Road rules1 min ago
The Answerbank Wars!!!
Having returned from Christmas and family obligations overseas, I decided to visit answerbank for a moment of sanity only to discover civil war has broken out and CBers have been excommunicated!!!
It got me thinking!
With the increase in such sites as Answerbank and the use of the Internet generally, do you foresee a time when nations will decide to organise an international Internet Police Force to monitor cyber activity in a more regulated and pro-active manner, or do you think the reactive nature of individual police forces around the world will continue in the present haphazard, but generally benign manner?
It would appear that united efforts across the world are beginning to deal with certain sex sites, but will the 'world authorities' (please excuse such loose terminology) be content to focus merely on specific areas of concern in the future?
Do you foresee a gradual spread into all areas of the Internet, a la 'Big Brother' (Novel, not TV series), or will political/social or financial concerns prevent such organised intrusion?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Drusilla. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I didn't follow it closely enough, but there was a recent move internationally to allow individual countries to control websites based locally, rather than have domain names dished out by US-based private enterprise as at present. This failed, partly because the USA doesn't give anything up, partly because nobody wants the likes of Mugabe, say, to be given any sort of globally-agreed powers over the internet.
But if some sort of controls are set up to act against child porn, in particular, who's to say that they couldn't then be extended by authoritarian governments to cover other subjects they disapproved of? I think people everywhere are in two minds over this.
You mean they don't already?
I'm sure if I put the words "How do I make a " followed by the letters b,b,m and o, (but in a different order) into Ask Jeeves or somesuch search engine, the little electronic ears in Cheltenham would soon be pricking up, and I could expect a knock at the door from Special Branch followed by being charged with a serious offence.
Before t'internet, this sort of schoolboy fascination was satisfied by playing around with a bit of charcoal, fertiliser and (I won't name the other main ingredient for fear of being accused of promoting terrorism).
Yes, the thought police may be with us very soon.... but to take my mind off it, I fancy going to sing a few Carols tonight, any London-based AB-ers care to join in?
Recently countries as diverse as the USA and China have taken major steps to both monitor internet users, and control the information they can receive. Particularly in the case of China, where the government have taken steps to prevent access to sites that discuss democracy or democratic ideas (just like this one), perhaps more alarmingly companies like Google have colluded in this practise (sod freedom of speech and human rights when there�s and advertising buck to be made in a market of a billion people).
Additionally, U.S. intelligence agencies have recently shown a great deal of interest in Internet surveillance. One thrust of this is determining geolocation from an IP number. Currently this is about 80 percent effective in fixing the IP number to a major city, and over 90 percent in fixing it to a country.
Another important aspect is the search terms used to query search engines. These terms are absolute pearls; they are a succinct window into the Internet user's interests and state of mind at a particular point in time.
Just try typing in your own AB handle in a search engine, it is very telling, and the information is out there for those that might want to use and abuse it.
Interesting topic! I totally think surveilance of the internet exists already - it is probably naive to think otherwise. In light of the threat of terrorist websites which propogate hate to impressionable young people and child sex sites, I do not disagree with some monitoring.
The internet itself has developed so quickly and to some extent, I do think it has got out of control - what, with internet fraud costs soaring and the aforementioned terrorist and child grooming sites/practices.
Frankly, I am more concerned about my international calls being tapped than my google searches being monitored. In the end, what's most important is that the "monitors" don't exploit their power - good luck with that!
People in China who use Google to search on terms like "falun gong" or "human rights" receive a standard-looking results page. But when they click on any of the results, either their browsers are redirected to a blank or government-approved page, or their computers are blocked from accessing Google, and you can bet a flag is raised to investigate them.
Freedom of speech might be 'drivel' to some people, but God help us all if we fail to defend it!
Sorry to post something a bit different than what you intended with your question drusilla.
I recently read an article about "farmers" in big online games like World of Warcraft and Everquest. There are some who play it only to find stuff the other players want and then they sell it. An example is that if A plays World of Warcraft and want some virtual things for his virtual persona, he then buys money for the game over the net, just like if you went to the bank and bought a foriegn currency. Quite intersting I think, and I quite amazin those online games can become so big!
Anyway the point of the article was, that at some point "virtual economies" with real money invested will become so big they will have to be regulated or/and twill have to be taken quite serious, because so many people and so much money is involved. Furthermore the virtual money may have to be viewed as real money, because it actually is worth something.
Hope the above makes sense (and I hope I remember correctly and that actually is what the article said :) )
I can see Governmental control of website content being a distinct possibility.
No-one would disagree with the control / censorship of websites portraying child pornography, (some would argue any pornography); or possibly those sites that 'promote terrorism'. But what about those sites that put across a view from a so-called 'enemy's' viewpoint? Web content that has an anti-government stance? Promotes an alternative system of government? Or those who are simply in opposition to the Government? Or what about control of sources of news or information sources that put Government, or Big Business in a bad light? Where do you draw the line?
The current climate is ideal for a government that seeks to control its people. Increasing restrictions on freedoms and rights can be justified in the name of 'terrorism prevention' and are 'just a temporary measure' .
Those that oppose increasingly restrictive legislation would be called 'bleeding heart liberals'. Well, so be it, it wouldn't be the first time I've been called it. But I'd rather be that, than an apologist for oppression, bleating out the motto "If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to worry about" as step-by-step, freedom is stripped away by stealth until we have nothing left.
Phew! Sorry, glad I got that off my chest. It wasn't aimed at anyone either, so I hope no-one takes offence. Just an utterance of opinion.
Just one thing to note:
Most countries have completely different laws, so an international law may be very difficult. To take the example given by both jno and brachiopod - child porn.
What if you are in Spain and host a site that allows 13 year olds in explicit shots? 13 is over the age of consent there - whereas it would be 16 over here, and 18 in some countries.
On the basis that we can't control borders from other countries, I doubt that we will ever be able to control the internet.
1 to 13 of 13
