I was happy to see an article on CNet that suggests that the original Phase I portion of the building will be preserved under a new plan.
Today just seems to be a day that the press is looking at the issue of blocking internet content.
Warren Kinsella writes in The National Post that Canada needs a better net nanny.
Last time anyone checked, making a death threat against a person was, indeed, an indictable criminal offence. So why would the CRTC even pause, for a moment, to impose a less-burdensome penalty — and when it has the clear mandate and power to do so?
Last month, we didn’t even ask the CRTC to order blocking. All we asked for was for the CRTC to permit ISPs that volunarily wanted to. We didn’t ask for a general framework. We looked at two specific sites.
Under the program, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children will confirm the presence of illegal images on reported sites and provide Web addresses and related information to internet service providers. The ISPs will take down such sites if they are based on their systems or will block their subscribers’ access using filters.
And in Canada?
Technorati Tags:
Illegal Content
I have been continuing to think about the expedited process that the CRTC is following to review its Local Forbearance Decision.
Following up on my Sunday blog posting, with some prodding I noticed that the CRTC only directed interrogatories to handful of VoIP resellers including Comwave, Cybersurf, Primus, Yak and Vonage. Why these service providers and none of the rest?
There are many, many more VoIP service providers.
It isn’t as though these are the only ones that the CRTC knows about. After all, the Commission has been notified by other providers subsequent to another proceeding that was looking at the customer notification requirements associated with 911 for VoIP.
Will the CRTC have enough data on the state of the market if it doesn’t even ask for input from the dozens of service providers it knows about, let alone the service providers that aren’t registered in any way? How will it know who the major players are, if it doesn’t even ask the question?
At AT&T; in the mid 80’s, we were already competing for business and residential customers. A product development work force composed exclusively of white males was simply not going to be as effective as a design team more reflective of the marketplace. Employment equity was more than just the right thing to do from a legal perspective; employment equity was good business.
Unfortunately, recent data indicates that engineering and technology disciplines have again fallen out of favour among some affected classes and are not producing sufficiently diverse candidates for employment.
At a meeting this past Monday, the comments of participants were off the record. For that reason, I won’t attribute the following, unless I get permission to the contrary. Let me simply note that one of the telecom technology companies indicated that they were working in the lower grades to try to stimulate the pool of students interested in Math, Science and Engineering. Other companies have similar initiatives.
This morning, the Ontario Science Centre is opening TELUSCAPE, a new outdoor exploration plaza. “Where trees light up, a fountain plays music and windmills create colour. Where visitors are encouraged to question everything.”
Let’s hope that these acts of corporate citizenship stimulate a new pool of kids to ask good questions and join the search for answers as they get older.
It’s not just the right thing to do. It’s good for business.
Technorati Tags:
TELUS, Bell Labs, Ontario Science Centre, TELUSCAPE, Mark Goldberg