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.

Not ‘If” but ‘When’…

From Simon Heffer

The other day I went to one of the most disturbing events of my life. Together with a number of others, I listened for the best part of two hours to two American security experts: their area of expertise was Iran and the threat it poses.

The burden of their observations can be summed up as follows: that an American strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities is not a question of if but when.

And, it was emphasised, this certainty is not dependent on the man the world regards as the warmonger Bush still being in office: his successor, be he or she Republican or Democrat, will see that there is no option but to deal with Iran’s nuclear ambitions too.

The terrifying thought is this: what he heard at that seminar may well be right — that the US will eventually go for it.

We have such short memories. It’s not that long ago since: we (Britain and the US) egged on– and armed — Iraq in its war on Iran; turned a blind eye to Iraqi use of poison and nerve gas against Iranian troops (there are still people in Iran dying from the after-effects of Iraqi gassing); and did everything in our power to prevent UN intervention to stop the conflict. Why? Because it was deemed necessary to stop Iran at all costs.

Nothing’s changed, really. But the Iranians have learned the lesson. In a world that is irredeemably hostile to them, nukes are the only safeguard. Which is why they’re going for them. We’d do the same in their position.

Life imitating art

Just heard a news snippet on a radio station about a life-sized cardboard cutout of a police officer which had been installed in a Nuneaton shopping mall to deter thieves. Yes — you guessed it! — it’s been stolen!

And I swear…

… that if I ever again hear anyone say “awesome” when they mean “good”, “pretty good” or even “terrific” then I won’t be answerable for the consequences.

‘Awe-inspiring’, however, is a different matter entirely. Think of Yosemite on a crisp spring or autumn day.

Antisocial networking

Lovely snippet from Lorcan Dempsey’s Blog…

From the personal ads in the current London Review of Books:

Divorced, 1950s born man, deeply at odds with the frivolous and incomprehensible nature of everything outside of this typeface and that pair of brogues seeks absolutely anyone who isn’t on facebook at box no. …. [London Review of Books 20 September 2007]

Hmmm… should that headline read “anti social networking”?

reCAPTCHA

This is a really smart idea.

Thanks to Pete for the link. And to James Miller for the link to the BBC report.

And thanks to Tony Hirst for explaining that CAPTCHA stands for “Completely Automated Public Turing test to tell Computers and Humans Apart”.

Say cheesy


A snip from the specification of the SONY Cybershot T70 compact digital camera.

Technology, said Heidegger, “is the art of arranging the world so that one doesn’t have to experience it”. Cue some of the new SONY Cybershot range which come equipped with a ‘smile shutter’ that recognises grinning subjects and then automatically takes a shot. Apparently, when several people are in the shot, the shutter only fires when the main subject – who must be manually selected – smiles. A sequence of six smile shots can be taken without manually pressing the shutter.

Jackie Stewart shares his, er, secrets of success

It’s pass the sickbag time again, folks. The diminutive Scottish petrolhead with the whiny voice has been sharing the secrets of his success with the unfortunate readers of the Torygraph.

The great challenge, he explains, “is to win with integrity and care.”

“Integrity and care?” some will jeer. [Ed: shurely not]. “They don’t count. Look at the scoreboard. It’s a dog-eat-dog world out there, and the reality is, in sport, business and everything else, that nice guys come last. Winning is not everything, it’s the only thing,” and so on. I disagree.

As a sportsman I was hideously spoiled. It’s easy for pampered heroes to believe the world owes them a living – until the adulation ends soon after they retire.

The key to success after sport lies in stopping being a taker and learning to be a giver. In my case, the realisation that I could add significant value to companies providing products or services to motorsport dawned long before I retired from racing in 1973. So, when the time came, I was able to move seamlessly from the cockpit into a series of long-term associations with companies including Ford, Goodyear, Rolex and Moët & Chandon. My aim was always to provide more value than they perceive they were paying for…

Aw, isn’t that sweet! Imagine someone generous enough to give to penniless outfits like Rolex and Moet & Chandon. Altruism is so ennobling, don’t you think.

Who reads this ‘inspirational’ crap, I wonder? (Apart from me, that is.)