netwit 2.01

BATTLE FOR THE INTERNET Tim Berners-Lee urges government to stop the snooping bill



Guardian series: day 2: Battle of the Internet


Tim Berners-Lee urges government to stop the snooping bill


–Exclusive: Extension of surveillance powers ‘a destruction of human rights’


Ian Katz, Guardian, 17 April 2012



April 18, 2012 Posted by | FaceBook, GCHQ, Internet, native apps, network silos, online privacy, privacy, silo effect, Skype, social media, Tim Burners-Lee | , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

#INTERNET #encryption #PgP #P2P ~ Who owns the Internet and does it matter?



Well, I don’t that’s for certain. Just the PC, some copper cables and a router. I’ve got a computer ID and a URL for any site I maintain. I’ve no idea what happens to those little packets of digital data that stream in and out of the router. They tell me Skype is encrypted, but how would I know?

Plenty of people can learn lots about me. Social media give a lot away to anyone caring to look. Governments will almost certainly have automatic systems to check who is saying what to whom on the Internet. If they don’t they will be buying the software to do so right now.



Internet black holes

The logical direction is a full-encrypted P2P world. The downside of a PgP P2P (as opposed to client-server, where only servers supply) world is no one else can know what’s being said between these two people. (Entrance, stage left, cipherpunk Julian Assange, encryption software in hand) Sometimes even Internet People might be happy for their governments to have ways of finding things out. The trend is more towards individuals giving up their privacy in return for what the Internet and Web provides in exchange. Both governments and non-governmental organisations are taking full advantage of this while it lasts.

The give-up-your-privacy-social-media seem to be in a cross over graph with Govt 1.0 which is in the process of changing to Govt 2.0, most wholeheartedly in local govt. At the moment social media are just underneath the cross-over. WikiLeaks and others are pushing the whole thing up to the cross-over a lot quicker. The biggest thing from WikiLeaks will be a unrelenting exposure of kleptocratic government. Even non-kleptocrats will be worrying about this: so many democratic govts. have cosy relationships with kleptocrasies. France recently had one with Tunisia. Was that because they were selling them french made armaments? Some of the U.S.A’s best friends are keptocrats. Easier to do big arms deals with them, too. Who does Indonesia buy its military harware from? Israel, which is not a kleptocracy except in that the U.S. govt.hands an awful lot of American tax payer’s money over to it without asking. So in a sense it’s an inverse Kleptocracy, in which a state not individuals receives the handout. So the U.S. govt. is doing the stealing from its own people to keep another sate going.

Who owns the Internet is an important question. If governments feel they are getting locked out of individuals lives, they may want to more impose rules on Internet usage that P2P-type people don’t want or like.

Tim Bermers-Lee is the most prominent advocate of a neutral Net. Most people haven’t the faintest idea what this would mean or require in practice. It’s not going to happen if every no-democratic state keeps control of the copper wires, optical fibe and satellites they put into space.

The reason I found Wikileaks interesting and thought it would be a good idea to set up a WikiLeaks dedicated blog, was partly because it was an ideal opportunity to re-examine the wider implications of the Internet and Web. Anyone with half an ear for the digital zietgeist can’t fail to read up on the implications of WikLeaks and other areas of change in the digital arena.

One of these things is the Govt 2.0 The problem arises when a yawning Govt. 2.0 gap builds up, say between authoritarian states and democracies. This is not exactly a firm basis for net neutrality (or open data) if the U.S. becomes compeletely open and China remains closed. In fact, the ways things go, it is inevitable that the U.S. will drag China kicking and screaming intop the open world

Both types of states have an interest in reading the minds of their citizens. Interestinglt social media such as faceBook and twitter are the simplest and easiest way for them to do so. Every new digital technology has a downside.

P2P proper only arrives when there is Pretty Good privacy for all. And yet no govt. wasnt this because they have got used to checking on peopoe with the technology uptodate.

Coinciding with a recent WikiLeaks leak a lot of publicity for Govt 2.0 and visualisation techniques through the work on the WikLeaks data but others.


repost:

OPEN DATA Initiatives and visualisation techniques



January 20, 2011 Posted by | anonymity online, Canberra cyber security centre, China, connective knowledge, connectivism, cyber attacks, cyber crime, cyber espionage, cyber security, cyber terrorism, cyber warfare, cyber-utopianism, cyberspace, cypherpunk, digital forensics, digital journalism, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), encryption, FaceBook, FGI, free government information [FGI], Government 2.0, Govt 3.0, hacker culture, info-war, information silos, Internet, internet activism, Internet filtering, Julian Assange, Mark Zuckerberg, net neutrality, network anomalies, Network security, network theory, on-line rights, Open data, open source, P2P, P2P Foundation, Peer-to-Peer, Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), privacy, Semantic Web, silo effect, social media, social networks, Tim Burners-Lee, trust models, Twitter, Web 2.0, Web 3.0, WikiLeaks | Leave a comment

#SOCIALMEDIA #cyber-utopianism #internet-centrism #BBCNewsnight [http://bit.ly/fNrj7i] @evgenymorozov ~ The Power of the Internet, Not?



Eugeny Morozov{ EM about}, author of The Net Delusion, will be on Newsnight 17 Jan 2011.



January 17, 2011 Posted by | "Collateral Murder" video, actor-network theory, Afghanistan documents, anonymity online, anonymous whistleblowing, Birgitta Jónsdóttir, Bradley Manning, Canberra cyber security centre, China, Citizen 2.0, citizen journalism, cognitive infilltration, connective knowledge, connectivism, crowd sourcing, cyber attacks, cyber crime, cyber espionage, cyber security, cyber terrorism, cyber warfare, cyber-utopianism, cyberpunk, cyberspace, Cyberspace Policy Review, cypherpunk, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, Daniel Ellsberg, data journalism, data leakage, data security, data-dump journalism, Defence Signals Directorate (DSD, Department of Homeland Security, Der Spiegel, digital forensics, digital journalism, diplomatic cables, Echelon spy system, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), encryption, Evgeny Morozov, FaceBook, FGI, free government information [FGI], Frontline Club, Government 2.0, hacker culture, Hrafnsson, Indentity Ecosystem Framework, info-war, information silos, insider security, insider threats, Internet, internet activism, internet-centrism, investigative journalism, Iraq War 2003, Iraq war logs, Jaron Lanier, Jónsdóttir, Julian Assange, Manning, National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC), National Security Agency [NSA], National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, net neutrality, network anomalies, Network security, network theory, NSA, on-line rights, ontology, Open data, open source, organisational network analysis, P2P, P2P Foundation, Peer-to-Peer, Phorm, Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), privacy, Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA), rogue employee, Semantic Web, silo effect, Single Person Organisation [SPO], social media, social networks, social semantic web, social silos, techno-libertarianism, The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto, Tim Burners-Lee, Tor, trust, trust models, Twitter, Virtual Private Network (VPN), virtual tunnel, visualisation, Web 2.0, WikiLeaks | Leave a comment

#INTERNET #privacy ~ Australia’s new cyber-warefare facility [http://bit.ly/fjOrlJ]



Australia’s new cyber-warefare facility



January 12, 2011 Posted by | ASIO, Canberra cyber security centre, Citizen 2.0, cognitive infilltration, connective knowledge, connectivism, conspiracy, cyber attacks, cyber crime, cyber espionage, cyber security, cyber terrorism, cyber warfare, cyber-utopianism, cyberspace, Cyberspace Policy Review, cypherpunk, data journalism, data leakage, Defence Signals Directorate, Defence Signals Directorate (DSD, Department of Homeland Security, digital forensics, digital journalism, DSD, encryption, free government information [FGI], Government 2.0, Govt 3.0, hacker culture, Indentity Ecosystem Framework, info-war, information silos, insider security, insider threats, Internet, internet activism, Julian Assange, Manning, National Center for Cybersecurity and Communications (NCCC), National Security Agency [NSA], National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, net neutrality, network anomalies, Network security, on-line rights, Open data, open source, P2P, P2P Foundation, Peer-to-Peer, Phorm, privacy, Protecting Cyberspace as a National Asset Act (PCNAA), Semantic Web, silo effect, Single Person Organisation [SPO], social media, social networks, social semantic web, techno-libertarianism, The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto, Tim Burners-Lee, U.S. diplomatic cables, U.S.Embassy cables, Unique Personality Organisation [UPO], Web 2.0, Web 3.0, WikiLeaks | Leave a comment

QUOTE INTERNET WEB SOCIAL NETWORKS Tim Berners – Lee



Long Live the Web: A Call for Continued Open Standards and Neutrality

– The Web is critical not merely to the digital revolution but to our continued prosperity—and even our liberty. Like democracy itself, it needs defending

Tim Berners – Lee, Scientific American, 22 November 2010

Social-networking sites present a different kind of problem. Facebook, LinkedIn, Friendster and others typically provide value by capturing information as you enter it: your birthday, your e-mail address, your likes, and links indicating who is friends with whom and who is in which photograph. The sites assemble these bits of data into brilliant databases and reuse the information to provide value-added service—but only within their sites. Once you enter your data into one of these services, you cannot easily use them on another site. Each site is a silo, walled off from the others. Yes, your site’s pages are on the Web, but your data are not. You can access a Web page about a list of people you have created in one site, but you cannot send that list, or items from it, to another site.

The isolation occurs because each piece of information does not have a URI. Connections among data exist only within a site. So the more you enter, the more you become locked in. Your social-networking site becomes a central platform—a closed silo of content, and one that does not give you full control over your information in it. The more this kind of architecture gains widespread use, the more the Web becomes fragmented, and the less we enjoy a single, universal information space.

A related danger is that one social-networking site—or one search engine or one browser—gets so big that it becomes a monopoly, which tends to limit innovation. As has been the case since the Web began, continued grassroots innovation may be the best check and balance against any one company or government that tries to undermine universality. GnuSocial and Diaspora are projects on the Web that allow anyone to create their own social network from their own server, connecting to anyone on any other site. The Status.net project, which runs sites such as identi.ca, allows you to operate your own Twitter-like network without the Twitter-like centralization.




January 9, 2011 Posted by | information silos, silo effect, social media, social networks, social silos, Tim Burners-Lee, Uncategorized | Leave a comment