Re: Content blocking - Singapore seems to manage??

["Marcus J. Ranum" <mjr () nfr net>]

> Have been looking at Singapore's SBA pages - and they don't report any
> trouble at all.  They say they've not charged ANYONE, cost hasn't risen,
> efficiency hasn't been lost, and business is booming.
>
> Is it naieve to believe this?

And there are no gays in the U.S. military, marijuana is unavailable,
and nobody under the legal drinking age can obtain alcohol in the U.S.
Nobody exceeds the speed limit, and nobody jaywalks.

;)

One of the problems with content blocking is handling violations.
I suspect the easiest way to handle them is never to see them in
the first place. ;) As I said in my previous message, a lot of
companies have _existing_ policies that would cover online
"objectionable material" -- they ask for technologies to block
it at the firewall yet, at the _same_ time, they have firewall
logs that show without reasonable doubt who the offenders are
already. Why not just deal with them directly? Oh, no, that would
cause too much conflict...   In fairness it's because it puts
the network manager in a position of having to do H.R.'s job,
which is kind of ridiculous. But then the whole idea of preventing
communication over a communication channel is kind of ridiculous.
The whole problem is basically unsolvable, so throwing technology
at it just makes it complicated and basically unsolvable.

If you don't actually try to enforce your policy, I guess that
violations aren't a problem! My impression of many nations' laws
is that they are on the books so you have something to throw at
_flagrant_ violators if they make a nuisance. That's what I think
most H.R. policies about "objectionable content" also are there
for. You need something to point at when you decide to shut
someone down because they've finally irritated someone enough
to warrant it. My impression of Singapore is that a lot of the
laws work that way: they are there to throw at you if you become
a pest. For example, publishing magazines, etc, is regulated. But
there's no regulation of ownership of high-output laser printers
or copiers. The laws exists so you can "grease" the occasional
"squeaky wheel." It actually makes _sense_ to run a country or a
company in this manner. It fails when the people running the
country or the company lack sense. Which argues for a benevolent
dictatorship / benevolent totalitarian regime.

mjr.
--
Marcus J. Ranum, CEO, Network Flight Recorder, Inc.
work - http://www.nfr.net
home - http://www.clark.net/pub/mjr