The climatologists present facts that contradict Al Gore’s fictions.

The election is still a year away but the debate has heated up. One must wonder if the free flow of information that we call the Internet is not playing a major role in the elections.

From the abortion debate and taxes to gay marriage and illegal immigration, the Internet is educating the masses.

In the past, it was relatively easy to maintain one’s ignorance. All you had to do was not buy books, not subscribe to any newspapers, not watch the nightly news, and spend the money you saved on much more enjoyable activities, like drinking beer.

On the Internet, however, you can’t take click on anything without being accosted with information. Iraq did this. Iran did that. Bush is the anti-Christ. That guy chopping off that lady’s head, he’s actually a noble “Freedom Fighter”.

Okay, bad examples. But there are also a plethora of legitimately insightful opinions, validated facts, and education to be had, absolutely free of charge.

The Internet has helped to educate voters about the positions held by candidates for public office.

The Internet has helped to educate the world to the plight of Aung San Suu Kyi.

The spread of knowledge on the Internet has helped highlight injustices and brought more public pressure to bear than could be imaginable otherwise.

Viva la Internet!

The Deleting Online Predators Act (DOPA) is legislation that has been introduced in the U.S. Congress that aims to restrict school and library access to social networking sites. Last week, it passed by an overwhelming majority in the House, and is now making its way to the Senate. If passed in the Senate, DOPA would likely go into effect.

DOPA proposes that all schools and libraries who receive E-Rate funding for their internet access would be required to block sites that meet the following criteria:

1. If it is offered by a commercial entity.
2. If it permits registered users to create an on-line profile that includes detailed personal information.
3. If permits registered users to create an on-line journal and share such a journal with other users.
4. If it elicits highly-personalized information from users.
5. if enables communication among users.

E-Rate reimbursement is funding received by schools and libraries for the fees they incur through providing internet access. Already, some degree of filtering is required to receive the funding, which most schools and libraries comply with. Very few libraries can afford not to receive E-Rate funding, and even fewer schools can afford not to. Therefore, most will continue to comply with the government’s restrictions on online access in order to receive the neccessary funding.

Such legislation would not only block sites like MySpace, Facebook, Friendster, and other social networking sites, but it could potentially block sites such as AOL, Yahoo, and MSN as all three of those also meet the criteria. And not only would it limit children’s access, but also potentially adults’ who wish to use the filtered PCs.

Instead of making laws that restrict the things kids can do even more, why not invest more money into educating them about the dangers of online predators? Why not encourage parents to take responsibility and actually talk to their kids? Come on, we all know how kids are… if you make it so that they cannot access these sites, they will try their damndest to find away around it. Whether that means hacking the computers or network, or simply “studying” after school at a friend’s house to access the sites… they will do it.

The issue is going to the Senate, and it is rumoured that they will fast-track it into passage. I fear the direction that we are headed in - relying on “laws” to protect our children, and how easily many are willing to give up their rights for a false sense of security.

As a library employee, I am proud to be a part of an organization (ALA) that staunchly opposes such legislation, and I am glad that I am lucky enough to be a part of a library who can afford to say “screw you” to the government and miss out on E-Rate discounts. However I am saddened that many libraries and schools across the country cannot afford to stand up for what they believe in and cannot afford not to receive the E-Rate discounts, for they must bend to the each and every whim of the government.

The Department of Telecommunications in India has sent a notice to ISPs operating in the country to block around 18 websites. The DoT will not release the names of the websites, although users in India have already figured out that sites such as Blogger, Typepad, Dalitstan.org, Clickatell.com, Hinduunity.com, Hinduhumanrights.org, and more are amongst those rendered inaccessible.

The government alleges that the sites that were requested to be blocked all spread extremist views. However, instead of blocking only the blogs that the government has found to be offensive or problematic, they’ve gone ahead and blocked all blogs - angering many throughout the country.

The ordered banning of these websites was issued on June 13, and more ISP can expect to receive notices soon. The Government alleges these blogsites were fuelling hatred and communalism.

The government has assured the people, however, that they are not attempting to censor free speech. The request to block the sites follows the deadly Mumbai serial blasts which killed 200 people, and marks the first time that the government has ordered the blocking of such a large number of sites.

Under the Information Technology Act, 2000, an entity called the Computer Emergency Response Team, or CERT-IN, was created. Its main task is in the domain of Internet security, but it also oversees Internet censorship under a clause that seeks to ensure ‘balanced flow of information.’ Any government department seeking a block on any web site has to approach CERT-IN, which then instructs the DoT to block the site after confirming the authenticity of the complaint. Web sites can be blocked if they contain pornography, speeches of hate, contempt, slander or defamation, or if they promote gambling, racism, violence or terrorism.

Bloggers are hopping mad, and are uniting in an attempt to get a list of the blocked sites released. The Indian Government, however, doesn’t yet seem to realize that they have effectively blocked not just 18 websites, but thousands of blogs, as a Hindustan report makes evident:

“Officials defended the decision saying, ‘We would like those people to come forward who access these (the 12) radical websites and please explain to us what are they missing from their lives in the absence of these sites.’”

Those looking for ways around the ban, may wish to consult this website put together by Indian technology blogger Amit Agarwal who has made a list of ways to get around the blocks (but good luck accessing it if you’re in India because its a Blogger/Blogspot blog). Another option is to use pkblogs.com, a site that was set-up to help Pakistani readers circumvent a Blogger.com ban in place in their country.

The issue of Net Neutrality is now working its way through the U.S. Senate, and as you can imagine the debates and presentations regarding the issue have begun.

Senator Ted Stevens, a Republican from Alaska, had some amusing - yet frightening - things to say about what the internet is, how it works, and why he’s against Net Neutrality.

Jon Stewart of the Daily Show recently did a piece on Net Neutrality, poking fun at the incompetent Senator.  Here’s a excerpt:

Stevens:  I…just the other day got, an Internet was sent by my staff at 10 o’clock in the morning on Friday, I got it yesterday. Why?

Stewart: …Why didn’t Senator Stevens get it until yesterday?  This is just a little bit of a guess here, but maybe it’s because you don’t seem to know jackshit about computers or the Internet.  By hey! That’s ok! You’re just the guy in charge of regulating it.

Ouch.  Senator Stevens does in fact play a large roll in the regulation of the internet as the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, & Transportation, under which telecommunications falls.  Unfortunately for us, it doesn’t seem like he knows what exactly the internet even is, yet he is qualified to help make legislative decisions regarding the oh-so-elusive Internet?

To hear more of what Stevens has to say about the internet and net neutrality, check out this video clip from the Daily Show.

I’m afraid, are you?

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives have voted against a measure that would protect net neutrality in a 269 to 152 vote on Thursdays.

If you’re not familiar with the term “net neutrality”, it is essentially the principle that all internet traffic should be delivered on a first-come, first served basis.

“There is going to be a fundamental change in the whole history of the Internet,” said Rep. Edwards Markey (D-Mass.) predicting that the bill would lead to the creation of fast and slow lanes on the information superhighway, and would stifle online innovation.

Net neutrality is what allowed the internet to become what it is today.  Without it, we might not have the likes of eBay, Google, Yahoo, and other prominent web companies.  By allowing telecommunications companies to control access and delivery of the web, they may very well be stifling the future of the internet and future innovative entrepreneurs.

With its defeat in the House, the debate now moves to the Senate.  Consumer groups and technology leaders are not willing to give up the fight yet; they plan on carrying the fight on up to the Senate.