How Much Power Should the Internet Police Have – And Who Are the Internet Police?

 

Time to look at a sensitive, exponentially issue-inducing question: who should police the internet and how much policing should they, or anyone, be allowed to do? In this blog, we will be looking at the topic of domain name policing in particular.

We are constantly reminded of the anonymity and opportunity the internet affords its users. These freedoms are one of the founding principles of the internet: that it be an open canvas on which anything can be painted and anyone we want can view it. The internet was supposed to be a virtual land where the most typical, average person could stake a claim and make a small piece of it their own.

Like all newly-settled worlds, however, it cannot remain so forever. Various organizations have come about to monitor the internet and keep its users and their information safe. The Internet Corporation for the Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), a non-profit in contract with the U.S. government, exists to manage internet addresses and oversee the addition of new domain suffixes. The most popular suffixes currently in use are .com, .net, and .org.

 A recent article on CNET.com once again brings to light the issue of domain name – and ultimately internet – governance. The United States government, among other governments both national and local, is looking to gain more power to allow or deny domain names. This has been a battle that has been raging in the internet background for as long as it has existed, and is a topic filled with shades of gray. For the past seven years, the domain suffix .xxx has been contested over by three camps: those who wish to use it, those who wish that it not be used at all, and those who wish not to be forced to use it.

Many adult content webmasters want to have the suffix .xxx be as useable as .com or .org, to give them their own space on the internet and make them easier to find. Currently .xxx is not a functioning domain. The United States government and many conservative organizations do not want the .xxx domain to exist, seeing it as comparable to allowing an adult video store on the same block as the white house.  On another end of the argument are those who see this new domain as a way to keep all of these adult content websites in one centralized location, so no one can accidentally stumble upon them or so they can be blocked more easily. Some adult content webmasters, and some webmasters who have sex education information on their websites, or others whose main purpose is not adult content but some exists on their site, do not want to be forced to join this new domain.

 Over 115 new domain name proposals are expected this year, and some raise controversies, such as the .gay domain. Whose responsibility – or right – is it to say whether or not the .gay or .freetibet domains can be used? If the former were used, it may upset millions of conservatives. If the latter were used, it may upset a government with rule over billions of people. Yet what about the people who want to use those names? What about their rights? They aren’t breaking any laws.

The debate over domain name allowance is explosive because it induces issues about freedom of speech and how much of a role governments should be able to play in the direction and access of the internet. Another example of governmental power over the internet is seen recently in Egypt, where the government shut down the internet in the entire country in an attempt to control its people. Is it right for a government to control something that belongs to no one, and yet belongs to everyone?

Tags: , , , ,

categories Security, Technology Mangement, Uncategorized | Matthew Kurtzahn | datetime February 8, 2011 3:23 pm | comments Comments (0)

Who Owns the Cloud?

When computers were first invented, history dictates that there were some, perhaps many, who scoffed and refused to accept that they would change our lives in the incalculable ways that they have.

When the internet came out, many could not understand why they would want to connect other computers to their own or the purpose of such a tool.

The reasons for such rejection and speculation of technological advancements are many, including but-not-limited-to: lack of detail, misinformation, contentment in already-working systems, and fear of the unknown. While I do not believe fear to be as culpable a reason when it comes to computer technology as compared to, say, nuclear technology or what your five-year-old cooked you for breakfast, I do believe the three former reasons to be legitimate.

The first two reasons, lack of detail and misinformation, are directly related. Although the name “the cloud” is fitting, it can also downplay the fact that the cloud is a real and working system, albeit a very large and multi-faceted one. Microsoft’s commercials that present a problem, then a savvy cloud user announcing “To the cloud,” then their problem solved by the cloud, show glimpses of what the cloud is capable of that could make it appealing to an everyday user, like remote desktop access and video conferencing.

These commercials show the most basic examples of cloud computing, but do not really explain what the cloud is or how to jump onboard. In addition, Microsoft must be careful not to make it appear that the cloud is a Microsoft invention but, rather, that they are one of many companies that is making use of the cloud. It may encourage utilization of the cloud by making known to more people that the cloud is not one company’s brainchild, but rather a fruit of the digital and internet age that all of us, users and developers, have helped bring about.

Regarding the contentment in already-working systems, the cloud is merely a way of connecting all of those systems and streamlining availability, scalability and synergy, which are useful both at home and in the workplace. The cloud possesses currently incomprehensible potential to shape how we handle information and, thus, our businesses and our lives. 

Like so many leaps forward, it will take some time for people to understand what the cloud is and how useful it can be, and how much smaller it is making the world, by putting in reach what we need, thanks to digitalization and the vast interconnectedness and availability of the internet. The important hope we have as the cloud moves forward is that it remains as open as it is today and that no company attempts to build legal or digital fences around what they believe to be their property within the cloud.

Tags: , , , , ,

categories Cloud Computing, Technology Mangement | Matthew Kurtzahn | datetime January 18, 2011 8:34 pm | comments Comments (0)

WordPress Themes