Recently in International Category

By George, I think he's got it!

By Kee Hinckley on June 21, 2008 2:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Well, okay, he's getting close…

"Take the Middle East seriously, because that's the center of - that's the place where people get so despondent and despair that they're willing to come and take lives of U.S. citizens."
-- George W. Bush, asked on Al Arabiya TV what advice he would give the next president

You mean like, maybe policy of supporting dictatorships and monarchies, and squelching even semi-democracies, might possibly have something to do with terrorism?

Supreme Court ruling cripples Guantanamo trials

By Kee Hinckley on June 12, 2008 3:29 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Let's hear for for having three relatively independent branches of government. It's far from perfect, but the odds of all three making the same mistakes at the same time are thankfully low.

The future of President Bush's controversial military trial system for terror suspects held at Guantanamo Bay has been dealt a potentially terminal blow by the US Supreme Court.

In its third rebuke of the Bush Administration's treatment of prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, the court ruled that the 270 foreign terror suspects have the right under the US Constitution to challenge their detention in civilian courts on the American mainland.

The 5-4 ruling did not order the military tribunal process to be halted but it could trigger a chaotic rush to civilian courts that in practical terms will leave the question of what to do with men such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the September 11 mastermind, in the hands of the next president.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article4123181.ece

Elections and Erections: A One-Queen Play at the A.R.T.

By Kee Hinckley on April 16, 2008 2:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

"Don't ask me about racism. As a white racist it didn't affect me. But if you ask me about fear, I can tell you about that."

Pieter-Dirk Uys, in "Elections and Erections"

That line ends a serious interlude in the show, one of several that provide counterpoint to the satire and humor he so deftly uses to highlight the flaws of South African society, both before and after apartheid. He has just told us how he came to be a democrat, and he has told us of sharing the garden-shed home of a yard-boy at a rich South African home. Of the fear of being discovered. The fear of being black with white, white with black. A fear so powerful that it overwhelms the fear of being man with man. Even now, when I relate the story to my friends, that final line sends a shiver down my spine.

Pieter-Dirk Uys' alter-ego is Evita Bezuidenhout, a household name in South Africa, famous for over thirty years of satire against the apartheid government. But she hasn't stopped there. "Elections and Erections" makes it clear that Uys' true enemy is that which makes people afraid. Whether it's corruption in the apartheid government or in the ANC; politicians denying the existence of AIDS; friendships with dictators based on a common race; ignorance; false pretenses; or just the everyday fears of trying to survive in a country stuck in a downward spiral. Uys wants to expose the things that make us afraid, shine the bright light of humor on them, and bring hope and laughter to the people he loves: the people of South Africa.

I'm hearing only bad news
From Radio Africa,
I'm hearing only sad news
From Radio Africa
"Radio Africa" by Latin Quarter.

If Evita Bezuidenhout has a counter-part in the the U.S., it might be Stephen Colbert, with his pseudo-conservative satire. But Evita is much more biting and relevant, and Uys has many more roles to don beyond Evita. He plays the ANC politicians contemplating whether the next president will get the position before, or after, he is thrown in jail for corruption. He lampoons (gently, but none-the-less) Archbishop Desmond Tutu. He describes the trials of a Jewish African Princess, her relatives self-exiled to Canada, trying desperately to be the liberal she knows she ought to be. He takes on Winnie Mandela, including relating the time he played her character (complete with rubber tire jewelry) with the real Winnie in the audience. He talks to the asian storekeeper whose husband used to be too black for jobs, but now is turned down because he is too white. He does a chilling rendition of Grace Mugabe as an evil child-like woman, losing her mind to AIDS. And he doesn't save all his barbs for Africa; his characterization of Mother Theresa, filling in for Marilyn Monroe as God's secretary, is priceless. The angels are on strike, suicide bombers keep showing up in pieces looking for their virgins, and the son of the managing director is refusing to return to Earth. He even does a great Hillary (and Bill!) impersonation.

What makes Uys' work really stand out, particularly as compared to American satirists like Colbert, is its compassion; even his enemies are human. The apartheid-era security chief he lampoons still had a sense of humor. Winnie Mandala may have "necklaced" informants, but she now tours AIDS facilities and pushes AIDS education. This, in a country where the government Health Minister promotes a cure of beet juice, and claims that HIV drugs are poisonous. His barbs are as pointed as they are funny, but he sees the humanity in everyone. In his heart, his true goal is to make his people happy and unafraid. You can see it in his eyes as he relates the story of a little black boy who wanders into his theatre as he is building the stage. From a simple "do you like to sing" and a few shaky songs, you see Uys' pride as he relates how that same child made it all the way to top awards at Trinity College. Uys' South Africa has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the pride of being a good human being.

Told today that they release you
That you had paid your debt
Nomzamo in her own damn country
How much more boorish can these people get?
But you refuse to get the message
Of waving whips, in bloody semaphore
Where only gunfire's indiscriminate - as always
One People! One Cause!
One People! One Cause!
Nomzamo! Nomzamo...
"Nomzamo" by Latin Quarter.

South Africa has not been on the forefront of American minds for some time. As Uys says, if Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela hadn't had an easy-to-pronounce first name, Americans may not have been aware of the country's plight at all. In "Elections and Erections," Uys entertains, and more importantly, educates. Throughout the show, he relays tidbits of history and culture which later become the punch lines of his comedy, ensuring the audience understands the satirical context of his work. Yet the pace never suffers. The flow of comedy and pathos, serious and profane, never falters. This is not a show you want to miss. I only wish we could import Pieter-Dirk Uys to provide a similar look at ourselves.

"Elections and Erections: A Chronicle of Fear and Fun" is written and performed by Pieter-Dirk Uys. It is playing at the American Repertory Theatre's "Zero Arrow Theatre" playhouse (a wonderful dinner-theatre style space just off Harvard Square, with tables, a bar, and wonderful ambience). It will be showing through May 4th, 2008. For more information on this show and other performances, see the A.R.T. site.

The A.R.T. graciously provided free tickets to myself and other Boston-area bloggers in exchange for an honest review (good or bad). I'd like to thank them for initiating this experiment in new media.

Many thanks to @devyl for the editing assistance.
Any errors are due to my not following her advice.

Wiretapping: Is it Worth the Cost?

By Shireen Hinckley on March 20, 2008 11:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This paper was written for my 10th grade English class. We were given a choice of topics and allowed to argue either side. We researched the topics and made notes, but the final paper had to be written in class, which left no time for proof-reading or editing down. There was a problem with the file server, so I was unable to save my paper. This version was scanned in from the printed copy, and may have additional errors as a result.

Shireen Hinckley

Waddell/E Block

Wiretapping: Is it Worth the Cost?

Although the government often thinks that they know the best way to deal with threats, deciding to take the entirety of the problem into their own hands, this can often lead to more trouble than anticipated. The United States was set up by our founding fathers with checks and balances, and recently, these have been ignored for the cause to fight terrorism. As Bruce Schneier said, "Terrorism is a serious risk to our nation, but an even greater threat is the centralization of American political power in the hands of any single branch of the government. Over 200 years ago, the framers of the U.S. Constitution established an ingenious security device against tyrannical government: they divided government power among three different bodies... Since 9/11, the United States has seen an enormous power grab by the executive branch."(3) The executive branch responded to a terrorist attack by exciting the American public, and making them even more terrified by exagerrating the situation. Through manipulating this fear, the government was able to pass laws and form secret orginizations that before, would never have been sanctioned. One of these was permitting close surveillance of the American public, including wiretapping. Their excuse for this was saying that it would aid greatly in finding and capturing terrorists, and give the people more security. Uncontrolled wiretapping hurts security by providing too much unfocused information; leading to the arrest of innocent people, taking away constitutional rights, drawing resources away from focused investigations, and creating opportunities for abuse and corruption.

Too much unfocused information leads to arrests of unassociated, innocent people and through manipulating paranoia, the government takes away basic constitutional rights. Although government officials claim that wiretapping helps find terrorist workers all over the country, in reality it is messy and inefficient. As Schneier said in "Uncle Sam is Listening, the technology works similar to a vacuum cleaner, "sucking up a staggering amount of voice, fax, and data communications... from all over the world: an estimated 3 billion communications per day. These communications are then processed through... data-mining technologies, which look for simple phrases like 'assassinate the president"(9) These simple phrases will get caught up in casual emails or conversations and can put any innocent American citizen on the suspect list. This limits our rights of free speech and press. Many people do not care that the government is watching their every move, saying that they have "nothing to hide." This innocence cannot save a victim once he has arrested for terrorism, because the government throws out all normal procedure for criminals, such as a phone call or a trial. This was the case of Canadian software engineer Maher Arar, who also holds a Syrian citizenship. Arar, while switching flights in New York to return to Ottawa from Damascus, was detained in JFK airport in Brooklyn as a presumed Al Qaeda terrorist, and then sent to Syria where he was tortured for 10 months. "Arar, who denies any terror links and was never charged with a crime, charges the US government with violating the Torture Victim Protection Act and his Fifth Amendment right to due process."(7) Although Both the Canadian and Syrian governments now say Arar has nothing to do with Al Qaeda, or any other terrorist group, the US government it still adamant with its accusation, although it has presented no proof to the court. Arar was even named by the Canadian edition of Time Magazine as the "Newsmaker of the year," calling him "a symbol of how fear and injustice have permeated life in the West since 9/11 ."(7) His case is not the only one that accuses the US government of illegal workings; the Electronic Frontier Foundation filed a lawsuit against AT&T on January 31, 2006, accusing them collaborating with the National Security Agency. This program's purpose was to wiretap Americans' communications without court oversight; violating the law and the privacy of its customers. These actions were in infringing the privacy safeguards established by Congress and the U.S. Constitution. Evidence soon revealed that the surveillance began before September of 2001, giving NSA no right to claim they were searching for terrorists, as it was not a valid threat at that time. "EFF 's case includes undisputed evidence that AT&T installed a fiberoptic splitter at its facility... in San Francisco that made copies of all emails, web browsing and other internet traffic to and from AT&T customers, and provided those copies to the NSA."(6) When the government and AT&T attempted to dismiss the case on the basis of state secrets, they were rejected, the judge saying, "the compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one. But dismissing this case at the outset would sacrifice liberty for no apparent enhancement of security." (6) The American public was violated and no amount of security is worth that destruction of privacy. The government cannot be trusted to always do right, as it is not run by supernatural beings. They too will make mistakes as with Arar. The more power the government has, the more they can misuse that power, and the bigger the mistakes can get.

Needless wiretapping and surveillance techniques cause more harm than good by drawing resources away from focused investigations and creating mistrust of the judicial system. The United States is not the only country wiretapping its people. After September 11th, other countries made similar precautions, such as Germany. Niels Sorrells explained the situation in Germany in "German Tap Lessons" saying, "German authorities cannot point to a single successful prosecution of a terror suspect identified from... blind wiretaps. The colossal volume of information produced from tens of thousands of these taps often obscures real threats, while dead ends are pursued. Authorities quite simply do not have the time to listen to and process it all. In the one case in which such surveillance was used to detect a terror plot... the authorities-thanks to old-fashioned investigative methods-already knew the identities of the... plotters. It's hardly a ringing endorsement for the kind of all-encompassing, warrantless surveillance that the United States government wants its citizens to accept. (4) Many times, rather than surveillance techniques aiding in investigations, it jeopardizes them. When certain laws are overlooked or broken, there are eventually consequences. Discoveries concerning organizations such as the NSA make many people question the true motives of other wiretapping programs that are supposedly put there to fight terrorism. "In criminal cases that can put terrorists behind bars, judges now have to worry that evidence was based on illegal wiretaps. Evidence might be excluded or convictions overturned."(8) Courts often do not know when to believe the government when it says where evidence has come from, and in numerous cases the government refuses to reveal even that, claiming it is a matter of national security, as they did in the case with Maher Arar. Judges who believe in the rule of law may feel obligated to be stricter with the government when they cannot trust its statements. This mistrust leads to lack of cooperation and less efficient trials, hindering the prosecution of terrorists rather than helping it. Not only does wiretapping hinder prosecution of terrorists, it wastes valuable investigative resources. "A January 17 story in the New York Times highlighted the huge amount of time and resources devoted to the program, apparently with minimal results. In the days after 9/11, the FBI decided to follow up on every lead... Long lists of phone numbers continued to be generated by the NSA program, however. According to a senior prosecutor: 'It affected the F.B.I. in the sense that they had to devote so many resources to tracking every single one of these leads, and, in my experience, they were all dry leads. "'(8) Even after September 11th, "the N.S.A. material continued to be viewed as unproductive, prompting agents to joke that a new bunch of tips meant more calls to Pizza Hut."(8) Although the government tries to convince the American people that their surveillance techniques are helpful to finding terrorists, the chance is one in a million. They are wasting resources and money chasing ghosts and dead ends, rarely finding any plausible suspects.

Opportunities for abuse and corruption arise when the government suddenly has the ability to retrieve boundless information on any individual. The Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam War made the government have to quickly cover its tracks by weakening the man who distributed them in the eyes of the public. Daniel Ellsberg turned himself in to the FBI, and the administration saw this as an opportunity to weaken the Democratic party. President Nixon decided the only way they could make Ellsberg and the Democratic party weaker was to leak damaging information to the press. The project was named the "plumbers" and their goal was to do surveillance on Democratic members of the government and collect information illegally that could potentially damage their reputation and prestige. On September 3, 1971, under orders from the White House, the "plumbers" burglarized the office of Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist, Dr. Lewis Fielding. Because of the resources the administration had at their fingertips, they were able to manipulate the power they had in order to hurt Ellsberg's reputation and claims in court. The burglary and other unlawful surveillance activities were discovered, and Ellsberg was let go on account "unprecedented' government misconduct" which had "incurably infected the prosecution of [the] case. (5) President Nixon complained; "the sonofabitching thief is made a national hero and is going to get off on mistrial. And the New York Times gets a Pulitzer Prize for stealing documents... What in the name of God have we come to? (5) With the power the American people give to the government, they can manipulate it to serve their own ends. They have the ability to incriminate any individual, never getting caught. The United States government is not the only thing that would be able to manipulate wiretapping and surveillance technologies. In fact, the very people that they were supposed to protect against are able to employ it, using it for their own means. In Greece, this is exactly what had happened; "Unknowns tapped the mobile phones of about 100 Greek politicians and offices, including the U.S. embassy in Athens and the Greek prime minister" and later evidence revealed that the criminals actually used the code that was designed into the system; "It's [the] eavesdropping code [that was] put into the system for the police. The attackers managed to bypass the authorization mechanisms of the eavesdropping system, and activate the 'lawful interception' module in the mobile network. They then redirected about 100 numbers to 14 shadow numbers they controlled."2 This code was put into place to search for these terrorists, and they managed to manipulate it to serve their own means. Installing these wiretapping devices harmed the government rather than helped it, and caused more problems than there was originally.

The administration and executive power has taken too much power and ignored the judicial checks that our founding fathers put into place two hundred years ago, and as Richard Posner said, "The government has a conflict of interest, because its paramount duty is to protect national security. If it could be trusted to hold national security and civil liberties concerns in perfect equipoise, there would be no need for judicial checks"(1). They are able to toss aside the Constitution, violating American's basic rights of free speech and press, and cannot be stopped or slowed. Should the government have uncontrolled power over wiretapping and surveillance? No. This power would detrimentally harm the American public, and cause grabs for power and control that would completely disrupt the balance of democracy, and throw the ideals of American into oblivion.

Bibliography

Posner, Richard A. Not a Suicide Pact: The Constitution in a Time of National Emergency New York: Oxford UP, 2006.
Schneier, Bruce. "More on Greek Wiretapping." Bruce Schneier. 1 Mar. 2006. 21 Jan. 2008 <http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2006/03/more_on_greek_w.html>
Schneier, Bruce. "NSA and Bush's Illegal Eavesdropping." Bruce Schneier. 20 Dec. 2005. 21 Jan 2008. <http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2005/12/nsa_and_bushs_i.html>
Sorrells, Niels C. "German Tap Lessons." Foreign Policy. Sept. 2006. 21 Jan. 2008 <http://www.foreignpolicy.com/index.php>
Stone, Geoffrey R. Perilous Times Free Speech in Wartime. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2004.
Hepting Resources." EFF Electronic Frontier Foundation Electronic Frontier Foundation. 21 Jan. 2008 <http://www.eff.org/nsa/hepting>
Regan,Tom. "Canadian Sent to Syria Sues US Over Rendition Policy." The Christian Science Monitor. 11 Aug. 2005. 21 Jan. 2008 <http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0811/dailyUpdate.html>
Swire, Peter. "Legal FAQs on NSA Wiretaps." Domestic and Economy 26 Jan. 2006. Center for American Progress. 21 Jan. 2008 <http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2006/01/b1389573.html>
Schneier, Bruce. "Uncle Sam is Listening." Bruce Schneier. 20 Dec. 2005. 21 Jan. 2008 <http://www.schneier.com/essay-100.html>

Remembering Arthur C. Clarke

By Kee Hinckley on March 19, 2008 1:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Yesterday, one of the stars went out.

Sir Arthur C. Clarke wasn't just a "futurist" who wrote about possibilities. He was an integral part of the community which made our global society possible. His first novel, Glide Path, was based on his WWII experiences using radar for the first time as a means to help aircraft land. And most appropriately, he was the first person to realize the potential power of planting a satellite at 35,780km and using it for communications.

But Clarke's fiction wasn't about science and technology. Like the best science fiction authors, he merely used those to talk about what it meant to human. His focus was on communities, on the importance of understanding our own planet, and on reaching our greatest potential as human beings without forgetting that we have a responsibility to all life on this planet.

The best obituary you can offer him is to go and read one of his books. Or better yet, give one to a child to read.

I find it fascinating (and appropriate) to watch the remembrances as they wend their way through the time zones. Here is a sampling (via Tweet Scan).

vinta : Arthur C. Clarke 死掉了啊 << (2008-03-19 12:46:05)
carloshotta : 2a. lei de #Clarke: "A única maneira de descobrir os limites do possível é passá-los um pouco na direção do impossível." << (2008-03-19 12:38:40)
jaysolo : Still haven't posted even a small bit about Clarke, but the whole world did that for me and little to add. << (2008-03-19 12:38:33)
djgotga : Los grandes artistas y literatos se van siempre en triadas: Gary Gygax - Anthony Minghella - Arthur C. Clarke. << (2008-03-19 12:33:02)
conniecrosby : Sir Arthur C. Clarke passed away today. Here is the Mars Society's tribute: http://www.marssociety.org.... << (2008-03-19 12:25:10)
niklasgv : "Aún tiene que probarse que la inteligencia tenga algún valor para la supervivencia." (Arthur C. Clarke 1917-2008) << (2008-03-19 12:21:48)
ourfounder : March is taking community thought leaders. Gygax and A.C. Clarke. Sigh. An obit for A.C. would require much wordsmithing. Or be a limerick. << (2008-03-19 12:17:05)
yurusuke : "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." by Arthur C. Clarke << (2008-03-19 12:14:08)
argent_bury : Another one of my memetic ancestors has passed away. Rest in peace, Mr. Clarke. Without you, I would not be here. << (2008-03-19 11:47:20)
PragueBob : Arthur C. Clarke has died. I mourn his passing as one of the most inspiring authors of my youth. Another satellite is in the heavens tonight << (2008-03-19 11:44:47)
brandonw : Arthur C. Clarke died yesterday. His "Childhood's End" was the first real novel I ever read. << (2008-03-19 11:45:41)
LPI_Library : In library catalogs Clarke, Arthur Charles, 1917- is now Clarke, Arthur C. (Arthur Charles), 1917-2008. http://tinyurl.com/ypz6wt << (2008-03-19 11:46:41)
Merras : Arthur C. Clarke blogkörkép: http://tinyurl.com/29be29 - ha valaki tud még ide ajánlani postokat, dobjon nekem mailt: merras@sfportal.hu << (2008-03-19 11:29:29)
nickellis : @spiceee Comentários de Arthur C. Clarke sobre religião. http://tinyurl.com/393rqb << (2008-03-19 11:24:44)
teledyn : The only way of discovering the limits of the possible is to venture a little way past them into the impossible. (Arthur C Clarke) << (2008-03-19 11:17:51)
titanas : Πέθανε ο Arthur C. Clarke << (2008-03-19 10:43:28)
oliver : Folllowing @adrianh call: today is Arthur C Clarke avatar day. << (2008-03-19 10:40:35)
monkchips : @Blag no i love my red avatar. but arthur c clarke died, and we're giving him a shout out. avatars need not be static, any more than we are. << (2008-03-19 10:42:00)
widgetapps : Thank you Arthur C Clarke, you will be missed! << (2008-03-19 10:12:58)
elinwang : Arthur C. Clarke (1917 -2008, English Physicist & Science Fiction Author) formulated three "laws" of prediction: << (2008-03-19 10:11:07)
elinwang : Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. Arthur C. Clarke (1917-2008, English physicist Science fiction author) << (2008-03-19 10:06:01)
greenideas : gary gygax, and now arthur c. clarke. it's a rough month for geek heroes. << (2008-03-19 10:01:21)
awerner : A.C. Clarke once denigrated religion as "a necessary evil in the childhood of our particular species." R.I.P. << (2008-03-19 09:58:15)
niklasgv : Obituarios en The Guardian: sobre el director de cine Minghella y sobre el escritor Clarke << (2008-03-19 09:57:28)
pipperl : Retweeting @tmas68: Watching: BBC NEWS | UK | Writer Arthur C Clarke dies at 90。2001太空漫遊的原作者Arthur C Clarke 逝世。 http://tinyurl.com/2qbwgo << (2008-03-19 09:54:20)
steppek : Don' t know if you guys saw this. A Video Message from Arthur Clarke just before his 90th http://www.aintitcool.com/n... << (2008-03-19 09:47:57)
burning_chrome : Arthur C. Clarke: RIP "Open the Pearly Gates, HAL" << (2008-03-19 09:46:10)
Urwings : 阿瑟克拉克(Arthur C.Clarke)于2008年3月18日在斯里兰卡的家中去世，享年90岁。他一共写过100多本科幻小说，其中包括《2001太空漫游》系列等。向克拉克致敬!他前瞻性地向我们描述了未来。 << (2008-03-19 09:34:11)
Technoir : so I told a group of coworkers last night that Arthur C. Clarke had died. They asked me who that was. Almost made me want to cry. << (2008-03-19 08:58:22)
TeeMonster : @steppek: Yeah....pretty freakin' creepy moment...I love my tech, but Clarke is always present, you know? << (2008-03-19 08:50:31)
Daranifer : Anscheinend ist Arthur C. Clarke ex gegangen. Die Blogs quellen über. << (2008-03-19 08:46:42)
lawboop : Arthur C. Clarke had his Rendevous With Rama today. Greg Boop << (2008-03-19 08:43:57)
avyuro : Thank you Sir Clarke for so many wonderful dreams. << (2008-03-19 08:42:15)
TeeMonster : @RapidEye: "I'm sorry. I can't do that." (RIP Sir Arthur C. Clarke. http://tinyurl.com/236pbx) << (2008-03-19 08:33:38)
oedenfield : “A Short Pre-History of Comsats, Or: How I Lost a Billion Dollars in My Spare Time”. Sadly, Arthur C. Clarke died. NYT has a good sto ... << (2008-03-19 08:26:48)
aliengirlbr : Arthur C. Clarke, descanse em paz!! << (2008-03-19 08:24:16)
TRBlogs : Dave? What are you doing, Dave? The legacy of Arthur C. Clarke - http://tinyurl.com/24ry85 << (2008-03-19 07:59:17)
SmarkYou : Arthur C. Clarke has been absorbed by the monolith. RIP. << (2008-03-19 07:58:59)
sam33r : Childhood's end. R.I.P., Sir Arthur C. Clarke. << (2008-03-19 07:59:02)
tachyondecay : Rest in peace, Arthur C Clarke. It's your turn to find the nine billion names of God. :) << (2008-03-19 07:56:01)
izlmichael : Arthur Clark逝世了？！http://tinyurl.com/2s4cmb << (2008-03-19 07:54:26)
randomquotes : "He was a rigorous extrapolator of what we know to what we don't know." Unknown tribute to Sir Arthur C. Clarke. << (2008-03-19 07:53:27)
skyadv : painful day, today we lost the big one, the Master, a thinker interested in the future of the humanity Arthur C. Clarke we will miss you =(( << (2008-03-19 07:53:43)
cadusimoes : Um minuto de silêncio para Arthur C. Clarke: http://www1.folha.uol.com.b... << (2008-03-19 07:51:48)
simplyarun : "How inappropriate to call this planet Earth, when clearly it is Ocean." - Sir Arthur C. Clarke (1917 - 19 March 2008) << (2008-03-19 07:42:00)
markiddon : I'm so upset that Arthur C Clarke is dead. One of my biggest heroes and an inspiration throughout my childhood. Very sad news. << (2008-03-19 07:22:49)
asesino : "Sir Arthur Charles Clarke" かぁ。今後は Wikipedia にあった「ナイトの称号」という言葉が気になる。Japones には関係ないか... << (2008-03-19 07:21:52)
deantenea : addio Arthur Clarke... che moria 'sto mese. << (2008-03-19 07:17:28)
madd0 : RIP Arthur C. Clarke. how cool is it however that Wikipedia is already up to date? http://is.gd/2mI not long ago this would've been sci-fi! << (2008-03-19 07:11:28)
melissa_bxl : Ai-je dis que j'étais triste de la mort d'Arthur C. Clarke? Un de mes auteurs de S-F préféré! << (2008-03-19 07:09:26)
JJFlash : Nel frattempo tramite @Bander apprendo della morte di Arthur C. Clarke. Molto molto dispiaciuto. << (2008-03-19 07:05:41)
kirdan : saluta Arthur C. Clarke, uno di quelli che ha fatto crescere @kirdan. http://tinyurl.com/yp959s << (2008-03-19 07:02:03)
spitsnet : Sciencefictionschrijver Arthur C. Clarke overleden http://spitsnet.nl/nieuws.p... << (2008-03-19 06:52:42)
aribadler : RIP Arthur C. Clarke - you've begun your final odyssey... << (2008-03-19 06:48:14)
weas : Arthur C. Clarke la ha palmado. Tenía ochocientos años o así, pero aún era un grande... << (2008-03-19 06:08:24)
SuperErnie : Rob wilde nog vragen of ze Clarke had ontmoet (want dat had ze) maar er was geen tijd meer, zonde << (2008-03-19 05:56:56)
Cryolite : Clarke 大先生なら「お疲れ様でした」って笑顔で送り出せるよね．今，仮に ( あくまでもしもの話ね！ ) 某 K 大先生がくたばったりでもしたら「テメー！ The Art of ナントカ書き終わるまでは絶対逝かせねーぞ！」っていってあっちから全力で連れ戻してく ... << (2008-03-19 05:42:25)
pauloflaherty : R.I.P. Arthur C. Clarke begiins his final odyssey: http://snurl.com/22370 << (2008-03-19 05:14:59)

Lauren Weinstein: "Tags instead of Takedowns" -- Does anyone remember PICS?

By Kee Hinckley on February 27, 2008 3:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Lauren posted a blog entry today, responding to the issues that caused Pakistan to accidentally wipe YouTube off the map for a few hours. He questions why we are bowdlerizing the internet to keep everyone happy. Yes, the companies who comply with foreign take-down notices have commercial reasons for doing so. But couldn't they find another way to keep insulted/shocked countries from limiting what the rest of us see?

So he's proposed that there be a mechanism for tagging content so that it can be avoided by those who don't want to see it.

YouTube and Global Censorship - A Proposal Lauren Weinstein's Blog

I now propose that a similar concept could be applied to services such as YouTube, as a preferred alternative to global video take-downs. That is, instead of being able to easily demand that a video be expunged from YouTube (for other than DMCA-related reasons), a procedure would be in place to tag the associated video in a manner that would display the noted objections to that material, and could even be used by national authorities to impose regional or local blocking (distasteful as this is) without affecting the rest of the planet's rights to view the video in question if they wish.

But we've been here before. The system is called PICS, the "Platform for Internet Content Selection", and the 1.1 version was finalized by the W3 in 1996.

PICS Statement of Principles PICS

PICS is a cross-industry working group whose goal is to facilitate the development of technologies to give users of interactive media, such as the Internet, control over the kinds of material to which they and their children have access. PICS members believe that individuals, groups and businesses should have easy access to the widest possible range of content selection products, and a diversity of voluntary rating systems.

In order to advance its goals, PICS will devise a set of standards that facilitate the following:

Self-rating:: enable content providers to voluntarily label the content they create and distribute.
Third-party rating:: enable multiple, independent labeling services to associate additional labels with content created and distributed by others. Services may devise their own labeling systems, and the same content may receive different labels from different services.
Ease-of-use:: enable parents and teachers to use ratings and labels from a diversity of sources to control the information that children under their supervision receive.

PICS members believe that an open labeling platform which incorporates these features provides the best way to preserve and enhance the vibrancy and diversity of the Internet. Easy access to technology which enables first- and third-party rating of content will give users maximum control over the content they receive without requiring new restrictions on content providers.

Membership in PICS includes a broad cross-section of companies from the computer, communications, and content industries, as well as trade associations and public interest groups. PICS member will deploy products and services based on these standards.

The third-party rating system in particular is perfect for Lauren's proposal. You could configure your browser to point at the rating body of your choice. (Imagine the possibilities—you could browse a web where only sites rated acceptable by FleshBot (NSFW) were visible!)

So, why isn't PICS built-in to every web browser and web site?

Okay, I confess, it was eleven years ago and I don't remember what happened. Internet Explorer did have support for it, perhaps it still does.

The real question is do we want it to be built-in to every browser? There's a very strong case to be made that once browsers have an easy way of censoring "bad" content, censorship of that content will become mandatory in large portions of society. Many governments (Australia and Britain recently, and of course multiple attempts in the U.S.) have made it clear that they don't trust parents to "protect" their own children. Adding content filters at the ISP-level would be an obvious and "simple" solution. Governments want to do it already; do we really want to make it easy for them?

The other issue is more practical, and I believe it will kill Lauren's proposal. Internet Services live and die on customer support. Which is to say that, for the main part, they die if they have to provide any. The overhead of providing a tagging and filtering service that can be used by any concerned government (or heaven forbid, organization) to complain about any content) is just too much to manage. And if the countries and organizations have to do it themselves, then they might as well just create a block-list of URLs and content words… oh wait, they already do that.

I understand the concerns that are driving the desire to compromise on content take-down. But fundamentally, I don't think it's a good idea. The risks of misuse are just too great.

Experience vs. Identity in Foreign Policy

By Kee Hinckley on February 25, 2008 3:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

[I originally posted this to my "Iran Outside In" blog, but I'm closing that down, and moving over a few articles that seem appropriate.]

I am a big fan of Fareed Zakaria. He is one of the few columnists out there who not only recognizes America's responsibility to appear moral to the world (and I mean that as an addition to "being" moral, not as an alternative), but also has the ability to understand and articulate how others view us, regardless of whether those people are friends or foes.

In this particular column, Fareed uncomfortably recognizes that the reason he prefers Barack Obama to Hillary Clinton on foreign policy is precisely because he believes Barack has a better "feel" for how non-Americans perceive our country. In other words, it's not about foreign policy "experience", it's about being able to empathize (in the sense of "deep understanding").

Zakaria: The Power of Personality Newsweek.com

I never thought I'd be in this position. There's a debate taking place about what matters most when making judgments about foreign policy—experience and expertise on the one hand, or personal identity on the other. And I find myself coming down on the side of identity.

…

But when I think about what is truly distinctive about the way I look at the world, about the advantage that I may have over others in understanding foreign affairs, it is that I know what it means not to be an American. I know intimately the attraction, the repulsion, the hopes, the disappointments that the other 95 percent of humanity feels when thinking about this country. I know it because for a good part of my life, I wasn't an American. I was the outsider, growing up 8,000 miles away from the centers of power, being shaped by forces over which my country had no control.

I call the recognition "uncomfortable" because of course, Fareed has made a career out of foreign policy (degrees, books, experience…). Yet, here he has to admit that while those gave him the necessary tools, what makes him really good as an advisor to America is his non-American upbringing.

Which leads me to something that always seems to be forgotten when we get around to picking our leaders. In the end, the true strength of a leader is not what they know, but how well they choose their advisors. It's a rare person who has the courage to surround themselves with people who are smarter than they are, and an even rarer one who can do so without being manipulated. Where would Kennedy have been without his brother as Attorney General? And since then, only Carter and (perhaps) George Bush Sr. have had those skills.

A leader may provide the ideology, but the advisors provide the tools and information. A smart leader knows that, and isn't afraid to pick advisors who differ in ideology but have greater skills.

But whomever becomes President next year, they could do far worse than choosing Fareed Zakaria as an advisor.

WikiLeaks Gets Taken Down--Should Domain Owners be Concerned?

By Kee Hinckley on February 18, 2008 5:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Wikileaks.org is (was?) a site created for whistle-blowers to post incriminating documents. There's obviously potential for abuse there, and WikiLeaks claims to have posted 1.2m documents, which is certainly a lot of incrimination.

Whistle-blower site taken offline BBC NEWS | Technology

A controversial website that allows whistle-blowers to anonymously post government and corporate documents has been taken offline in the US.

Wikileaks.org, as it is known, was cut off from the internet following a California court ruling, the site says.

…

The case was brought by lawyers working for the Swiss banking group Julius Baer. It concerned several documents posted on the site which allegedly reveal that the bank was involved with money laundering and tax evasion.

The documents were allegedly posted by Rudolf Elmer, former vice president of the bank's Cayman Island's operation.

…

The BBC understands that Julius Baer asked for the documents to be removed because they could have an impact on a separate legal case ongoing in Switzerland.

There are a couple interesting things about the take-down which should concern any domain owner.

Wikileaks was not at the hearing which closed the site. They claim to have been given only a few hours warning via email. The take-down was done via the registrar (Dynadot). Additionally, the court (apparently being more technical than most) also ordered Dynadot to prevent any domain transfers.
A California court took the entire site offline because of a legal issue in Switzerland over specific documents.

I suppose going through the registrar is similar to having a landlord change the keys on an apartment, but I find it very disturbing that this was apparently done without first attempting to negotiate with the Wikileak maintainers. This isn't a case where there is any time critical element, or where evidence might "disappear" if the owner was given a warning. Quite the contrary. So what's the rush? And what are the legal implications?

I also find it disturbing that a California court is enforcing Swiss laws, particularly ones that don't appear to have U.S. analogues. And that they would take such draconian measures. They've shut down the presses in order to prevent the repeated publication of an "article" that has already been made public. I certainly hope that someone rules that they've overstepped their bounds.

BTW. There are of course, still mirrors to the site. (You should be so lucky if your site gets taken down.) You can find one here. And their article on the take-down his here.

« Humor | Main Index | Archives | Iran »

Recently in International Category

By George, I think he's got it!

Supreme Court ruling cripples Guantanamo trials

Elections and Erections: A One-Queen Play at the A.R.T.

Wiretapping: Is it Worth the Cost?

Remembering Arthur C. Clarke

Lauren Weinstein: "Tags instead of Takedowns" -- Does anyone remember PICS?

Experience vs. Identity in Foreign Policy

WikiLeaks Gets Taken Down--Should Domain Owners be Concerned?

About this Archive

Subscribe via Reader

Subscribe via Email

About Me

International: Monthly Archives

Categories

Search

Recent Posts