Group items tagged

The US government is being encouraged by various committees and "experts" to increase regulation of the Internet. The Internet is compared industry to the car industry before regulation was introduced to make cars safer. Apparently the "Internet Wild West" is over!

Wow. Read it and weep. Tim O'Reilly is promoting this article. I haven't read anything quite so scarily propagandist since Caberet. What do I mean? (and who is this 'state'?) Courtesy of One Economy Corporation "If e-mail lives in the cloud, who owns that information?" says State Department's Alec Ross. Cloud computing is a double-edged sword in the fight for Internet freedom, a top State Department official said on Wednesday." "During a major policy speech in January, Clinton announced that Internet freedom would become a strategic priority for the United States in 2010. In March, State revived the Global Internet Freedom Task Force, a Bush administration initiative that worked to harmonize policies departmentwide on protecting free speech. The renamed NetFreedom Task Force met on March 4, when 19 telecommunications and information technology companies discussed the corporate sector's role in facilitating Internet freedom."

During a speech at the Media Institute in Washington [February 24, 2010], Larry Strickling, President Obama's top official at the Department of Commerce and administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), suggested that there should be policy discussions between government agencies, foreign governments and key Internet constituencies on issues such as privacy, child protection, cybersecurity, copyright protection and Internet governance. "It's now time to respond to all the social changes being driven by the growth of the Internet," Strickling said. "We need Internet Policy 3.0. We enter this new decade recognizing that we rely on the Internet for essential social purposes: health, energy efficiency, and education. It's also a general engine for economic and social innovation. We must take rules more seriously if we want full participation, but we must keep the need for flexibility in mind."

Somewhere I read that to grasp the technology of the internet, computers and networking, you really only needed to understand: TCP/IP, the end to end principle, object-oriented programming and service based APIs. This summary of 10 serious networking papers is useful to have and also points to Blumenthal/Clark's key paper on the architecture of the internet: M. Blumenthal, D. Clark, "Rethinking the Design of the Internet: the End-to-end Arguments vs. the Brave New World," ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, Vol. 1 , No. 1 (August 2001) pp. 70-109.

The conversation first looked at internet censorship from an international perspective covering issues of internet governance from and internet freedom. Unfortunately one or two members of the panel were prone to regurgitating policy rather than engaging in an actual debate. Towards the end inevitably the discussion was drawn to the proposed filtering laws within Australia. The general consensus from the panel members was that education had to be an essential part of policy when addressing online safety. Interestingly the government representative, the Minister for Home Affairs, was a keen supporter of this policy stance.

The findings of this article definitely portrays an extremist view of the internet. It shows the internet to be extremely dangerous which would add to the already growing nervousness which I think many parents experience in letting their children surf the web. While cybersecurity is an increasingly prominent issue I don't see how producing a bubble of fear around the online world can improve the situation. You generally cannot function without the internet and being fed these alarmist ideas only furthers the notion that people should be fearful and avoid the internet rather than be engaging with it and appreciating it for being an amazing tool to communicate and learn.

Well, Fox News is just unbelievable... guess who they consider their competitor, CNN or Comedy Central.

yayy for fear-mongering....

This article has explored the successful application of internet in Obama's political campaign. Obama's is said to be the first internet president. This article analyzes the advantage of the new media internet campared to the traditional media such as Newspaper, Television, radio, newspaper and so on. As is listed in the article the main advantages of the internet for the campaign use are including the ability to focus on specific demographic segment, and the convenience to create a place for participant to donate, and as is said by the author Samuel Greengard "Obama's staff could conduct polls, solicit ideas and opinions, and hold online town，hall meetings." However this article does not explore the reasons why Internet has this power deeply enough. Behind this power, in my opinoin, it is the "recursive public" that exerts impacts, it would be better if the author also to the "social capital" theory to analyze the power of the internet.

The internet has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for its help in "advancing, dialogue, debate and consensus." According to the article if the internet were to win it would be a "win for each and every one of us." Go Internet!

An group of academics formed in 2004 geared towards the establishment of international governance for the internet. Contains many critical articles on the current state of the internet and attempts/strategies to govern the internet.

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.

Watch the live debate from Intelligence squared -Governments should not Censor the Internet? Intelligence Squared uniquely provides a forum for debate on crucial issues within Australia. On the Affirmative Antony Loewnstein- freelance journalist, author and blogger Ross LaJeunesse-head of Public Policy and Government Affairs for Google David Marr- reporter for Fairfax, broadcaster ABC On the Negative ELizabeth Handsley- specialist in media law as it affects children Kaiser Kuo- Beijing-based columnist and commentator on tech and politics. Alastair MacGibbon- founder of the Internet Safety Institute and Manageing Partner of internet consultancy the Surete Group.

This article eloquently discusses the importance of the internet in our lives and addresses issues of the digital divide. Internet use has become so woven into everyday life that some technology experts say online access should be legally protected, even to the point of considering it a human right. ''It's a social inclusion question,'' said Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre executive director David Vaile

Following on from the BBC's survey of 27,000 people in 26 countries which resulted in 79% of adults regarding internet access as a human right, David Vaile from the Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre and Brett Solomons, formerly of GetUp and now AccessNow.org, have both put their weight behind this approach. Some countries already include internet access as a consumer legal right and other countries regard it as a human right.

Much has been said and written about Obama's online success during the 2008 US presidential election. But what are the numbers? This is an interesting report that sets the stage for the 2012 elections, which are not that far away. Interesting findings not only concerning the candidates, but also in the role played by the Internet in the voting experience itself. 

This article refers to the internet as the "weapon of choice" for the Taliban. The reason the article gives for why the internet is deemed a weapon in this case is due to the distribution of misinformation. If this is the case the internet should deemed to be a weapon in the hands of any government in the world. Misleading information is a problem everywhere and this is why people need to be diligent when looking at information on the web.

A media rights watchdog has listed Australia in a report on countries that pose a threat of internet censorship.

Why does everyone get so worked up with the word "censorship"? In some cases, like with child porn, if a medium is used to violate a human right or indeed foments a crime, then there should be some sort of control. Why look at it from a b&w perspective when there are so many grey areas?

Is this really where Australia's future in censorships is heading?

In the words of one infamous US President, Australia - "you are either with us or against us". Australia's proposed mandatory filtering laws runs contrary to stated US foreign policy championing an open internet. Read US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton's remarks on internet freedom.

A coalition of internet companies are pushing for the US federal regulator responsible for communication industries to reassert control over ISPs by seeking to have internet services re-classified under the same rules as telephone services.

Follow up article to Ambassador Bleich's appearance on Q&A last night, where he said the "internet has to be free" and that there were other means of combating nasty content such as child pornography. "We have been able to accomplish the goals that Australia has described, which is to capture and prosecute child pornographers ... without having to use internet filters" Surely a strong American stance against the MISP means no MISP?

Google in the articulation of a 'foreign policy'??? Could Internet companies develop these kinds of policies?? 

Google's position about internet filtering on China reveals the need for internet companies to develop their own foreign policies. Clay Shirky is interviewed on the topic and he shares his view about how the social effects of internet and how different are the mentalities behind microsoft and google

Great Larvatus Prodeo post over the weekend, written for Electronic Frontiers Australia about the internet filter. Quite long, but here is a key quote: "The Internet ... is part of that secular movement towards the democratisation of social relations; and of knowledge. It's precisely because the Internet affords so much promise for those who wish to decide their destinies in common, to learn, to form an informed judgement and habit of thought that its freedom from state interference is so important at the level of principle." http://larvatusprodeo.net/2010/04/16/left-reasons-to-oppose-the-net-filter-nocleanfeed/