Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

In Mexico and other Latin American countries there have been some questions raised on how kidnappers can get precise information of potential victims and their spending power: friends, lifestyle, travels. If social networks like Facebook are a potential tool for criminals, should they be regulated by the government? Is it the media or the government's fault if such a use is being made? I am looking for references in English regarding this problem. 

YouTube could be among high traffic sites given carte blanche to self-monitor under the federal government's internet censorship efforts if the recommendations of a leaked whitepaper are implemented.

Obama's "Organizing for America" was an attempt to channel digital political organizing toward an established candidate. It was the first time a mainstream candidate used the internet effectively to organize. But now they're using it to organize while in government... will it continue to work? Perhaps the fact this year's election is still 9 months away is the problem.

I found this article interesting as it gives a good description of user control and encouragement - a form of governance - through site architecture. Particularly interesting was the discussion around how changing one button's position increased that button's clicks by 10%.

Seeing google's step out from the users' view, people are angry at what the government has done.

"A national review of computer game classification laws is currently in progress and work is also under way to develop proposals to improve compliance by retailers."" The article also leads with the factlet that Aust is one of only Western nations WITHOUT an R18+. On this front, the current internet governance proposals looks like a lay down misere.

55 000 submissions have been received under the Australian Government's review on the introduction of an R18+ rating for games in Australia.

Study into the US Safe Harbor is an agreement between the European Commission and the United States Department of Commerce that enables organisations to join a Safe Harbor List to demonstrate their compliance with the European Union Data Protection Directive.

A brief review of a letter that 'some' Chinese netizens sent to Google and to the Chinese gov. The 'netizens' confirm that they "support necessary censorship of Internet content and communications", however, they give a few guidelines on how this censorship should be conducted.

"Let us all renounce the harsh rhetoric about the POTUS [president of the U.S.]. Several, including myself, hv used inappropriate language. Let's remain civil! #tcot." See full article from DailyFinance: http://srph.it/dCqW2m

The Pentagon receives thousands of attempts to from hackers/crackers to access their defense computers. They are deciding to fight fire with fire and train their employees to understand hacking so they can be prepared. Sounds like a good idea, just maybe one they should have had years ago...

When government censorship becomes too much for a company to handle. What will Google decide, stay in the most populous country, or leave because censorship has become too much.

This is a clear example of a government trying to control the information flow with old techniques (only one CD for all journalists) and how the Internet comes into play to provide electoral information. Interesting to compare vs the 2008 US elections, where pundits and commentators could get info from various sites. Can the Internet change results?

Minister Stephen Conroy challenges Google's credibility in response to the search engine giant's criticism of Australia's looming mandatory filtering. Interestingly he also says he is unaware of complaints from Hilary Clinton - which his department responded to in the previous article I posted. Interesting...

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.

This article discusses how Michael McConnell (former director of national intelligence), has suggessted that "we need to re-engineer the Internet to make attribution, geo-location, intelligence analysis and impact assessment - who did it, from where, why and what was the result - more manageable." Under the guise of protecting the state, it deems the "netizens," as possible enemies of the state.

This article discusses how a simulated war game called "Cyber ShockWave" can turn any electronic item, for example, cell phone or computer can be "weapons" used to shut down the Internet during terrorist attack. The notion of privacy and civil liberties, should expect to be ceased for Americans during a crisis of that level. During this mock scenario, it was revealed that "[The United States] don't have the authority in this nation as a government to quarantine people's cellphones." Which during a state of emergency brings to question if Internet carriers should allow their networks to be monitored. How secure is online security, and who is the enemy, becomes difficult to discern, as any threat to national security arises.

Interesting post about SPAM and keeping it under control in twitter. Particularly pertinent is the point that as a site/community becomes larger the more SPAM there is - ie, the larger the population, the harder the governance.

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!