ARIN6902 Internet Cultures and Governance

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'.

This article discusses the different ways to access content that is blocked, down etc on the Internet. I'm not 100% sure if this would work around the Mandatory Internet filter in Australia though! But interesting read. 10. Skip Past Annoying User/Pass Requests 9. Read Articles That Rupert Murdoch Wants You Paying For 8. Change User Agents to Get Around Browser Blocks 7. Get to Gmail When It's Down 6. Get Actually Usable BitTorrent Speeds 5. Get To Sites Taken Down by Traffic 4. Control Computers At Home 3. Download YouTube and Other Flash Videos 2. Access Country-Blocked Streaming TV 1. Roll Your Own Proxy to Access Blocked Sites

Canada, alongside France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Spain and the United Kingdom have issued a warning to Google on the grounds that the company is ignoring privacy and legislation with respect to launching their products (Google Buzz). This is a clear example of when a company, may appear to attempt to protect their users (Google vs. China) while, in the company's own interest, these rules and regulations may be ignored. How much trust should we put into any company that offers services free to the public, and exactly what liberties do we give up when we sign up for that service?

What happens when an institution that is supposed to be safe, violates your personal rights? This article discusses how a high school in Philadelphia installed software on their lap tops that would capture photos of the user of the lap top. Though the software was intended for recovery measures of stolen lap tops, it appears that the software goes beyond photos taken from the software contained images of chats, and content that the user was viewing, to the users themselves dressing., as it spies upon the user's interactions with peers. This brings to question whether or not to trust institutional technology, and whether or not they should stipulate that some software installed may violate the users right to privacy.

This offers an overview of how the debate over the proposed mandatory internet filtering law has played out to date. In particular it outlines key voices in the debate and their stance.

This article is an interesting complement to the recent reading by Lawrence Lessig on code as architecture.

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?

According to a survey by Newsweek, although young people know the risks online, they choose not to protect themselves. In cases such as this, is it the Government's role to step in and protect people? Or is it the user's own fault for not taking precautions when they know the risks?

Discussions of a pilot program for e-democracy and citizenship that extends into 'real world' elections.

Google Australia says here that the mandatory internet filtering is too wide and they believe that the filtering not only would slow user access speeds, but also questions the legitimacy of the measure because of the associated restrictions on access to information

page ranking algorithms.

Another case of cyber bullying that led to the suicide of a teenager, Allem Halkic, who was sent threatening texts and Internet communication by former friend, Shane Phillip Gerada. Gerada received an 18-month community-based order after pleading guilty to stalking Allem. Another move towards the governance of threatening behaviour via the Internet.

Good article on the social and political uses of social media (sic.) in Indonesia. There have been attempts to filter/censor content, but so far they have been avoided. Uses of Twitter, Facebook by politicians is also described. 

As Facebook is criticised for refusing to allow a child safety button on its network, we look at some of the online dangers kids face and measures being taken to educate kids about those dangers.

The University of California published a report about Internet privacy. 1.000 Americans were interviewed last summer. The result: 55% are more concerned about privacy issues then they were five years ago - mainly because they know more about the subject now. But still only 14% read privacy policies on websites. Besides that younger Internet users belief that their privacy is protected by the law.

Bug off standards! It is "www.google.com", not "http://www.google.com"!!

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/

Article that suggests that China might be reshaping its media apparatus to deepen its leverage over the Web.  Policing over social networking, microblogging and video.

With new technologies being introduced, the function of libraries is changing.

Unofficial reports of Google's open source VP8 video codec may arguably give other major video codec companies a run for their money- offering internet users good quality video, whilst using smaller bandwidth. But keeping it royalty and patent free for web browsers to use without charge- making it difficult for royalty codecs to compete.