Dear All, Thanks Gaurab and Abhishek for expressing your opinion and helping me justify the rational behind my query of internet filter software.
Since this campaign is about children, it is in no way about restricting children's access to information. Neither CWIN nor SAP International or any other organizations behind the campaign have any intention of blocking children's access to the wealth of information that resides in the internet. In fact, we really want to promote the use of internet for enhancement of children's knowledge base. The situation is that you have a 10 year old kid accessing internet from a public cybercafe or the home computer. Along with access to information of different kind, the kid has unlimited access to porn and other stuffs through the internet, which in fact is harmful for the kid's overall development. The research conducted in the internet behavior of children (research carried out by CWIN Nepal in Kathmandu) has also validated this behavior whereby it was found that more than 50% of the kids have said that they have access to porn stuffs. We will share the report with the group once it is published as well. Parents, teachers and other relevant stakeholders might not even have a single clue about the possibility of their kids accessing such harmful content through internet. In this context, it becomes our responsibility to inform and aware them of the situation and also suggest appropriate measures they can undertake if necessary. Again, we do not want Parents to think that Internet is spoiling their children and hence take the decision of restricting them the access to Internet as a whole. So, we want to inform Parents that technically it is possible for them to monitor their children's internet behavior or restrict access to harmful content (eg. porn) if they install some monitoring or filter softwares in their PCs. We would like them to at least know what these softwares are like, specially the open source ones. It is by no means an attempt to hinder children's access to resources and is totally in compliance with the "UN Convention on the Rights of the Child" as pointed by Gaurab. Here is an excerpt from the same Article 17 (e) * Article 17* > > (e) Encourage the development of appropriate guidelines *for the > protection of the child from information and material injurious to his or > her well-being*, bearing in mind the provisions of articles 13 and 18. > *Article 13* 1. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of the child's choice. 2. The exercise of this right may be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; or (b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. *Article 18*1. States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure > recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities > for the upbringing and development of the child. Parents or, as the case may > be, legal guardians, have the primary responsibility for the upbringing and > development of the child. The best interests of the child will be their > basic concern. > > 2. For the purpose of guaranteeing and promoting the rights set forth in > the present Convention, States Parties shall render appropriate assistance > to parents and legal guardians in the performance of their child-rearing > responsibilities and shall ensure the development of institutions, > facilities and services for the care of children. > 3. States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that > children of working parents have the right to benefit from child-care > services and facilities for which they are eligible. > So, we have approached experts and enthusiasts from the FOSS community to guide us in identifying and perhaps contextualizing the open source filter softwares that Parents and Stakeholders can use in Nepal to protect their clindren from online harms. Do let me know if you guys still need more clarification. Looking forard for your support and cooperation. Best Regards, Bibhusan I think I need to further clarify the rationale behind my query about internet filters to be used On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Abhishek Singh <[email protected]>wrote: > I agree with Gaurab dai. Making parents aware about the how to safeguard > their children against visiting unwanted site is logical. This awareness is > indeed necessary. Freedom and access to information is essential, until the > reader can interpret and use it in a rational way. Still, it is better to > let parents implement and use such filters rather than some ISP or > centralized system doing it. Following a centralized content filtering > system will create chaos, and the decision of what contnet to allow and what > content to block is solely upon them. This again requires a regulation which > guides all these process. Moreover since computers are shared at use, > advanced technology (or authentication) mechanism is needed to verify and > validate the user and implement filtering mechanisms. > _________________________________________________________ > > Regards, > Abhishek Singh > > Fedora 10 (Cambridge) is releasing on 25th Nov, 2008 > http://fedoraproject.org > > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 7:46 AM, Gaurab Raj Upadhaya < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Bipin Gautam wrote: >> >> > Alternately, the only best technological solution to this problem is >> > from the ISP level. ISP's could offer anonymous proxies that could do >> > content filtering if a cyber / home user voluntarily wishes to use the >> > proxy for content-filtering. >> >> tell my why are you in favour of a centralized technological soltuion >> (which of course has a higher probability of mis-utilization by the >> governments to spy on people),then giving the choice of >> blocking/sanitizing content into the hands of end-users. ? >> >> I see any centralized systems you support above, as a much bigger >> threat, technologically a lot more expensive, and also against the >> general philosophy of FOSS. It should be about choice and informed >> decisions right ? and it's definitely not the 'best' solution - probably >> the 'worst' solution, in my view. Let the power be in the hands of >> people and not in the hands of some unknown bureaucrat or so called >> security people sitting in a dark room. >> >> Also, I see nothing wrong with Bhibhusan approach of generating >> awareness and informing Parents of a software that they can use to stop >> their children from visiting unwanted sites, either knowingly or >> unknowingly. >> >> Since Shankar quoted the CRC, let me cite the the preamble 'Bearing in >> mind that, as indicated in the Declaration of the Rights of the Child, >> "the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs >> special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, >> before as well as after birth". >> >> Full text here. >> http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/k2crc.htm >> >> thanks >> -gaurab >> >> >> > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ FOSS Nepal mailing list: [email protected] http://groups.google.com/group/foss-nepal To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] Community website: http://www.fossnepal.org/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
