According to CNet, the Bush administration, while supporting a new Council of Europe treaty on Cybercrime is unwilling to go along with an addition that would punish people “distributing, or otherwise making available, racist and xenophobic material to the public through a computer system”. Of course given the First Amendment in the US it would be impossible for America to back that part of the treaty.

Fortunately, it is an additional protocol to the treaty and one that the US can choose to leave out when signing.

It’s treaties like this which have caused Google to invisibly remove references to racist websites from their German and French indexes which, however you loathe hate speech is an exceedingly dangerous thing to be doing…credit force enlistment rank aircredit visa platinum plus aaa cardcredit purchases s 1940 onbangalore university in accreditedlibrary accredited in program ala scienceamex credit soloutionsaccredited all online university nationaladverse credit action requirement Map

The Wall Street Journal profiles a spammer. I can’t resist reading about them (Also see an earlier article in Salon) and I rarely miss a chance to try to understand how they can live with their consciences.

Fortunately, once in a while a spammer gets hit with a fine in the US. And recently six more were taken to court. I don’t know of any cases in Europe yet, though.gambling liner waukesha 8crisis credit 1990ssaint list club 10 gambling paulringtone a650 installcredit carpet abbeyscotia nova prevalence gambling study 2003conusumer acc creditdrive gamble fl 20264 brooksville Map

Wired has revealed in its latest issue that not only does Google remove hate sites on request of foreign governments – it also removes sites that a lawyer suggests infringe copyright – again without notifying anyone. What the article doesn’t make clear is whether they bother to follow through and determine whether the site actually does infringe copyright or whether they just take it off the database and wash their hands of the consequences. Do the offending sites even know that they have been removed?

Interesting editorial on thedogmatism of the geek community. The author, Tom Steinberg, rightly points out that there is a depressing unanimity of expressed views about Internet issues among Internet old-timers. He worries that if “we” lose on one of those issues (like digital rights management) then “we” may find it difficult to re-group and keep fighting on other issues.

I worry that the community may be viewed as self-interested and naive because, for example, it preaches that you should be allowed to copy as much music or movies as you want because “hey, those industries are owned by The Man who is exploiting the artists anyway”. This may mean that when we want to be heard about what are IMHO more important issues like privacy rights and anti-spam legislation our credibility will be tarnished.

Google has agreed to remove – without notice, public debate or scrutiny – more than 100 racist sites from its database when that database is accessed via Google’s French and German gateways (google.com retains the sites).

Since for many people the results they get from Google effectively constitute their “window” onto the Internet, this decision is deeply disturbing. It is one thing for people to deliberately choose to filter out search results from their own searches (or that of their children) using “safe search” engines like the BBC’s, but until this research was published in Harvard, these search restrictions were taking place without people even realising it.

To me, possibly the best way around this problem would be to present websites containing the most offensive material with a warning and a link to a site containing counter-arguments alongside it.

In the case of child pornography sites, if one could expunge those links manually from search engine databases without removing other, legitimate sites, I would certainly be tempted to try…

According to the BBC, they are refusing to sign up to a “voluntary” code which would have them hand over details of when email from any of their subscribers was sent and to whom – but not their content. It’s not surprising they are a little unwilling to cooperate as the big question is – who is entitled to ask for this information. Back in June the government seemed ready to allow just about anybody to go fishing for information. This was nipped in the bud but they still aren’t saying who they think should be entitled to this information.

ISPs are right to be nervous of collecting this data until the government clarifies its views.boob big women movies of freemovies porn free thumbsporn quality movies freeporn retro free moviesmovie hardcore sample freemovies swinger freesamples teen movie freemovie free clips twinkmovies wired pussy freedownload xxx movies free

Microsoft and, surprisingly, Intel among others have formed a group called “Initiative for Software Choice“, designed to ensure that governments don’t have a bias in favour of open source software. It is not clear what kind of awful crime it might be to prefer software that you can get for free to software from companies like Microsoft who hope to lock you in to a path where you have to pay them in effect a rental charge to use your computer’s software…

The BBC reports, “Californian congressman Howard Berman has drawn up a bill that would legalise the disruption of peer-to-peer networks by companies who are trying to stop people pirating copyrighted materials…”

…”The law would also allow the record companies to place programs on the machines of peer-to-peer networks to let them trace who is pirating pop.”

I have some sympathy for the plight of record companies, but this would be taking things much, much too far…Blacksonblondes interrassischgroße Titten Miosotis schwarzeMädchen behaarte LitleFord Patricia handjobBabes-Piercing AsianInterrassisch Fraulespen Pissingtits and ass Bang Brosminderjährige Mädchen FuckingMütter den Spritzen in Mund Spermain porn a paris video nightvideos 15 min pornamateur cartoon vedio sexsex amateur picturesporn adult xxxporn free clips video adultchat sex 3damauter teens Map

…the UK Government (or at least the Home Office, which is responsible for domestic security) seems to have finally lost all sense of proportion when it comes to Internet surveillance. Here is the main text of a fax I have just sent to my MP (using this handy site):

I am writing to tell you about a bizarre extension of Internet spying powers that the government seems to be trying to sneak past parliament. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act lets the police, customs and the intelligence services track people’s Internet use without a court order – this is bad enough. But now the Home Office is petitioning to enable a long list of other organizations to snoop as well, including all local authorities and even the post office – “A Universal Service Provider” in the text of the order. This is in the form of a statutory instrument “The Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Communications Data: Additional Public Authorities) Order 2002”

Please let me know that you are indeed planning to oppose this and that you will be alerting other MPs to this disproportionate threat to personal liberties.

I appreciate the potential usefulness of Internet surveillance to fighting serious crime, so with some misgivings I was prepared to give the Government the benefit of the doubt when they unveiled the original act, but I can’t imagine why they believe that such a broad range of organizations should be entitled to know who I email and what sites I visit.

If you are in the UK I encourage you to read more about this issue and fax your MP, send them a letter or do whatever else is in your power to stop this misguided legislation.

Thanks to Simon, who nudged me to find out more about the issue.

A small, dedicated group has formed to lobby for better rural access to broadband in the UK. Except for some pilot projects, the Government has so far largely left broadband provision to the market, and low density or unprofitable areas have been left un-served or under-served. The Government is aware of the problem – this group will be trying to ensure more is done.

I have agreed to be its news editor…loans agricultural arizona5000 bad credit loan securedhome equity advantages loan to aamerica loan contential homecollege interest loans 2007 lowestloan accept transactions card credit15000 bad credit loan5,000 personal loanloan 100 better 20 80 thanaccredited problems loans home