ARIN6902 Internet Cultures and Governance

This is blog post # 4 regarding online safety, assisted suicide and cyberbullying.

This blog by Dan Yoder counts 10 reasons why you should can your Facebook account. The main reasons for this boycott are related issues of privacy and how they treat the information of members, for example not providing complete information on how they use your information.

Australian government is planning to accedeto the concil of Europe's Convention on Cybercrim, to further govern online content. several opinons appeared, one is saying that "age-appropriate" filtering is more effective than compelling ISPs to provide access to stored electronic communications for foreign law enforcement pruposes.

A step back- looking at censorship in Australia under the Rudd government. Going back to when the ISP filtering laws were first proposed David Marr observes an underlining level of conservatism in Australia in particular light of the governments pursuit of censorship. He looks at the governments approach to undesired content on the internet by reflecting back on the Bill Henson case.

EFA look at the answers provided Senator Conroy's office to the Questions on Notice asked by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam. EFA's summary is accompanied with their comment to each of the Ministry's responses but at the end you are able download the entire exchange.

My blog post on the outcomes of the recent conference which saw educators, politicians and lawyers discuss the problem Australia has with cyberbullying.

Internet Policy Task Force is the name of the new initiative the U.S. Commerce Department founded. During the next months it will take a closer look at current policy frameworks and explore ways to address challenges of the new internet economy and society. It will finally advise the White House on how to improve privacy for individuals online. The article mentions current discussions about privacy issues Google and facebook have to face. But obviously these did not directly lead to the kick off of the initiative.

This article discusses two studies that were released March regarding bullying and how they correlate to cyberbullying. The majority of cyberbullying made commentary on appearence and body shape. The first study concluded that bullying was on the decline, while the other study illustrated how discussing such matters with an adult or friend would most likely improve the situation. Though these studies may seem common sense, one of the startling issues that appears to have been noted during this study was that some of the answers from educators and friends alike were, "told me to stop tattling," "ignored what was going on," "told me to solve the problem myself," "blamed me," "ignored it," "made fun of me." It seems that those in position to help, may often try to ignore or deny help to those who have outwardly asked for it, which may also be an issue regarding cyberbullying; awareness and how to appropriate deal with reports on cyberbullying.

If you are going to look at copyright on the internet, you really can't go past this settlement. This is Google's next step at world domination: control of our intellectual property. No one likes it, but everyone is going ahead with it because Google has them over a barrel ... The basic deal is that Google wants to digitise every book ever written and make them all searchable online by google customer. On the surface this is all shiny; it seems commonsense that all material should be digitised - we have to keep up with technology. The problem arises when you get to the sticky situation of copyright - generally with books, owners get royalties every time someone buys a copy. With the digitisation, Google wasn't too keen on the idea of pay-per-view. Ideally, they would have loved to present all that information free and just reap the benefit ... well, however Google reaps benefits. There was litigation all round - publishers were against it, yahoo and other internet giants were against it (because it wasn't their idea) and it went to the doors of the US Supreme Court, but not quite to trial. Google's rivals were not too sure that they wanted to go to trial, because the outcome was a little on the uncertain side. So the Google book settlement was drawn up, objected to, fought, signed up to, taken to the US Supreme Court for approval, rejected, modified, fought over a bit more, and sent back to the judge. The last move was in Feb 2010; we're still waiting for Critics argue that the deal gives Google too much power over digital books and will not benefit customers in terms of cost, possible censorship issues, privacy. Copyright owners will also lose out, as Google's royalty policy cuts them out of the system and reduces their royalty - and they are automatically included in the agreement unless they 'opt out' (even if they have not 'opted in'). Really, Google is the only party that seems to benefit, and yet for all of the fighting, the settlement seems

Hosted by the Sydney Law School, is a seminar to discuss the very modern challenges of private international law jurisdiction in cyberspace. Very apt for this week's topic of Borders. When: 6pm-7.30pm, Tuesday 4 May 2010 (registration and refreshments from 5.30pm) Where: Sydney Law School, New Law School Building, Eastern Avenue, Camperdown Campus Registration: $77 incl GST (full-time student concession $44 incl GST)

Law School talk on legal challenges of the interwebs tomorrow: The Sydney Law School will tomorrow host a seminar to discuss the very modern challenges of private international law jurisdiction in cyberspace. "Trade and commerce have become increasingly international - we no longer live in a world where merchants typically do business with others located in the same country. Businesses are just as likely to look to potential partners overseas, and will frequently conclude their transaction over the internet… without ever meeting or speaking to each other," says Associate Professor Chester Brown.

'Educause', a not for profit organisation supporting education in Information Technology, has released an excellent guide explaining DNS Security. It explains the primary benefit of incorporating DNSSEC, namely that it will '...expand the trustworthiness-and thus the usefulness-of the Internet as a whole.'.

DNSSEC was developed to add security to the Domain Name System . The tool works by adding information on the origin of authentication of DNS data, data integrity and authenticated denial of existence. DNSSEC obviously adds more information to queries and therefore increases the size of those query packets. Where older routers exist the additional information included in the larger data packets may not be recognised and therefore the DNS will not be resolved. The end user, in this instance, would not be able to visit the site they requested. The fear campaigns in the community have been around that very point: that the implementation of DNSSEC will not resolve host names. This article provides some light explanation around the rollout of DNSSEC and lays to rest the fear mongering by stating that there, to date, has been minimum negative effect of the DNSSEC that has been rolled out.

Third blog post in my series of posts about Internet Protest Movements.

Microsoft shares the same point of view on the limitations of the Flash product as Apple. Again, reliability, security and performance were identified as impediments of supporting the flawed software. Speaking about the mobile era Steve Jobs of Apple says 'low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards...' are areas where Flash is not currently accommodating. It's most interesting to watch powerful market players create pressure for change in the internet space. Adobe can ill afford to ignore these criticisms yet it's now taking opportunity to discredit the motives of the multinationals: "Apple's moves to block Flash and other technologies are designed to protect a business model that locks developers and consumers into a single, proprietary stack," Adobe spokeswoman Holly Campbell said.

The government has decided to accede to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime (the only binding international treaty on cybercrime). It will require Australia to implement legislation dealing with offences against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data; computer-related offences, including forgery and fraud; content-related offences, including child pornography; offences related to the infringement of copyright and other related rights. The decision could have some baring on Australia's position vis-a-vis the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement?

The federal government's own experts have slammed the internet filter as"difficult" to implement, and saying it would "impose siginficant burdens on the industry". Expert and government report author Louise Collins also suggested the blacklist would have "currency" and could actually serve as a directory for paedophiles.

There has been an underlying shift in the way we live our lives, as a result of technological developments.

The mobile phone is a tool that can help bridge the digital divide permitting to US teenagers from low income households to access the Internet even if they don't have access to a home computer.

related to this, this article suggests that the humble mobile phone may be slowly eroding the digital divide in third world countries, India in this example. http://inside.org.au/india-mobile-revolution/

From Cuban dissident blogger Yoani Sanchez's blog. A short post that describes how the Cuban communist intelligentsia deals with Twitter. Interesting to see how some dissidents have contacts outside Cuba who are in charge of maintaining their twitter accounts. 

second blog post