|
Questions
posed: What are your feelings on state regulation of the internet?
Should the State protect against computer virus threats and hacking
and other national security threats? While
I really do not have a clear cut answer to your questions I still
find myself leaning in one direction more than the other. I might
be more liberal right now with my views toward Internet security.
In one of my classes last year we covered how the Internet has
opened new doors to make money, like the market over the Internet.
We did discuss the implications of the state involving itself
in the market, I totally disagree with that. I think the only
way a state should involve itself in regulating the Internet is
in specific cases where viruses may affect large numbers of people
and destroy computers or people’s ability to use them. So
right now, for the most part, I believe the state should keep
out of regulating the Internet. I do not know how the government
here could regulate anything over the Internet fairly, it’s
too big.
|
|
Hugh
Milward from the Internet Society of England The
benefits of this information to protecting national security should
be clearly demonstrated. So far, the Government is working on
the basis that it believes that data retention rules are essential
for maintaining national security. However, ISOC England would
like to be convinced of the benefits of data retention. Due to
the ability of criminal elements of society to avoid the UK’s
jurisdiction by using, for example, international ISPs, web-based
email accounts and satellite telephones to cover paths, we are
not convinced that the type of information required will have
any real affect on national security.
Many data producers such as individuals, children on gaming networks,
writers’ circles and small trades businesses who operate
using emerging club based city wireless networks will find that
data retention provisions are simply not feasible to implement.
|