Barbarians at the gates and the world economic crisis

Barbarians at the Gate: The Fall of RJR Nabisco ?is a book that might have been written in present times instead – as it was – of the ’90s. The well documented (and very well written) account of the biggest leveraged buy out Wall Street had dreamed ever is a detailed explanation of how the financial system started ruining the “real economy” after 1987 black monday crisis. Although this book is slightly out-of-the-scope for this blog, I nevertheless suggest to give it a try. A lot of things that happens in the ICT world might all of a sudden make sense…

Only a journalist can run a website in Italy?

On May, 8 2008 the Court of Modica (Sicily) ruled that a website identified by a “heading” and publishing contents on a periodic basis is subjected to the regulation of newspapers or magazines and – in general – or in ? press.

The result is that an anti-mafia webmaster has been indicted for committing the crime of “clandestine publication” because he didn’t request the Tribunal’s authorisation to publish his site www.accadeinsicilia.net.

The “Catch 22” comes because to obtain this authorisation, this webmaster should have been a journalist, member of the national journalist association or the permit wouldn’t be granted. Then, nobody but a journalist can run a website, because nobody but a journalist can obtain the Court registration.

The legal paradox is a consequence of the fact that, before the internet came, publisihing a newspaper meant investing huge money in equipment, people, distribution etc. Thus it was easy for ? “power” to control the press with a series of adminstrative burdens. Now, with the free availability of content management system like WordPress, and the low cost of internet-based services, ? publishing a magazine is absolutely affordable. So the “power” – namely, Law 62/01 – tried in a very messy way to reassert its control over the information flow.

It is simply a nonsense affirm that since a website has a “heading” and publishes daily information, then it is a newspaper. Following this line of reasoning, it is enough – to not infringe the law – to “restrain” from publishing on due dates… Killing free speech starts from here.

Apple’s “Misprint” get-a-mac ad actually misleading?

A few days ago Apple released a new “get-a-mac” ad titled “Misprint” where the characters argue about – a statement published by PC WORLD – Mac being the fastest notebook they tried to run Windows Vista. The PC guy call the publisher to complain about the statement claiming that it is not possible that a Mac would run Vista faster then a PC.

This ad seems misleading for a series of factors:

  1. From an hardware standpoint, a Mac IS a PC,
  2. The difference between a Mac and a PC is the operating system,
  3. PC WORLD statement is relative (Mac is the fastes among the notebook we tested); thus no generalization can be inferred ? (or suggested).

I don’t think Apple – or its advertising agency – should play this kind of tricks. A Mac is good enough to speak for himself.

Do we need an Internet Bill of Rights?

During the Internet Governance Forum Italian meeting (Rome, Sept. 27 07) Stefano Rodotà (former Italian Data Protection Commissioner) and Fiorello Cortiana (former Senate member) strongly supported the need of an “Internet Bill of Rights” (IBR) as tool to protect netizen’s free speech, privacy and other human rights. Is this a good idea?

The answer – as ALCEI pointed out during the same meeting – is no.

Continue reading “Do we need an Internet Bill of Rights?”

A comment on Skype’s outage-related official statement

So, at the end of the day, Skype explained the reason for the outage that broke its P2P network. To make a long story short, the point is that Skype relies upon a closed source approach (that slows the bug finding process) and on Microsoft technologies that, in that specific case, create the problem. This reinforces my early assumption, that crash cause was Skype design instead of a unpredictable problem. It simply unacceptable that an outage of that dimension has been provoked by the inability of an operating system to patches itself without always rebooting. And who did that choice should account for it.

Right, Skype is very clear in repeating that Microsoft has nothing to do with the Big Crash. Nevertheless, it raises some suspect, to me, reading statement such as: “The Microsoft Update patches were merely a catalyst – a trigger – for a series of events that led to the disruption of Skype, not the root cause of it.” or “Microsoft has been very helpful and supportive throughout.” or, again, ? “In short – there was nothing different about this set of Microsoft patches.”, “The Microsoft team was fantastic to work with”. But this PR stuff doesn’t change the basic stuff: Skype is the next component of a “vulnerable society”, where problems, risks and damages are created mainly by the ICT companies – instead of the “dangerous criminals” that fall under than unspecified label of ? “hackers”.