Quote:
Originally Posted by AndyCalling
No, it doesn't. A white list internet requires staff in massive amounts, which won't happen. It will also result in an embarrasing number of hackers and a cyber warfare savvy generation. Nasty. It can only be black list and the game becomes, can the internet generate bad sites faster than we can hire staff? The answer in China may be no (though I doubt it). The answer in the UK is certainly yes. High profile sites may be taken down as a show of strength. That is all though. It'll move too fast for a system like that.
What they want to trigger by shows of strength and state backing is a cultural change. Away from tape-to-tape thinking and into coin-op-arcade thinking. This is an essential misunderstanding of the human experience though. We like buying nice new things with our pennys. We also like copying our mates' tapes. I personally have an account with a music purchasing service I like and buy straight off my radio. I also have some CDs. I also have some mix tapes and some MP3s from mates. Like most folk. People don't see an either/or situation here, but corporate fear of one extreme leads them to over promote the other. They think that adds no risk to them, but I think it leads to things like 'Amazing Radio'. Watch out big business. Once Youview gets going it's only a matter of time until 'Amazing Video' comes along. And not a lot of time either.
The encryption is necessary because of the new proposed phone/internet tapping laws. Basically, it won't just be Rupert Murdoch we have to worry about, the local council will be at it as well (you know they will in the end...).
|
Its evident so far they dont care about the cost of implementation.
I expect a whitelist internet would be managed by a central provided whitelist aka IWF style. So isp's wouldnt individually manage whitelists.
The barrier isnt cost its public acceptance.