Here's two tech stories from this week, one you have undoubtedly seen unless you've been in a media cave for the last week.
Let's start with the other one... the UAR is looking at banning Blackberrieson security grounds. Since the data is stored out-of-country (Blackberry's parent RIM is based in Canada), it makes it hard for the authorities to censor things that disrupt their worldview. There could easily be a split on that issue within the UAE, as relatively free-wheeling Dubai might not want to have PDAs put under the control of the morals police or other regulatory body.
The UAE isn't the first to be nervous about that; the French banned Crackberries from their defense ministry a few years back, possibly as a way for then-new president Sarkozy to look anti-Anglo-Saxon after running as a pro-American guy.
Would you want your data under government supervision?
For the civil libertarians out there (or righties who trust the Obama team as far as you can throw them) that said "No" to that, may I present the other big tech story of the week, Wikileaks. A free Internet with pockets with light regulation will have renegade sites on any number of issues, whether it be jihadi sites, purdy dirty pick-ture sites, Napster 2.0 sites and the one from our friendly Aussie leftist who wants to tweak the nose of the Not-Quite-New World Order.
The current Afghani data-dump is a mixed bag, with some possible dirty laundry from the US side coupled with confirmation that the Pakistani ISI is playing both sides of the fence with the Taliban; the ISI has been strongly rumored to be a long-standing backer of the Taliban but had to be seen as fighting them when being pro-Taliban became toxic as of 9/12/01. The Obama team is making the right noises about security leaks, but since the material was '08 and back, they can say that that was then (with the bad Bushies in charge) and not now.
When you have a free Internet, with data that can move from server to server and country to country (I started this post at home, draft-saved it, then am finishing it at the library while Eileen browses), information has a way of getting free, especially if there is a political or economic reason for having it become unfettered. When the data can be shepherded out of the country in milliseconds, governments have little power to suppress runaway information.
This Wikileaks story is oft compared to the Pentagon Papers of the Vietnam War era; back then, the Nixon team tried to keep the NYT and WaPo from publishing the unflattering info. That was technically doable (but unconstitutional per the Supreme Court) at the time. However, with Wikileaks setting up server shop in Sweden, the horse is out of the barn and out of the country before the powers that be knew about it.
Security hawks would like to string up the Wikileaks people along with their abettors at the NYT and other newspapers in on the story. There is most likely some espionage charges that can be brought, but the horse is out of the barn; if Mr. Wikileaks is arrested, someone else will pick up the mantle in short order. That's the nature of the Internet and modern politics.
Recent Comments