Friday, January 20, 2012

Some Information about Internet Censorship

There is a line that some may cross when dealing with Internet censorship. That line is reliance of ignorance, and not everyone is informed correctly.

The Protect IP Act, and Stop Online Piracy Act are dangerous bills, no doubt, but they also fail to mention some of the things that can be done if they were put into affect.

Domain Name System is a tough cookie, but not tough enough to crack. The World Wide Web works off asking what is where, who has what, and any one person or group can start one of these. The Dot Coms people use (or .ORGs, .NETs, etc) can easily be manipulated with a simple hosts file edit. It's practically no different than running a full blown server to compensate for the load difference (if you're hosting it for thousands of people).

Months ago there was talk about a decentralised DNS that could be polled via BitTorrent or some equivalent mark, on Torrent Freak. I'm assuming a D-DNS would work by only requesting and caching what the end-user wanted (or whatever the website they went to wanted). Not-so complicated?

iCANN (Internet Committee for Assigned Names and Numbers) is the most known and used address aggregator on the web. It's not the only one. The second one I'll speak of is OpenNIC. They run other "generic Top-level domain names" such as .geek. The reason you may not be able to access .geek when using an iCANN oriented network is due to iCANN not recognising OpenNIC's root servers. A slight form of censorship you may say, but only it isn't. This is the power of the web, the Internet. (Note, there is a huge difference between Internet and World Wide Web.)

How would you override a censored domain?

Get on-board with a network that does not filter it, or add the bare IP (Internet Protocol address) to your hosts following with the domain.tld. Typically, you don't need to do this, because well, it's already visible accordingly to your assisting (Domain) Name Servers.

There's also other routes, The Online Router network, among plenty of other proxy routes, but is that it? And is that the only way to override censorship?

This is a Hold-up! EVERYONE Move!

A large group of people could simply decide to hijack what part of the web there is, and branch their own network, at any given time. There's nothing anyone could do about it. because this is the anarchist system. People just happen to work together to bring what allows you to read this text.

It's all against the Law! (or could be)

However, if PIPA/SOPA were put into affect, we would never be able to have this universal approach to the Internet and World Wide Web. The Internet as a whole would not be able to receive the willfulness of information that is provided with it. People already work together to bring a synchronous network to you, that allows you to censor any part you want, at your local end.

Censoring at the global (national) level could cause serious damage. It could cause a lot of people who are not harming anything to be at fault. Damaging the structure of search engines, Internet service providers, web hosts, and in-general website operators. The Internet now, is an anarchist-democratic system.

If PIPA/SOPA: It would be in-reverse. Simple as. After reading all of this, which is a simple glance of the WWW/'net, I hope the loop has displayed the damage. No matter how universal, it could be against the law.

Thursday, January 19, 2012

A Letter to Occupy

I've been watching you, communicating with you, and giving my opinions where I think I should, but I don't feel I've made my point(s) as clear as they should be. Several times have I seen mistakes being made, some of any Occupy cannot help. There are however tons of mistakes that could be avoided.

Media attention is an important thing for a protest, or any type of political event. How else are people going to know about what you're doing? Stop turning it away, and stop trying to direct it in your manner - It'll never work. It's very important to have an update system, but it's not important that you have a team that manages this. While having media team to walk around the camps, broadcast feeds, etc it is indefinitely not important for you to try to spawn your own media agency.

News syndication is the most notable thing when dealing with material. Stop attempting to shut down these syndications. It's a bad thing if a news source or blog speaks bad about you, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to do this. You're still getting attention whether it's good or bad. I'm sure there's people out there that would willingly correct any errors, and report in a more unbiased state. Let the media ninjas and sharks do their jobs.

Take major action. Some Occupy have worked together to go to council meetings, file lawsuits, and much more. This just isn't a physical protest, but also a paper protest. Do both, not one - Else everything you're doing is a waste.

I'm not telling you to give your demands now, but it's evident at what people want. More jobs, more jobs within the U.S., bankers prosecuted, tax holes fixed, and so-on, but you really need to push this material to paper, too. It's not as if anything is failing with the protest, but paper, petitions, TV commercials, etc is all needed. If you want to fight the system, then use the system--it's already in-place.

While writing about it, calling some of the organizers, I notice that some of the Occupy organizers simply don't care to respond. Stop it! Respond to as many requests as you possibly can, or fix someone to do it for you. None-the-less, if one of the Occupy has a media team (that writes news, etc), then do so, and make sure you do plug other news sources (aka: syndication).

Occupy The Courts is already there, but what is going on? Let's get some information flying about, people contacted and outlets displayed.

Occupy Cincinnati has taken legal action, Occupy London has taken action, and there's others, but keep charging. It's winter, which makes it difficult, but it does not stop all forms of protesting. 

Next is the undeniable circus ring. Parading around doing nothing makes you look stupid. It does. Not the Fox News stupid, the you don't know what you're doing and wasting peoples' time stupid. Get some objectives together, and get to it. Not all of Occupy are circus rings. Occupy DC had a bad start, and while it's still touchy if it was a ploy to make ODC look bad, it still needs to be noted that is not how you treat the press[1], regardless of that press' bias.

These are just some things that I wanted to get off my chest, and have it here so I did not have to keep repeating it.


Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Anti-SOPA Recap

For January 18, 2012 many websites have participated  in the protest to oppose the Stop Online Piracy Act & Protect IP Act. The websites I've discovered are: Reddit, Imgur, Wikipedia, Google, HypeM, and there is probably thousands of others.

First up is Hype Machine. A music oriented website, that indexes music blogs. Many artists end up here, being discovered, shared, and sales generated. I can't speak directly for the sales, but I can imagine they pick up a heavy fan base. If SOPA was in-affect, this website would most likely not exist.

Next, Google. An arguably powerful search engine that has served billions of queries to billions of key strokes ('er, humans). The Google team wishes to index and display the web as it is, and not how we want it. Again, SOPA would destroy the structure of any search engine, not just Google's.

Wikipedia. A digital user-based encyclopedia. A free one at that. Used by millions, and edited by millions. Wikipedia serves pages about history, and current events, ranging multiple subjects. While they didn't pick out bits of the website to be blacked, they did lay-over a big notice. SOPA would be in huge conflict with the linkage.

GoDaddy, once siding with SOPA has changed their minds. They are now opposing it. If I could make a guess, I would say it is because they started losing some customers (money) over it, or benefit of the doubt they have realised how damaging the bill is.

NameCheap has been anti-SOPA.There's been several people I know that have been migrating their domains to NameCheap (affiliated) or another domain registrar of their choice.

The flip-side of SOPA, and cybertised protesting, other websites have not been promoting the Stop Online Piracy Act. Almost as if it's non-existent.

Yahoo, Microsoft, AOL, Twitter have not promoted any of SOPA, however SOPA is on the Trending list of Yahoo, as-well as various hashtags on Twitter.

People have been going on about this for a year or more, but in the last week it has been flared up consistently. This is good, due to the awareness it'll hopefully receive more bad attention, and shifted out for the already existent Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

Update, January 19, 2012: According to Ars Technica, eighteen senators now oppose PIPA.  Read more here:

Tuesday, January 17, 2012

Anti-SOPA Blackout Day

A few websites noted off hand will be participating in a blackout day (January 18, 2012), to publicly oppose the Stop Online Piracy Act. Websites include Reddit, Wikipedia, Imgur, and possibly others. If you know any, feel free to leave them in the comments. Journal Five will also be participating in the blackout.


Opposing SOPA is everyone's best interest. There's no reason a company should be able to single handedly, without court procedure shut down a website, or any portion of a website, or disconnect a user's privileges of a website for the purpose of self-interest. While there could be people flying around posting Copyright materials, it's best if the DMCA is used.

Stop Online Piracy Act simply complicates this, or more-so overlaps it. It's no one's fault the DMCA may be ignored, but from my understanding the majority of the time it is not, and those that receive it follow it accordingly.

YouTube, being arguably one of the most active and used video platforms on the web is at major stake for such a law. Even though YouTube may have the technology to monitor videos, review reports, etc, this does not mean they can do it exactly when a video is uploaded, and respond within ten minutes to every takedown notice.

To the more serious concerns of these bills, news sites may be at risk for their reporting. The way I see it, is the news agency will be at risk for losing their website for the material they report, because someone may not want something published -- Contradiction? That's what news reporting is supposed to be--following behind ethics.

further (this is a detailed explanation. I encourage you to read it) :