Comments on: Virgin kills Virgin Killer http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/ Just another WordPress weblog Thu, 15 Jul 2010 00:32:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: sampablokuper http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-419 sampablokuper Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:34:56 +0000 http://www.sampablokuper.com/blog/?p=194#comment-419 <p><a href="http://www.lightbluetouchpaper.org/2009/02/17/technical-aspects-of-the-censoring-of-archiveorg/" rel="nofollow">Richard Clayton's analysis</a> of the way the IWF has been blacklisting <a href="http://archive.org" rel="nofollow">the Internet Archive</a> is also illuminating.</p> Richard Clayton’s analysis of the way the IWF has been blacklisting the Internet Archive is also illuminating.

]]> By: sampablokuper http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-274 sampablokuper Wed, 11 Feb 2009 23:56:20 +0000 http://www.sampablokuper.com/blog/?p=194#comment-274 <p>I quite like <a href="http://www.mattwardman.com/blog/2008/12/09/privatised-censorship-and-the-internet-watch-foundation-uk-child-protection-law-problems/" rel="nofollow">Matt Wardman's analysis</a> of the shifting terminology the IWF employs to describe its activities.</p> I quite like Matt Wardman’s analysis of the shifting terminology the IWF employs to describe its activities.

]]> By: sampablokuper http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-117 sampablokuper Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:48:55 +0000 http://www.sampablokuper.com/blog/?p=194#comment-117 <p>I'm pleased to see that the <a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/12/15/lessons-and-questions-for-the-iwf/" rel="nofollow">Open Rights Group</a> also advocates reform.</p> I’m pleased to see that the Open Rights Group also advocates reform.

]]> By: Cognitive Conga » Blog Archive » Virgin Killer killer killed? http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-44 Cognitive Conga » Blog Archive » Virgin Killer killer killed? Thu, 11 Dec 2008 02:04:54 +0000 http://www.sampablokuper.com/blog/?p=194#comment-44 <p>[...] couple of days ago, I blogged about the fact that my internet connection was being censored. A spokeswoman of the Internet Watch Foundation, which was, along with my ISP, responsible for the [...]</p> [...] couple of days ago, I blogged about the fact that my internet connection was being censored. A spokeswoman of the Internet Watch Foundation, which was, along with my ISP, responsible for the [...]

]]> By: Pretzels http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Pretzels Wed, 10 Dec 2008 16:19:05 +0000 http://www.sampablokuper.com/blog/?p=194#comment-43 <p>This is a good read, and it was very interesting to see Robertson's replies to your phone questions.</p> This is a good read, and it was very interesting to see Robertson’s replies to your phone questions.

]]> By: David Hayes http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-42 David Hayes Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:09:29 +0000 http://www.sampablokuper.com/blog/?p=194#comment-42 <p>An interesting slant on this story. Critically, the IWF should be blocking illegal content.</p> <p>URL != Static Content</p> <p>This is especially in the case of wikipedia! Blocking a URL is inevitably a pointless exercise, as people can create new URL's, or change the content delivered by requesting from a URL. Further, the content delivered from a URL request can be shaped by the server, based upon any factor the server decides (such as pseudo-geographic location of the client). Maybe someone should create a new article on the wikipedia, hosting the offending image, then notify the IWF, add a new image with a different name but same content, then notify the IWF, then... repeat ad-infinitum.</p> An interesting slant on this story. Critically, the IWF should be blocking illegal content.

URL != Static Content

This is especially in the case of wikipedia! Blocking a URL is inevitably a pointless exercise, as people can create new URL’s, or change the content delivered by requesting from a URL. Further, the content delivered from a URL request can be shaped by the server, based upon any factor the server decides (such as pseudo-geographic location of the client). Maybe someone should create a new article on the wikipedia, hosting the offending image, then notify the IWF, add a new image with a different name but same content, then notify the IWF, then… repeat ad-infinitum.

]]> By: Nick Seeber http://www.sampablokuper.com/2008/12/09/virgin-kills-virgin-killer/comment-page-1/#comment-41 Nick Seeber Tue, 09 Dec 2008 15:15:24 +0000 http://www.sampablokuper.com/blog/?p=194#comment-41 <p>Great article, Sam.</p> Great article, Sam.

]]>