Burma’s Internet Crackdown

Tech Review has an interesting interview with John Palfrey of the Berkman Center. Preface to the interview reads:

The Burmese government’s recent shutdown of the country’s Internet connections amid pro-democracy protests was a new low for what is already one of the most censorious nations in the world. Earlier this year, the OpenNet Initiative–a collaboration among researchers at Harvard, Oxford, Cambridge, and the University of Toronto–found that the nation’s rulers blocked 85 percent of e-mail service providers and nearly all political-opposition and pro-democracy sites. (See “Internet Increasingly Censored.”) All this in a nation in which less than 1 percent of citizens have Internet access in the first place.

Last week–after images of the beatings of Buddhist monks and the killing of a Japanese photographer leaked out via the Internet–Burma’s military rulers took the ultimate step, apparently physically disconnecting primary telecommunications cables in two major cities, in a drastic effort to stop the flow of information from Burma to the rest of the world. It didn’t completely work: some bloggers apparently used satellite links or cellular phone services to get information outside the country.

One chilling exchange in the interview goes:

TR: How does this shutdown compare with other state-controlled actions you’ve documented?

JP: I’ve never seen anything like this cutoff to the Internet at such a broad scale so crudely and completely. They’ve taken the nuclear-bomb approach. We’ve witnessed what appear to be denial-of-service-type attacks during elections, for instance, but nothing so large-scale like this shutdown. Still, information has leaked out. So the military junta has found that given the many roots to the global telecommunications infrastructure, it’s very hard to cut off a place entirely.

So much for John Perry Barlow’s utopian dreams — to which (full disclosure) I once also subscribed. Sigh.

A cracking good time

From Good Morning Silicon Valley

The Australian government spent almost $85 million on a filter to block children’s access to porn on the Net. Tom Wood, a 16-year-old from Melbourne, cracked it in 30 minutes, all the while heaping nationalist scorn on the imported product. “It’s a horrible waste of money,” he said. “They could get a much better filter for a few million dollars made here rather than paying overseas companies for an ineffective one.” The government responded by adding an Australian designed filter. Tom cracked that one in 40 minutes. Communications Minister Helen Coonan said, “The vendor is investigating the matter as a priority.” Young Tom says there are more important concerns about children’s Net safety to deal with anyway. “Filters aren’t addressing the bigger issues anyway,” he said. “Cyber bullying, educating children on how to protect themselves and their privacy are the first problems I’d fix. They really need to develop a youth-involved forum to discuss some of these problems and ideas for fixing them.” And maybe give them some security tips as well.

Why Germans get their Flickrs in a twist over ‘censorship’

This morning’s Observer column

The Flickr firestorm is just the latest refutation of the enduring myth that the internet is uncontrollable. While technologically adept users can usually find anything they’re looking for, the vast majority of the internet’s 1.1 billion users are at the mercy of local laws, ordinances and customs.

Flickr users in Singapore, Germany, Hong Kong and Korea are finding themselves at the sharp end of this, because Yahoo needs to conform to local laws if it is to continue to trade in those jurisdictions. The same forces explain why Google provides only a restricted search service to its Chinese users. Libertarianism is all very well when you’re a hacker. But business is business.

Great Firewall of China (contd.)

Michael tells me that Answers.com is now being blocked by the Chinese authorities. Answers.com is an advertising-supported, free website which was launched in January 2005 and has become one of the leading information portals on the Internet. It claims to hold four million answers drawn from over 120 titles from brand-name publishers, original content created by Answers.com’s own editorial team, community-contributed articles from Wikipedia, and user-generated questions & answers from its proprietary WikiAnswersTM system.

Great Firewall of China (contd.)

From Technology Review

BEIJING (AP) — New rules by a Chinese government-backed Internet group maintain strict controls over the country’s bloggers, requiring them to register with their real names and identification cards.

The guidelines from the Internet Society of China, a group made up of China’s major Internet companies, contradict state media reports this week claiming that China was considering loosening registration requirements for bloggers to allow anonymous online journaling.

The society’s new draft code of conduct seen on its Web site Wednesday says Web log service providers must still get their users’ real names and contact information.

Critics say the requirement violates a blogger’s right to freedom of expression and puts them at risk of punishment or imprisonment if they post controversial opinions about politics, religion or other issues.

The society’s proposed code of conduct for blog service providers comes in addition to already existing government regulations that govern China’s Internet. The country’s official Internet watchdog banned anonymous Web site and blog registration in 2005.

Online bulletin boards and blogs are the only forum for most Chinese to express opinions before a large audience in a society where all media are state-controlled.

China has the world’s second-biggest population of Internet users after the United States, with 137 million people online. It also has some 20 million blogs, according to government figures…

Google’s strategy: order out of chaos

From today’s New York Times

Speaking at the annual shareholder meeting on Thursday, Eric E. Schmidt, the chief executive, said Google’s long array of initiatives was organized around three ideas.

“Our next strategy evolution is to really think about three components,” Mr. Schmidt said. “Search, ads and apps,” he said, using a common shorthand for applications, or software programs.

The move is less a strategy shift than a new message — a way for Google to talk about its disparate initiatives in a way shareholders and the public can readily understand.

“It is worth saying that our underlying mission has not changed,” Mr. Schmidt noted.

The first two — search and ads — are well known to shareholders, and they account for virtually all of the company’s success. The third — apps — puts under one umbrella Google’s growing business of offering an eclectic mix of software.

Mr. Schmidt said the unifying theme behind the seemingly disparate programs was that they resided on the Web, rather than on users’ PCs, and were available wherever there is an Internet connection.

The programs include photo storage, social networking, online calendars, e-mail, instant messaging, word processing and spreadsheets. Most are free, and many compete with paid offerings from Microsoft. But Google has started charging businesses for some of them. “That is a business that looks like it is going to grow very nicely for us,” Mr. Schmidt said.

But a shareholder proposal to force Google to resist censorship in countries with authoritarian regimes like China was defeated “by an undisclosed tally”.

Surprise, surprise. Corporations don’t do ethics, any more than my cats respect fledglings’ rights.

Putin News Service

From Saturday’s Herald Trib…

MOSCOW: At their first meeting with journalists since taking over Russia’s largest independent radio news network, the incoming managers had some startling news of their own: From now on, at least 50 per cent of the reports about Russia must be “positive”.

In addition, opposition leaders cannot be mentioned on the air and the United States is to be portrayed as an enemy, journalists employed by the network, Russian News Service, say they were told.

The report goes on to say that:

Parliament is considering extending state control to Internet sites that report news, reflecting the growing importance of Web news as the country becomes more affluent and growing numbers of middle class Russians acquire computers.

Business as usual in the Kremlin, then.

Billg welcomed with open source as well as open arms in Beijing

Like most senior executives of western companies, the Microsoft Chairman has been assiduous in sucking up to the Chinese government. Recently he was rewarded with the title of “Honorary Manager” at a ceremony at Beijing Peking University. He also gave a lecture on “China’s Creative Future”. So it was highly fitting that he was greeted by a chap proclaiming the merits of Open Source software. The demonstrator, I need hardly add, was bundled away and is no doubt languishing in gaol.

Thanks to Rex for the link.

A Blogger.com curiosity

From the blog of one of our Wolfson Press Fellows, Lara Pawson…

Well there’s a funny thing. I wrote a blog four days ago, criticising the BBC (and indirectly British foreign policy) for its contradictory approach to Africa, in particular its interest in Zimbabwe compared to Angola. And this afternoon, some time between 3pm in Luanda and 6pm, it disappeared. Yes! It vanished from my site. Is this Blogger falling prey to the heavy hand of British censorship, or just a clumsy oversight on my part? I’d encourage you to respond with your own thoughts: I really haven’t a clue. All I can say is that it is a strange feeling to be living in Angola – which is not known for its press freedom – and to feel like you are being censored from afar, possibly from home. Can a techno please enlighten me on what might have happened to my posting, ‘substantially worse’?

Fortunately, she had saved a copy and was able to re-post the item — which is well worth reading btw. But for one nasty moment, I had a creepy feeling. Angola (from where she is currently reporting) is a dangerous place, but it’s not where Google resides. Was it just a technical glitch? If the BBC had complained about her post, surely Google would have pulled the entire blog, not just the offending post? Hmmm…