7 Mar
2002
7 Mar
'02
1:45 a.m.
Sellam said:
...governments want to try to control the
content, for various political and social reasons (political dissent,
porn, etc.) As we all know, try as they might, they won't be able to
control it, ....
There is a scary article in last week's Weekly Standard that makes
this a more shaky proposition. Basically the contention in the article is
that the internet in China effectively *has* been placed under the control
of the Chinese government. The key technology there has been developed by
Cisco, AT&T, and other telecom giants given suitable financial inducement
by the chinese government, and as I understood the article, it involves
putting firewalls around the entire country, with enough power to sniff
packets for subversive terms to effectively render the internet unusable to
elements unfriendly to the government.
The article does hold out hope, based on cryptography, "pirate"
links from Hong Kong, etc.
Anyway, I'm not currently convinced that internet access is
currently synonomous with freedom of information exchange.
- Mark
7 Mar
7 Mar
7:01 a.m.
Mark Tapley wrote:
Sellam said:
Yes, I saw that article, too. Oddly enough, the internal firewalls that
the running-dog corporate, capitalist lackeys of the evil, repressive
Chinese government have installed, while great for surveilling the
populace and shutting down hotbeds of sedition like internet cafes or
Falun Gong websites, appears to have done nothing to stem the tidal wave
of spam, worms, and DDOS attacks coming from Chinese servers, leading to
selfless, concerned, civic-minded sysadmins around the world to
basically netblock China. An external firewall as well. Funny how that
wasn't mentioned.
Topicality: Maybe we can punish them by refusing to ship our old
computers to them?
jbdigriz
...governments want to try to control the
content, for various political and social reasons (political dissent,
porn, etc.) As we all know, try as they might, they won't be able to
control it, ....
There is a scary article in last week's Weekly Standard that makes
this a more shaky proposition. Basically the contention in the article is
that the internet in China effectively *has* been placed under the control
of the Chinese government. The key technology there has been developed by
Cisco, AT&T, and other telecom giants given suitable financial inducement
by the chinese government, and as I understood the article, it involves
putting firewalls around the entire country, with enough power to sniff
packets for subversive terms to effectively render the internet unusable to
elements unfriendly to the government.
The article does hold out hope, based on cryptography, "pirate"
links from Hong Kong, etc.
Anyway, I'm not currently convinced that internet access is
currently synonomous with freedom of information exchange.
- Mark
8 Mar
8 Mar
3:55 a.m.
Unfortunately too true. Control of info exchange is the priority of all
authoritarian governments. One of the reasons I lament the demise of FIDO,
NANET, local BBS's, and the like.
Lawrence
Sellam said:
Reply to: lgwalker(a)mts.net
Love of the Goddess makes the poet go mad
he goes to his death and in death is made wise.
Robert Graves
...governments want to try to control the
content, for various political and social reasons (political dissent,
porn, etc.) As we all know, try as they might, they won't be able to
control it, ....
There is a scary article in last week's Weekly Standard that makes
this a more shaky proposition. Basically the contention in the article is
that the internet in China effectively *has* been placed under the control
of the Chinese government. The key technology there has been developed by
Cisco, AT&T, and other telecom giants given suitable financial inducement
by the chinese government, and as I understood the article, it involves
putting firewalls around the entire country, with enough power to sniff
packets for subversive terms to effectively render the internet unusable to
elements unfriendly to the government.
The article does hold out hope, based on cryptography, "pirate"
links from Hong Kong, etc.
Anyway, I'm not currently convinced that internet access is
currently synonomous with freedom of information exchange.
- Mark
2:20 a.m.
Unfortunately too true. Control of info exchange is
the priority of all
authoritarian governments. One of the reasons I lament the demise of FIDO,
NANET, local BBS's, and the like.
Lawrence
FidoNet in North America might be going down the tubes, but it's
actually
growing in popularity in Eastern Europe and a few other places.
g.
--
"I'm not crazy, I'm plausibly off-nominal!"
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
8325
days inactive
8326
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
geneb＠deltasoft.com -
jbdigriz＠dragonsweb.org -
lgwalker＠mts.net -
mtapley＠swri.edu