View From the Balcony - Writers Block

View From the Balcony

Writers Block

2006-02-17

As The Internet World Turns

I am going to wax philosophical this round. I have tons of ready material to post here that I could use. However, life and issues pop up that require a position sometimes, that cannot be avoided.

How many times have you heard these words uttered?

    Business is business. It is cut throat.
    In business making decisions, friends get hurt.

I can well imagine you can add a lot more to those two. But for the moment, they suit the times. Over that last few weeks a lot of people have experienced real time hurt for their dependency on HYIP programs that are coming back to bite them severely.

The blame game is in full swing and loads of bad decisions are being made on emotional responses that will cause further pain.

Business owners are concerned about 3rd party liability. Should they or should they not ban certain programs from their sites to protect their people and keep themselves out of harms way?

Then they raise the issue of who should be allowed to own a business online and what it should cost to prevent a lot of scams and bad programs from even getting started.

Next they so state the need for Government intervention to enforce this position.

Underlying all this concern, is the fear of redress from angry users should they take an unfavorable position.

It boggles the mind that there is so much concern over a choice between integrity and turning a blind eye to reasonable choice when it comes to their own business practices.

The fine line between integrity and the law has cropped up more than enough times in the past year to create a bitter taste in everyone's mouth

Why?

Back in June the FBI requested a list of URLs for certain search terms used to identify pornography on the net for the period of June and July. It requested these URLs from Microsoft, AOL, Yahoo and Google. All complied supplying aggregated query data (not search results) that did not include any personally identifiable information except for Google.

Google has stated that it is their intention to resist the request.

Who cares about filtering software's effectiveness, anyway?

The Bush administration's request, first reported by The San Jose Mercury News, is part of its attempts to defend the 1998 Child Online Protection Act, which is being challenged in court in Philadelphia by the American Civil Liberties Union. The ACLU says Web sites cannot realistically comply with COPA and that the law violates the right to freedom of speech mandated by the First Amendment.

What happens with Government intervention?

It may begin with the analysis of search engine logs to determine the prevalence of what is harmful to minors vs the effectiveness of content filters blocking pornography, but it can end with a lot more serious consequences to users than keyword search strings checking out on-site porn.

Are your search terms private? That is the question that can hang you big time if your online activities are questionable under the law. And Google being the largest search engine the whole world seeks too gain entry to, is probably the biggest aggregator of private information available to law enforcement and net users alike.

Do search engines collect far too much information about their users?

Google keeps log files that record search terms used, Web sites visited and the Internet Protocol address and browser type of the computer for every single search conducted through its Web site. It also sets cookies that can be used to correlate repeat visits to the company's growing network of Web sites. [Gmail users paying attention to this?]

Do we take their right to set cookies on our computers for granted so that we can use their tool bars to make our work easier? How many times have your spyware cleaners listed these tool bars as spyware and you smiled while you promptly exempted them as dangerous?

Will the First Amendment really protect your right to freedom of speech? Is it really even applicable in this case? It surely will not for Internet users who do not live in the United States.

So many questions, so many genuine concerns as to where information on the Internet is heading and so many questions as to how this aggregated information can affect you.

And my genuine concern. Will allowing Government intervention to solve one issue stop there or will we all pay the piper for even suggesting such a solution?

by Fran Klasinski
http://www.kwalitydesigned4success.com
copyright © Fran Klasinski All rights Reserved

TAGS: search,AOL.MSN,Google,federal government,information

Posted at 10:01:11 PM | Post Comment | Read Comments (1)

Comment posted by gweiss at 2006-02-18 01:47:27

Your concern is mine as well, Fran. I've yet to see it proven where Government intervention has furthered any Constitutionally-mandated issue, such as the First Amendment and freedom of speech. I daresay, quite the opposite is the case.

And, as you point out, Internet users who do not live in the United States do not have that protection.

I do believe that search engines collect far too much information about their users and I think it's clear with the recent FBI requests of Microsoft, AOL, Yahoo and Google, that the aggregated information will NOT remain confidential.

Shouldn't search users, as in taped conversations, then be informed that this information is being recorded and can be used against them to incriminate themselves?

This being the case, maybe search users would think twice before using such search engines asMicrosoft, AOL, and Yahoo; and Google, not being so quick to hand over this aggregated information, would remain the top choice of Internet users when searching the web.

Gina Weiss
GAnetlink.com

Page content ©2005-2007 Fran Klasinski