- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Fwd: [ NNSquad ] The "Right to Be Forgotten": A Threat We Dare Not Forget
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 29, 2012

Feb. 29, 2012

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ NNSquad ] The "Right to Be Forgotten": A Threat We Dare Not Forget Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 17:44:49 -0800 From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren(a)vortex.com> To: nnsquad(a)nnsquad.org The "Right to Be Forgotten": A Threat We Dare Not Forget http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000938.html Imagine that you're conducting a Google Search for "Beatles" -- but mysteriously, the only results you receive are links to official, authorized pages for their song downloads and related corporate promotional materials. Or perhaps you enter a search for "Rick Santorum" -- but the search results are all links to pages on his official campaign website. Maybe a simple query regarding "John F. Kennedy" provides lots of details about his official presidential papers, but not a single link to information about his reported extramarital activities that we know about today. Or do we know about them? After all, if they're not in the search results, perhaps they don't exist. Right? Wrong! But there are governments, individuals, and organizations who would very much like to make "disappearing search results" scenarios come true on a vast scale, creating a new form of censorship that would make previous censorship efforts -- on and off the Internet -- pale by comparison. We know that search engines like Google are required to abide by valid, legal orders concerning the removal of search results. To date, these have been relatively limited in terms of scope, though there are already many egregious examples of what most of us would probably agree are inappropriate takedown orders. The thankfully now moribund SOPA and PIPA legislation would likely have mandated the removal of search results involving the location of materials that the MPAA, RIAA, and other groups felt were illicit, and in the process would have done enormously wide damages across the Net. But at least SOPA/PIPA supporters weren't trying to erase from memory even the existence of those songs and films! They obviously didn't want us to forget that The Beatles were a great group, or that "Citizen Kane" is a wonderful film. Today though, governments around the world and allied pressure groups, especially in Europe but also elsewhere, even here in the U.S., are pushing a dangerous censorship concept much more akin to Stalin's alteration and censorship of photos than to even the controls envisioned by SOPA and PIPA ( http://j.mp/yZ7wA0 [Wikipedia] ). Generally called the "right to be forgotten" (RTBF), this ultimately insidious concept embodies the view that governments, corporations, other organizations -- and individuals -- should have what amounts to absolute control over related publicly available information, especially in search engine results. Note that our key words here are "publicly available." By and large we're not talking about private data, we're talking about information on public websites that particular individuals or other entities would prefer didn't show up in associated search results. The theory seems simple. If you can dictate and micromanage (for example) Google Search results, you hope to prevent searchers from finding unfavorable information about you, whether true or false. Various types of situations where the "right to be forgotten" has already been invoked includes people acquitted of crimes who had highly publicized trials, doctors trying to suppress complaints from upset patients, a resort unhappy that stories of a fire disaster from decades ago are still associated with their location, and (much more sympathetically) individuals who are the target of websites that were created to harass, libel, or injure them in other ways. The focus on search engines in these regards is a consequence of several factors. One issue is the reality that information on the Net, once available publicly, can be virtually impossible to actually remove, given the global availability of mirrors, archives, and other systems in various jurisdictions that can copy and preserve virtually any data. So -- the thinking goes -- rather than try actually taking actions against the various websites that are the real publishers of the data in question, targeting search engines make for more of a "one stop shopping" regime, to try block people from finding the data even if it's still really out there. Another factor is that the legal bar can be high in some countries for libel and other similar suits. So if governments can be convinced to anoint essentially everyone with the right to demand censorship of any search results that they feel relate unfavorably to themselves, that much lower burden could be widely exploited. It doesn't take more than a few minutes of thought to see the utterly disastrous ramifications of the "right to be forgotten" approach, and the cascading damage to free speech that could easily spread malignantly across the global Internet as a result. The crux of the matter is simple enough. Even if search engine results are selectively expunged on demand, the "upsetting" material in question will still likely exist on the Internet itself, still subject to being located by other means, including via sites that merely discuss related topics, situations, companies, or individuals. This is a crucial point. To be "forgotten" in the usual sense of the "right to be forgotten" proponents would typically end up requiring not only that direct references to sites containing "offending" materials be expunged from search results, but also links to any sites that so much as specifically (or in many cases even generally) discuss, critique, analyze, or otherwise mention the materials in question, or that even note the removal of the more direct links from search engine results themselves! So a site that so much as says, "A controversy arose about whether or not Dr. Foo was providing quality health care, resulting in Google being ordered to remove links to sites operated by those patients," could itself trigger an order that demanded the removal of links mentioning the controversy involving Dr. Foo -- that he would prefer be "forgotten." Like ripples spreading from rocks tossed into a pond, the range of directly and indirectly related sites whose links could be ordered censored from search engine results will tend to spread, multiply, and interact in complex ways, pulling ever more websites into "right to be forgotten" censorship demands. And for all that damaging censorship and invasive restrictions on speech, the primary materials in question will likely still remain easily available. I do not accept as credible the claims of some "right to be forgotten" proponents that just getting the top, main related links out of Google Search results will be enough to satisfy them. It is inevitable that as the reality of the complex network graph associated with such information becomes obvious, calls for ever broader censorship orders, targeting results and links increasingly "distant" from the core sites, will be forthcoming in massive numbers, in a gigantic, nightmarish version of search results "Whac-A-Mole." The only rational approach to the kinds of disputes invoked by "right to be forgotten" advocates should not be censorship, and should not be attempts to delete information and references to that information. Rather, we should be concentrating on providing more information, more context in case of disputes, not less ( http://j.mp/dOE4Vw [Lauren's Blog] ). While the "right to be forgotten" may at first glance seem to have laudable goals, it is in truth an impractical and ultimately abusive concept, that cannot realistically accomplish its stated goals, but that would inevitably do enormous damage to the valid speech rights of an ever widening sphere of organizations and individuals around the world. It is a dangerous Chimera that would create vast new problems, not solve existing ones. The right to be forgotten is a threat that we dare not forget, but that we should most soundly and totally reject. --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein (lauren(a)vortex.com) http://www.vortex.com/lauren Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org Founder: - Data Wisdom Explorers League: http://www.dwel.org - Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org - Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org - PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com Google+: http://vortex.com/g+lauren / Twitter: http://vortex.com/t-lauren Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 / Skype: vortex.com _______________________________________________ nnsquad mailing list http://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad

1 0

Fwd: [IP] Wireless carriers claim they're being victimized
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: [IP] Wireless carriers claim they're being victimized Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2012 18:11:23 -0500 From: Dave Farber <dave(a)farber.net> Reply-To: dave(a)farber.net To: ip <ip(a)listbox.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Lauren Weinstein" <lauren(a)vortex.com <mailto:lauren@vortex.com>> Date: Feb 28, 2012 6:01 PM Subject: [ NNSquad ] Wireless carriers claim they're being victimized To: <nnsquad(a)nnsquad.org <mailto:nnsquad@nnsquad.org>> Wireless carriers claim they're being victimized http://j.mp/zJ5u0o (This message on Google+) - - - http://j.mp/AogDMi (CNET) "Operators are under extreme pressures. If we are going to build the highways, there has to be a tax on the highways," Mittal said. - - - Hello? Is anybody in there? To listen to these guys, you'd think we're getting our Internet connections for free. Maybe you do? I sure as hell don't. I pay *plenty* for wired and wireless Internet access. It hasn't been for pizzas. What's going on is plain, old, ordinary G-R-E-E-D on the part of the carriers. They can spin until the clothes are dry but it doesn't change the underlying facts. What they really want is to get a piece of the *content* side that they have nothing to do with producing in most cases. They don't like being just Telecom, they want to be Hollywood, too. And the way they want to do it is by using their positions as gatekeepers to their own advantage. And if they're going to use the "tax on the highways" analogy like Mittal in this piece, they'd damn well better be prepared to be fully *regulated* like the utilities they are. Enough of their crocodile tears. We won't be fooled again. --Lauren-- Lauren Weinstein (lauren(a)vortex.com <mailto:lauren@vortex.com>): http://www.vortex.com/lauren Co-Founder: People For Internet Responsibility: http://www.pfir.org Founder: - Data Wisdom Explorers League: http://www.dwel.org - Network Neutrality Squad: http://www.nnsquad.org - Global Coalition for Transparent Internet Performance: http://www.gctip.org - PRIVACY Forum: http://www.vortex.com Member: ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com Google+: http://vortex.com/g+lauren / Twitter: http://vortex.com/t-lauren Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800 <tel:%2B1%20%28818%29%20225-2800> / Skype: vortex.com <http://vortex.com> _______________________________________________ nnsquad mailing list http://lists.nnsquad.org/mailman/listinfo/nnsquad Archives <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now> <https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/14798382-eb93fc78> | Modify <https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=14798382&id_secret=14798382-58a8a…> Your Subscription | Unsubscribe Now <https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=14798382&id_secret=14798382-…> [Powered by Listbox] <http://www.listbox.com>

1 0

Google nuove privacy policies: forti dubi di legittimità della CNIL
by MANTELERO ALESSANDRO Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

qui maggiori dettagli: http://goo.gl/BwCFV

2 2

Neubot 0.4.9 released
by Simone Basso Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

Neubot/0.4.9 released http://www.neubot.org/neubot-0.4.9 Version 0.4.9 is the latest generally-available stable release of Neubot, distributed for Ubuntu >= 10.04, MacOSX >= 10.6, Windows >= XP SP3 and FreeBSD, as well as in source format. If you have already installed Neubot for Ubuntu, MacOSX or FreeBSD, it should update automatically, and we just kindly ask you to verify that this is the case. As a rule of thumb, if it has not updated after a couple of weeks, that is probably a bug and you should report it. Neubot for Windows, instead, needs manual intervention and you can find instructions here: http://www.neubot.org/install-windows#upgrade Instructions for installing from scratch are available here: http://www.neubot.org/download This release contains 142 commits. The diffstat says: 73 changed files with 3,562 additions and 1,025 deletions. Here are the most relevant changes: - MacOS: keep neubot directory clean This commit teaches Neubot updater to periodically check whether the base directory (/usr/local/share/neubot) contains old releases files and directories. If so, old files and directories are removed. https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commit/18cf09e Requested by Alessio Palmero Aprosio some time ago. - www: add latency plots This commit adds latency plots to Neubot Web User Interface, both for speedtest and bittorrent. https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commit/0a523988 Suggested by Francesco Corazza, written by Alessio Palmero Aprosio. - www: less annoying win32 browser notifications This commit makes sure that Neubot does not open the Web User Interface in the default browser more than once per day per type of notification. This means that, for example, you will be notified at most once per day when a new version is available on our servers. https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commit/f0bef78b Reported and prodded by many. - doc/FAQ.rst doc/FAQ-it.rst import and revamp A couple of commits have imported the website faq into the sources tree, allowing for better maintenance. Now the faq is written in restructured text and the html on the web is automatically generated. After the import, both FAQs have been revamped and updated significantly. https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commit/843247c7 https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commit/1badc97d - Revamped manpage The manual page has been revamped and updated as well. https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commit/4e154a2a - Bug fixes Since Neubot 0.4.6, I've started collecting know bugs information at: https://github.com/neubot/neubot/wiki/errata Here is the list of bugs that have been fixed since the previous release, along with the link to the relevant commit: - Make sure that the Web API always returns sorted keys to the Web User Interface. Fixes settings keys being not properly sorted in settings.html. https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commit/7b3a9689 - More code rationalizations, cleanups and regression tests. Full change log available here: https://raw.github.com/neubot/neubot/0.4.9/ChangeLog Diff since previous version here: https://github.com/neubot/neubot/compare/0.4.8...0.4.9 Commit history here: https://github.com/neubot/neubot/commits/0.4.9 SHA256sums here: https://github.com/neubot/neubot/wiki/sha256 Errata here: https://github.com/neubot/neubot/wiki/errata Data here: http://www.neubot.org/data -- Simone <http://www.neubot.org/people#basso>

1 0

Rif: R: Libertà d'informazione: Assemblea Nazionale di Articolo 21
by a.dicorinto＠uniroma1.it Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

1 0

Libertà d'informazione: Assemblea Nazionale di Articolo 21
by a.dicorinto＠uniroma1.it Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

1 0

"THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY IS SEARCHING YOUR FACEBOOK AND TWITTER FOR THESE WORDS"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

*THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY IS SEARCHING YOUR FACEBOOK AND TWITTER FOR THESE WORDS * The Department of Homeland Security monitors your updates on social networks, including Facebook and Twitter, to uncover "Items Of Interest" (IOI), according to an internal DHS document released by theEPIC <http://epic.org/>. That document happens to include a list of the baseline terms for which the DHS--or more specifically, a DHS subcontractor hired to monitor social networks--use to generate real-time IOI reports. (Although the released PDF is generally all reader-selectable text, the list of names was curiously embedded as an image of text, preventing simple indexing. We've fixed that below.) [...] Continua qui: http://animalnewyork.com/2012/02/the-department-of-homeland-security-is-sea…

2 1

La Repubblica: La fiducia sul web ha valore. "E' una moneta di scambio"
by a.dicorinto＠uniroma1.it Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

1 0

WP 29 opinion n.16/2011 translations
by avv. Monica A. Senor Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

Sono state pubblicate le traduzioni dell'opinion n.16/2001 del Gruppo di Lavoro Articolo 29 sull'online behavioural advertising che affronta il problema dei cookies: http://bit.ly/pLcW4K Un caro saluto. Monica

1 0

Mother Jones: "I Was a Warehouse Wage Slave"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 28, 2012

Feb. 28, 2012

Cosa c'è dietro quelle scatole che arrivano così in fretta: non solo logistica di prim'ordine e ottimo software, ma anche, eccome!, esseri umani. juan carlos I Was a Warehouse Wage Slave My brief, backbreaking, rage-inducing, low-paying, dildo-packing time inside the online-shipping machine. ---By Mac McClelland <http://motherjones.com/authors/mac-mcclelland> | March/April 2012 Issue <http://motherjones.com/toc/2012/03> Don't take anything that happens to you there personally," the woman at the local chamber of commerce says when I tell her that tomorrow I start working at Amalgamated Product Giant Shipping Worldwide Inc. She winks at me. I stare at her for a second. "/What?/" I ask. "Why, is somebody going to be mean to me <http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/slave-elves-online-shipping> or something?" She smiles. "Oh, yeah." This town somewhere west of the Mississippi is not big; everyone knows someone or/is/ someone who's worked for Amalgamated. "But look at it from their perspective. They need you to work as fast as possible to push out as much as they can as fast as they can. So they're gonna give you goals, and then you know what? If you make those goals, they're gonna increase the goals. But they'll be yelling at you all the time. It's like the military. They have to break you down so they can turn you into what they want you to be. So they're going to tell you, 'You're not good enough, you're not good enough, you're not good enough,' to make you work harder. Don't say, 'This is the best I can do.' Say, 'I'll try,' even if you know you can't do it. Because if you say, 'This is the best I can do,' they'll let you go. They hire and fire constantly, every day. You'll see people dropping all around you. But don't take it personally and break down or start crying when they yell at you." [...] Continua qui: http://motherjones.com/politics/2012/02/mac-mcclelland-free-online-shipping…

1 0