired under privacy issue. One thing about the Internet is its border less feature, but when it comes to regualtion, this becomes a big problem. American based companies should or should not follow local ligislations? Which country can take the responsible for indivisual interllectual property or private information internationally?

I know this is a piece of fluff, but it raises some questions for me: 1. Was Twitter the only medium through which this event was advertised? Could there not have been other ways to advertise the cancellation of the signing? 2. Is private Twitter usage able to be publically regulated? If so, to what extent? 3. To what extent is the shopping mall responsible? OHS and Fire codes would have mandated the number of people allowed in an area - should they not have made provision for that? 4. Was the failure to tweet reckless endangerment on the part of the manager, or have the law enforcement agencies taken social networking and used it to increase the level of responsibility a person owes to the general public (at least in this instance)? I'm not saying that the manager is in the right, I'm just wary of the level of importance placed on one aspect of this event. Has the way we operate changed to such an extent as to warrant this sort of police interference?