On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Francesco Cat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm trying to sum up the whole discussion. The main trigger is an article > about Silvio Berlusconi (Italy's prime minister) in which is stated that > Berlusconi wants to discuss some "internet rules" during the upcoming G8. > Then Matteo wrote on the list something that sounded like "some kind of > ruling over the internet is a good thing against crimes", while he intended > "Authorities should be able to punish the ones who perpetrate an > international crime over the internet". This misunderstanding almost started > a flame ;) > However, the discussion moved on: should netsukuku implement some feature to > prevent excessive spreading of criminal-related web pages? EG: > Pedopornography. > My proposal was to implement a rating system: every domain should have > something like a "tag" voted by the users that visited it. Once you have > enought reviews and/or an hight percentage of "comments per visit", you can > choose what to do with that domain. First thing that camed at my mind is: if > my neighbourhood is tagged as "criminal", I MIGHT want to refuse routing the > traffic directed to him, in order to isolate that domain (althought this may > be a bad idea). > At the end, we are discussing if we should implement something like > "suggestions" and "warnings" about domains, using voted tags or other means, > but we come up that "shaping of traffic" is bad, since it might become > really easy to tag and isulate some nodes, so that some people cannot expose > their ideas (and this is exactly the opposite of the idea behind netsukuku: > everyone should be able to speak)
That's pretty odd indeed. Trying to control and censorship the network it's a huge mistake, even if it brings a few extra features such as "Internet police" and "criminal control". The problem with the censorship is that it takes away the whole autonomous and distributed network (on the technical side) and the community participation and anonymous voice (needed in a true open network). In principle, we don't need to care what our neighbor is doing over the network, it doesn't concern us. The only issue I'm truly against is child pornography over the Internet, and I think it's a separate issue. Nobody cares if our neighbor is selling warez or if he is downloading mp3s, or whatever activity that politicians consider as illegal, we simply don't care because we know by fact that it really isn't illegal. We also can't fall into the trap of trying to control as much as we can because we might end up being trapped ourselves on the network; that kills all the principal ideas on what netsukuku bases it's objectives. >From my point of view, such system ain't needed. Child pornography and such inhuman acts should be punished however, without having to implement something over the ntk protocol. -- Ricardo Lanziano 6838 E880 7CA4 D4B6 8283 8F65 96AD EC0B F113 AB62 Unix is simple. It just takes a genius to understand its simplicity. _______________________________________________ Netsukuku mailing list [email protected] http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/netsukuku
