Group items tagged

Self-googling will not sound as vain or egotistic as it may seem if it means that an individual can be aware of what information the internet holds about him or her. To me, it's a form of "damage control". 

Should customers in Internet cafes be monitored? The governments' fear of terrorism stands against user privacy. Up to now no official regimentations for internet cafes in the EU exist, Scotland Yard now advises administrators of public web spaces to regularly control their customers' activities.

Very interesting article about people being marked in social networks even if they are not a member - can Facebook and the like be made responsible? An Italian court recently sentenced three Google executives because of a video posted by a user. Swiss and German privacy watchdogs further discuss the matter, many other EU nations are also involved. Google asks where to draw the line between censorship (controlling users' content being an invasion of their privacy) and free speech. There could be a conflict between US Web Giants and EU authorities. Only mentioned in passing that American media companies only react very slowly to European concerns "given the close relationship between Silicon Valley and the administration of President Obama".

Founder of the infamous Australian Whirlpool Forums Simon Hackett outlines five points about the impending government ISP level filter. Interesting as it highlights the gap between the governments ideals for online family security and the realpolitik for control.

This article looks at the notion that the internet was supposed to spark the decline of autocrats. It then argues that authoritarian regimes, such as China and Vietnam, have actually undermined the potential power of the Web in the way that it controls content. However, this idea of a filtered internet for users should not be restricted to countries such as China and Vietnam. Australia is quickly becoming one of the most censored countries in the Western world and in many instances has been compared to that of China.

Apple vs Flash is used to illustrate protocol as a form of control where end users have no saying and are affected with a partial access to internet

Baking surveillance, control and censorship into the very fabric of our networks, devices and laws is the absolute road to dictatorial hell. This interesting article discusses legislative measures taken in the UK regarding the digital economy. The first question that springs to mind is - how will it be enforced in an effective way?

Over the years, Facebook has changed its privacy policy, increasingly restricting  the control that users have of their own privacy.

Google has released the extent to which intruders broke into their system in January. It targeted their password system which controls access to users worldwide. This brings up the debate about the security and privacy of systems like Google that centralize personal information. However, the real issue behind this attack was that it was traced to two computers in China which then started the whole 'Google to change its policy toward China'.

Kind of a scary headline after today's class. Not quite what it sounds though. .. Or is it? Google owns or controls content. Now Google owns more content. If you look at Benkler's definition of layers (via Lessig), both the physical layer and the content layer have been subject to ownership and freedom exists/ed mainly on the layer of logic or code. Google is just a giant content aggregator.

Privacy addressed by Zukerberg. Shall we believe him? Article goes hand in hand with this week's readings. 

Reporters without boarders has set up the new enemes of the Internet 2010. Australia and South Korea where draconian laws are creating too many specific restrictions on Web users by challenging their anonymity and promoting selfcensorship. they are democratic countries under surveillance and their upcoming implementation of a highly developed Internet filtering system is very controversial.

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.

The government's rules on the internet extend beyond websites to individuals. All forum and chatroom users will be required to make verifiable real-name registrations, while internet companies will have to make their search algorithms public to improve transparency.

Big discussion about the permanent storage of personal data in Germany at the moment. Google and its inter-connected services is just one part of it. The government talks about the "Gläserne Bürger" (vitreous citizen) but still they seem to like it somehow - at least they haven't come to an agreement yet. Also see http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,682129,00.html @Google street view: The campus of Sydney University cannot be visited via this service. Why?

Ilse Aigner, Germany's minister of food, agriculture and consumer protection, who usually concentrates on issues over rotten meat, genetically engineered corn and imitation cheese, recently took on a different kind of issue: the Internet and data privacy. Suddenly Aigner finds herself facing online giants Amazon, Facebook and, above all, Google. Soon Google plans to send cars equipped with cameras out onto Germany's roads once again for the company's Street View project. Aigner is now insisting that Google should ask permission before violating the privacy of German citizens. The minister's attack and the following discussions reveal just how divided the German government is when it comes to the online world. The debate revolves around questions of national security and individual self-determination on the Internet. But it also concerns the power of the large giants such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and MySpace, as well as the question of what these companies are doing with the records of our everyday data, and how they will be able to obtain information from us, influence us or perhaps even control us in the future. It seem like, once again, a German politician is exploiting the popular issue of internet privacy and censorship in a superficial way in the hope of scoring political points.

This article show how companies like Google, Facebook, are facing judgments from the public that blame them for the latest cases of Cyber-bulling. They defend themselves arguing that the number of users has grow fast and is impossible to control all the contents. However social networks are using auto regulating mechanism like reporting abuse. The preoccupation raises in how the main idea of free expression that internet provides could be destroyed by the "freedom abuse".