May 06, 2009

It's time to say 'no' to cybernannies

Apple's move to add parental controls to iPhone 3G instead of censoring developers is a win for free speech -- now if we could only get Google and Congress to wise up

Denial-of-service attacks are a threat to the Web. Viruses are a threat, and uncontrolled spam is a threat. But dirty words? Ridiculous. It looks like Apple is going to do the adult thing and add parental controls to iPhone 3.0 and stop censoring prospective applications on the App Store.

That's good news for freedom of speech. Apple has engaged in egregious censorship, even forcing a writer to tone down a novel he wanted to sell as an e-book. But every time you boot your computer, someone else decides to play nanny. You'd think the average Web user is a sensitive plant, ready to wilt at the slightest shock. Now Google and Congress are getting into the act. Enough already.

[ Looking to develop your own mobile apps? Find out how in InfoWorld's developer's-eye view of smartphone platforms. ]

Watch what you say
Sure, some of the remedies are well intentioned. You may remember the ugly MySpace bullying case that led to the suicide of 13-year-old Megan Meier. I have zero sympathy for the woman who taunted and humiliated an innocent child, and I'm glad she's going to do some jail time.

But passing a vaguely worded law to crack down on something called "cyberbullying" is, well, stupid -- and probably unconstitutional. You'd think that after eight years of watching the constitution shredded by the Bushies, Congress would think twice about abridging the First Amendment. But wave the banner of protecting our children, and common sense immediately takes a hike.

The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act (introduced by Linda Sanchez, D-Calif.) makes it a felony, carrying a two-year prison sentence and a hefty fine, to post or electronically transmit information "with the intent to coerce, intimidate, harass, or cause substantial emotional distress to a person ... to support severe, repeated, and hostile behavior."

What does that mean? It sounds like hurting someone's feeling is now against the law. Was I a committing a felony when I repeatedly called IBM CEO Sam Palmisano a bozo and a slumdog millionaire in this blog? Much more significantly, what about a journalist or a citizen who uses the Web to beat on the bad behavior of a public official?

additional resources
White Paper - How to Improve Delivery of Advanced Web Applications

White Paper

Virtual Workforce: The Key to Expanding The Business While Cutting Costs

Get the independent advice and expertise you need to support a virtual workforce.

Go inside:
The three-step approach to making a virtual workforce a reality.
The four flavors of client virtualization technologies.
The three key initiatives that solve IT challenges.
Download now »
White Paper: Successfully Secure Your Wireless LAN With Wi-Fi firewalls.

White Paper

Addressing Linux Threats Leveraging Fewer Resources

The increase in Linux popularity has increased the frequency and sophistication of malware attacks. Read this 2 page white paper now to learn how you can protect your Linux environment with real-time protection that is certified by all major Linux vendors.

Download now »
White Paper - The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

White Paper

The 2009 Handbook of Application Delivery

Ensuring acceptable application delivery will become even more difficult over the next few years. As a result, IT organizations need to ensure that the approach that they take to resolving the current application delivery challenges can scale to support the emerging challenges. This handbook elaborates on the key tasks associated with planning, optimization, management and control and provides decision criteria to help IT organizations choose appropriate solutions.

Download now »
White Paper - Is Your Backup System Outdated?

White Paper

Mid-range Storage Considerations

A common misconception is that mid-range storage requirements are dramatically different than that of a larger enterprise. Mid-range storage users may require less capacity, but they have similar functionality and management requirements. This ESG paper examines mid-range storage needs and reviews a new solution that adjusts size while retaining value, performance and functionality.

Download now »
skiddycajun 7-May-09 10:17am
2 replies

I stopped reading after the word "Bushies." Totally unprofessional, and inappropriate in an article like this.

Move on, Bill, and seek to elevate discourse here, not drag it back an administration . . . regardless of your feelings on them (which we all now know).

tcapun 7-May-09 3:33pm
Just because you are obviously a republican, skiddy, doesn't mean you can bury the effects of 7 years of bastardizing the U.S. constitution. Under the guise of fighting country-less individuals who are admittedly and measurably insane, we have allowed the last bushwhacking administration to "legally" trash all inalienable rights to personal freedom, private property and speech in America. If you don't think so, go tell the president or any senator, representative or govenor, what you think of their policies at one of their assemblies, and then enjoy the shock of guilty until proven innocent. If you're rich, skiddy, you may even avoid Guantanamo, unless you threaten a stewardess, then you're Bruce's Date.
MAS 8-May-09 7:19am
1 reply
I have to agree with skidycajun! Besides, congress deserves much of the blame. Bush couldn't do it without their nod. Also, Pelosi did little to change things when she became Speaker. Let's keep the politics of of the previous administration out of it. The "Bushies" had little to do with Apple's policies.
tomaddox 11-May-09 10:13am
1 reply
Yes, the Republic Congress, which was in power for 6 of the 8 years of the Bush administration, does deserve much of the blame. Additionally, the Democratic Congress had little capability to change those policies, since it was unable to override Bush's veto.
tomaddox 11-May-09 10:14am
Er, Republican Congress.
y2kjohnson 7-May-09 10:34am
1 reply
I totally agree with skiddycajun. Get over it. Your guy is in power now, deal with it! Life must be meaningless for you without someone to blame.
tcapun 7-May-09 3:34pm
1 reply
any more die hard republicans care to weigh in?
tomaddox 11-May-09 10:16am
Yes, allow me to sum up the Republican talking points: * Teleprompters * Oh noes, teh socialism! * Obama wants our guns! * Secrit muslin That should about cover it.
dpguice 7-May-09 10:42am
Bill the problem with the rabid left is that even when you have won you still need to find someone to bash! Get a life and try showing us why your ideas are better, oh wait thats why you have to bash Bush you don't have any better ideas just the same old ones!
DKrause 7-May-09 10:43am
1 reply
I too stopped reading after the "Bushies" comment, it's time for you to do a little research. Your Obama is attempting to do far more damage to the constitution than the "Bushies" ever did.
tcapun 7-May-09 3:44pm
Oh, come ON! Obama isn't doing anything to the constitution. He's just helping the rich steal from the taxpayers, under the guise of bailing out our "wretched" economy and saving the precious overpaid jobs of "union workers". Nothing wrong with AVARICE. It would be a corporate name if we weren't so moralistic. So, we use Coke and GM instead. Besides, corporations were and are granted their entire existence by us, the citizens of the world. And, just in case you get sick of their travesty, you can legally change them, just like Obama did. Of course, I don't trust his Socialistic motives, but then that's apparently, only me in a brave new world.
rdhalste 7-May-09 11:47am
I believe most who use computers, surf the Net, or just send e-mails start clicking through these pop up warnings after about the 4th or 5th time. I'm including Vista's pop ups as well. After 4 or 5 times people don't even bother to read them and I'm including professionals such as myself. Sure there are a few who do, but it's human nature to start ignoring repeated warnings that prove to be false in short order. Our leadership be they from Red or Blue states, is as clueless when it comes to the cyber world as are most computer users. They prove it by trying to legislate common sense while using little. The problem today is most readers can not get past any statement that may have political overtones when each side is as bad as the other. Now I believe most readers have become so politically polarized they are easily offended by any political remark with which they don't agree and stop reading at that point and miss the gist of an article.Our citizens are becoming as polarized as the government.
llarzelere 7-May-09 12:14pm
Ever since I first joined the schoolyard in the 1960's, I have felt that the only appropriate place for a bully was in a shallow grave at the edge of town. Technology changed, but a bully is a bully. Put a few of these self-entitled little brats behind bars until they are 18, and it may send a message: Teasing and bullying have no appropriate place in society.
fishersystems 7-May-09 12:40pm
2 replies
It's possible that Bill's use of the word "Bushies" was out of line. I'm sure that if an apology were to keep the dialog going he would make one. I can't apologize for him, obviously, but I'm truly sorry that encountering such a term would prompt people to stop reading. When I encounter terms like "left-leaning liberal" (which I would dispute) I will keep reading in case the person actually has something important to say. For the record I and a lot of people like me are alarmed at some of the decisions made by the Obama administration and you can be sure that we are and will be fighting them just as hard as we did the Bush violations. Regarding the content of Bill's post, I thought it was a well balanced analysis of the cybercensorship issue. This is a very dangerous area to be mucking around in, and I think that the place for controls is at the receiving end. There are several very effective software packages that allow parental control and I would suggest that any concerned parent learn what is available and install what is appropriate for their situation. Regarding us adults, I believe we have the right to say what we think and hear what we want. We already have laws protecting children from sexual predators, and we should be using these laws to shut down child porn. I have to say that anything else -- no matter how personally objectionable to me -- should be allowed.
tcapun 7-May-09 4:05pm
re: "Regarding us adults, I believe we have the right to say what we think and hear what we want." _____________ Oh, how I wish that were true, but you already know it's not, Mr. fisher. In fact, from the tone of your opening effort to apologize for some one else, I'm guessing that you've been bullied, successfully. ____ I apologize for your apology. ____ No one is harmed by words but rather by their belief in the truth of them. ____ It is that belief that is the problem.
Bill Snyder 7-May-09 11:04pm
1 reply
If I were going to write this again, I'd leave out "Bushies," since it obviously muddied the waters. Consider me taken to task.
quadir 9-May-09 7:29am
You should have left out Saudi, China too.
hoohah 7-May-09 2:59pm
This bill will never make it out of committee as it's currently worded-- sending a copy over to the folks at ACA International should easily get it hammered to pulp since making coercive telephone calls illegal would quickly put them out of business.
tcapun 7-May-09 3:52pm
re: "or cause substantial emotional distress to a person .." ____ ANY law that would contain such a phrase is automatically the fine artwork of lawyers and insane psychiatrists. One person's "substantial" is another person's "provacative" and another's "BORING!". ____ There is no equivocacy in human emotions. Just watch television. You are bored by some programs and elated by others or not at all. ___ This is another one of those Lawyer Gotchas like "beyond a reasonable doubt" that will ensure Billions of dollars and hours for them for a hundred years to come. ___ If you don't want krap in your life, start by not sitting in it. ___ Seen any Jerry Springer episode? Which one of those players could have not been emotionally distraught, if they had only walked away?
quadir 9-May-09 7:26am
Does Freedom of speech give you or anyone the right to slander without repercussions? Saudi Arabia and China have their own restricted version of freedom of speech, because they have a different way of life and values, and this sometimes restricts basic freedoms and leads to injustice. But aren't basic rights trampled in US too (Patriot Act)? Americans who value freedom and diversity in their own country should acknowledge other country's values and lifestyle. As foreign companies in US must obey US law, so too US companies (eg. Google) operating in Saudi Arabia, China, India etc. should obey their laws respectively. Looks like you are advocating a supremacist attitude that Americans and American companies need not respect other countries' laws or cultures if they are different.

Sign up to receive InfoWorld Resource Alerts

Subscribe to the Today's Headlines: First Look Newsletter

Find out what will be news for the day, with our first-thing-in-the-morning briefing.

©1994-2010 Infoworld, Inc.