Tagged: China Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • joly 6:29 pm on 12/31/2017 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: China, , MWC   

    WEBCAST TODAY: @InternetSociety CEO @KathrynCBrown keynote at MWC Shanghai #ShapeTomorrow #CommunityNetworks #mwcs 

    lOn 29 June 2017, Internet Society President and CEO Kathy Brown gave a keynote speech at the “Society and the Human Element” panel at the Mobile World Congress in Shanghai. She talked about the role of the telecom industry in achieving the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 9, in particular by enabling Community Networks in underserved areas. The speech will be webcast at 7pm EST (00:00 UTC) today December 31 2017 on the Internet Society Livestream Channel.

     

     

    View on Livestream: https://livestream.com/internetsociety/mwcs17
    Twitter: @KathrynCBrown https://twitter.com/KathrynCBrown

     
  • joly 6:37 pm on 01/15/2015 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , China, ,   

    VIDEO: The Great Firewall Inverts – @n8fr8 @berkmancenter #privacy #security 

    Berkman CenterOn January 13, 2014 the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University presented a talk – The Great Firewall Inverts – saying:

    The world is witnessing a massive expansion of Chinese telecommunications reach and influence, powered entirely by users choosing to participate in it. In Usage of the mobile messaging app WeChat (微信 Weixin), for example, has skyrocketed not only inside China, but outside, as well. Due to these systems being built upon proprietary protocols and software, their inner workings are largely opaque and mostly insecure. (WeChat has full permission to activate microphones and cameras, track GPS, access user contacts and photos, and copy all of this data at any time to their servers.)

    In this talk, Nathan Freitas — Berkman Fellow, director of technology strategy and training at the Tibet Action Institute. and leader of the Guardian Project — questions the risks to privacy and security foreign users engage in when adopting apps from Chinese companies. Do the Chinese companies behind these services have any market incentive or legal obligation to protect the privacy of their non-Chinese global userbase? Do they willingly or automatically turn over all data to the Ministry of Public Security or State Internet Information Office? Will we soon see foreign users targeted or prosecuted due to “private” data shared on WeChat? And is there any fundamental difference in the impact on privacy freedom for an American citizen using WeChat versus a Chinese citizen using WhatsApp or Google?

    Video is below:

    Watch on YouTube: http://youtu.be/KEJGqNf2rgk
    Transcribe on AMARA: http://amara.org/en/videos/QXtvLEbkPhRP/
    Download video: http://wilkins.law.harvard.edu/events/luncheons/2015-01-13_frietas/2015-01-13_frietas853.mov
    Download audio: http://wilkins.law.harvard.edu/events/luncheons/2015-01-13_frietas/2015-01-13_frietas.mp3
    Twitter: @berkmancenter + Firewall

     
  • joly 12:38 pm on 12/18/2009 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , China, , metering, Olivier,   

    Comments on purported Chinese Internet Metering Plan 

    Olivier of ISOC-England writes:

    Very interesting article on the BBC:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/8417680.stm

    My own views on this article is that there appears to be a gross misunderstanding by many people of how the Internet works, and I am trying to find out in this instance, who’s more guilty of this misunderstanding, whether it is “China”, the gentleman from the European Commission, the ITU, or the BBC.

    Yes, in some cases, the Internet works with peering agreements allowing for flow of traffic from backbone provider to backbone provider. But this is not the case for every Internet Service Provider out there.
    “Pendants”, ie. networks connected to the rest of the network through a single link, sometimes pay to get connected to the Internet backbone, with no “discount” whatsoever. This has always been the case, and it is therefore entirely possible that an end user gets charged according to the amount of traffic they send and receive. The great thing about the Internet is that charging models at the edge of the network (customer access points etc.) can be whatever you design them to be. Of course, you can’t charge on a per destination basis, but that’s the whole point of the Internet.

    The use of the word “Borders” in the article is even more confusing: “China wants to meter all internet traffic that passes through its borders”, ie. into/out of the country, and there is allusion to the “Border Gateway Protocol – BGP”. What an amalgamation! These two, I’m afraid, are completely unrelated.

    Also, the paragraph “It would allow countries which currently receive no payment for use of their lines to generate income.” is completely misleading too. Short of a few insane volunteers like us lot, I have never heard of an actual “country”, (1) being in the business of owning and running telecommunications lines, and (2) doing it for free.

    Finally, I find it… amusing, for lack of better fitting word, to see that the ITU, an organisation which has brilliantly excelled in its absence of involvement in the development of the Internet, is purported as being “the UN body in charge of internet standards”.

    Is the ITU trying to introduce a PSTN-era monopoly telecom control? Shall we all turn back our clocks 30 years?

    Red herring or serious political move? I wonder if any of you have sources which could validate this article, and whether the perceived threat is real or grossly inflated?
    Bonus question: if metering Internet access in this way, how will economic growth be impacted in Western Economies when their digital economy plans collapse?

    Warmest regards,

    Olivier


    Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
    http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

     
c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel