TVNZ 7 Internet Debate: Individual vs Government

Forums › ICT Policies and Regulation › TVNZ 7 Internet Debate: Individual vs Government

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
61710 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12383

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

Topic # 65035 28-Jul-2010 09:43

As part of the TVNZ 7 Internet Debate, I am starting a discussion on one of their workshop topics:

" Individual vs Government: do we need or want Government filtering the Internet? Should New Zealand have better cyber-defences?"

The debate is on 11 August 2010 9:10pm. It will be live on TVNZ channel 7, Sky Digital channel 97, and online at TVNZ 7 Internet Debate. You can participate live while watching the streaming.

Backblaze cloud backup (personal and business) | Geekzone broadband switch | Amazon (Geekzone aff) | MightyApe (Geekzone aff) |

My technology disclosure | Business Transformation | Enterprise Content Management | Customer Relationship Management | Sharesies investment fund

smiffypr

27 posts

Geek

Reply # 357868 28-Jul-2010 17:57

Censorship is censorship even if its dressed up at "protection". The only time anyone should be allowed to intercept my internet communication, or telephone calls, is if they have a warrant to do so, and that would be only if I was suspected of a crime.

Smiffy

Derek

1 post

Wannabe Geek

Reply # 357904 28-Jul-2010 19:09

"...only if I was suspected of a crime"
Then they would suspect everyone, all the time.

Surely, the only time a private citizen should have their privacy removed by the act of intercepting their communications is if there is evidence of a crime.
What is considered a crime is what nearly all citizens agree on.

George Orwell's 1984 seems to be regarded by governments as a guide rather than a cautionary tale.

Cheers,

Derek

Screeb

671 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 10

Reply # 357911 28-Jul-2010 19:30

smiffypr: Censorship is censorship even if its dressed up at "protection". The only time anyone should be allowed to intercept my internet communication, or telephone calls, is if they have a warrant to do so, and that would be only if I was suspected of a crime.

Smiffy

+1

Even if the internet was censored, the people who really want access to whatever information it is will be able to access it. Proxies, onion routing, darknets, etc. And the ones that are most willing/determined to circumvent it are the ones who are engaged in the more illegal/"bad for society" activities. This means that the only people being hindered are the ones who aren't doing anyone harm. The government knows this, and thus has framed their current "voluntary" censorship as a tool to help people not accidentally come across something illegal. That's absurd because a far better solution would be to give out free "net nanny" software, or at least make it opt-in for the end user. The downsides of government censorship far outweigh any potential benefits.

timmm

2 posts

Wannabe Geek

Reply # 358372 29-Jul-2010 13:53

http://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/3970132/Govt-to-invest-4-4m-in-cyber-security-technology

As a thought experiment, describe possible benefits to implementing Endace's packet capture technology in conjunction with the Government Censorship Filtering System.

http://www.endace.com/100-percent-network-packet-capture.html

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
61710 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12383

Administrator

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 358378 29-Jul-2010 13:57

Very good question. Got that press release this morning and this is a good point of view.

Backblaze cloud backup (personal and business) | Geekzone broadband switch | Amazon (Geekzone aff) | MightyApe (Geekzone aff) |

My technology disclosure | Business Transformation | Enterprise Content Management | Customer Relationship Management | Sharesies investment fund

kyhwana2

2450 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 147

Reply # 358395 29-Jul-2010 14:15

A tool is a tool... besides, haven't they already got the DIA filter already up and running through some other company?

Unless you want to pull an australia and try to force ISPs to capture _Everything_, you don't need 100% packet capture to filter.

I'm pretty anti-filter, but the technology itself is cool.

EDIT: Note that my opinions are my own and don't represent my employer in any way.

rwoodnz

6 posts

Wannabe Geek

Trusted

Reply # 362492 3-Aug-2010 16:23

No reason why ISPs can't offer a filtering service as a value add or on-sell a PC-based service and perhaps we should encourage them to do so, so that it is even clearer that there is no need for Government to run one. The danger of Government running it, is it's thin end of the wedge for more and more things to be added.
The DIA has limited its filter to the very worst material and it is voluntary for the ISP (and if the user doesn't like it can change ISP). However, there was no specific enabling legislation passed for it and it came in relatively quietly. Now that it's here and some ISPs are apparently using it, we need to keep an eye on it and make sure it doesn't get expanded.

jpollock

600 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 5

Trusted

Reply # 365241 9-Aug-2010 09:42

I'm curious about what happened to the first principles copyright review that was talked about by every political party (other than Labour) in the debate prior to the election.

---
http://blog.jason.pollock.ca