125 posts • joined Wednesday 16th September 2009 12:41 GMT
One can only hope....
... that he was given a funeral that echoed his life.
Maths problems maybe?
"The EC's vice president only tabled the proposed regulations in January 2012, yet she is hoping to the whole thing wrapped up in 2014."
so you can block google analytics?
...""The European Commission says no to roaming premiums, yes to net neutrality, yes to investment, yes to new jobs. Fixing the telecoms sector is no longer about this one sector but about supporting the sustainable development of all sectors," Kroes said.
Do you really want to take everything Kroes says as fact? Where's the analysis? Where are the alternative views? Where's the criticism of her half-baked NN proposals, for example?
Bad pun alert
Hahn/Cock's half hour of fame?
Activist or journalist?
Your "bootnote" would suggest the former.
"Tripathi's case showed the dangers of crowdsourcing investigations of this type, "
No shit, sherlock!
Re: Oh FFS
Yes it is... just not in absolutely all cases.
godaddy... the ryanair of the Internet
If you're using them, you've only got yourself to blame.
protecting us from spam
If bureaucrats like in the ITU were in charge of protecting us from spam, we'd never eat anything else!
And the head of the copyright unit of the European Commission....
.... used to work as a lobbyist for the music industry!
I look forward to an equivalent article on this... anomaly.
Lots of careers are built...
... on hysterical child protection nonsense... it is a very solid business model.
"most fixed ISPs use the Internet Watch Foundation to block the worse of the worst, "
No, they "block" (solving unproven problems for unclear motives) *anything* that the IWF says may be illegal under UK law. Not "worst of the worst"... just anything the non-judicial IWF fears may be illegal.
Gee, I'd hate it if....
I put something on the Interwebz and somebody found it!
PS - F**k off and stop reading this!
What about Afghanistan
For the Germans, I mean...
"The German organisation was also embarrassed last week when it emerged that party executive Julia Schramm’s publisher Random House is using DCMA takedown notices against those who pirate her book."
That was a publicity stunt... *obviously*
Have you tried reading the actual text?
It is so restrictive as to be almost unusable, exactly how you'd like it, unfortunately.
the court ruled that IP addresses are personal data...
...which renders the use, outside any legally recognised structure, illegal. Simples.
Re: What is wrong with opting in to censorship if you want it?
This is wrong, for starters - http://gigaom.com/europe/orange-censors-all-blogs/
Kelly, you can do better than this!
"Google, which undoubtedly makes plenty of cash from porn sites, has previously warned against such a heavy-handed approach to filtering content over ISP networks in the UK."
How about Google, who has vast experience of Internet restrictions in China?
AAAAGH - EC and ECHR are not the same thing
Can someone please write a memo and share it with everyone in El Reg, this is getting tedious.
Enough to make a tabloid blush
"Google may not be willing to comment on how much money it makes from pornography online, but the search giant's UK public policy head Sarah Hunter has unsurprisingly urged caution when it comes to ISPs filtering content over their networks."
Re: As soon as I saw "hippies" in the headline...
That's a very good point! The problem is that it's not always obvious from the headline - the fact that it was comparatively obvious this time doesn't mean that it is always obvious.
As soon as I saw "hippies" in the headline...
... I knew that it was one of El Reg's two "shock jocks'.
Could the Reg possibly mark the shock jock articles with a [sh1t] tag, so that we can avoid wasting our time by opening them?
The clue is in the title of the working group
Working group on*information exchange* and data protection. Coming from the policing side of the Council, these guys are traditionally... unfriendly to privacy concerns - information exchange and data protection are not easy bedfellows.. Their reaction is therefore not altogether surprising.
on one hand, Google should be happy...
... nobody else can enter the market if it is regulated in this way.
followed by "we have to block the 'foreign'-based websites proposal...
...even though this doesn't work in France, doesn't work in Italy, doesn't bloody work.
What do we feel about US police shutting down .com addresses?
I mean... if it is okay for UK police to shut down .uk sites, could we complain if they shut down .com or .net domains?
"It looks like Hague might be taking the arguments on board, kicking off the cyber-security conference with a speech railing against net censorship."
You don't understand... when THEY restrict access to content, it's bad censorship"... when WE restrict access to content, it's "good government". Small but crucial difference.
The perfect intro to the non-neutral Internet
Game set and match to the big ISPs who have managed to produce a situation where government applauds and demands interferences in traffic and the introduction and use of invasive anti-net neutrality tools. Of course the government won't actually cotton on until it is too late. Idiots.
Transparent like the mobile phone billing systems, you mean?
Or transparent like useful?
"Transparency" is a dangerous buzz-word being pushed by "the internet is my cable TV service" telecoms monopolists and monopoly-wannabes.
Security company thinks security is vrrrrry important?
- Facebook offshores HUGE WAD OF CASH to Caymans - via Ireland
- Mexican Cobalt-60 robbers are DEAD MEN, say authorities
- Apple's spamtastic iBeacon retail alerts launch with Frisco FAIL
- Submerged Navy submarine successfully launches drone from missile tubes
- Pix Astroboffins spot HOT, YOUNG GIANT where she doesn't belong