"Mayor of Boston bans the DEA's website"

[madrchsod]

"MIT student David Sheets has been delving into the censorship software used by the Mayor of Boston to restrict access to the city's free WiFi network. It's incredibly badly designed and configured -- as David says, "The engineers or systems administrators who chose and implemented this system should be fired and Mayor Menino should think long and hard about his stance on free speech....

Disturbingly, I could not access many government web sites that inform me of my rights and responsibilities as a citizen, the punishments for various crimes, or available government services. I attempted to access both the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and the Drug Enforcement Agency and was denied access. I could not read about drug crime penalties or how different substances are controlled. I was denied access to information about what law enforcement officers can and cannot demand of me and what the government does to protect children from abuse."

from-- http://www.boingboing.net/2007/04/23/mayor_of_boston_bans.html

link-- http://web.mit.edu/dsheets/www/bostonwifi/

[MADem]

1. Well, it's a "pilot program" nu? This guy should send his feedback to whoever is running it

And we know it ain't Tom Menino himself, I mean...really. Clearly, their filtering software is crappy, and they're trying to make it match the libraries, or something on those lines. It's fine to publish the complaints, but it would also be good to send them up the chain officially and ask for some correction formally.

Conclusion
From a technical standpoint, the stupidly simplistic the artificial "intelligence" algorithms used to censor content are beyond sad. After over a decade of work on spam detection, the fact that a system like this has been implemented is beyond reproach. The engineers or systems administrators who chose and implemented this system should be fired and Mayor Menino should think long and hard about his stance on free speech.

I have shown that a great number of sites are miscategorized by the filtering software and rules in place at Boston's public wi-fi pilot. This censorship is completely unacceptable and, although I am not a lawyer, I believe it constitutes illegal government control of speech or the press. I find it absolutely despicable that public funds are being used to provide this crippled service in the shadow of one of our nation's greatest landmarks representing our common ideals of liberty and justice. Furthermore, it is painfully ironic that this page will now most likely be inaccessible from the hotspot due to the presence of certain phrases such as "crack cocaine". Not only is the filtering software censoring speech in general but when one tries to speak out against the filtering software, that speech is also restricted.

Please do not take my opinion out of context, however. I think the government of the city of Boston should be applauded for researching and implementing free public wi-fi. I feel that universal, unfettered access to the internet is crucial if Boston as a city and America as a country are to remain scientific and technological powerhouses. I also do not condemn filtering outright. While I feel that information should be uncensored to the greatest extent possible, I do understand that concessions may need to be made for access to extreme sexual content, child pornography, or media involving violence or death in public places or on publically funded networks.

Oh, and when I tested the network, BoingBoing was no longer restricted.

[Solo_in_MD]

2. So he should salute smartly and file a complaint?

Tell that to all of those who have prostested over the centuries.

He is quite right. There should be no nannyware on the public net.

[MADem]

3. How is anyone gonna KNOW there's a problem if he doesn't GRIPE?

What, by OSMOSIS???

And if you read his full diatribe, he acknowledges the real need for SOME "nannyware" to prevent access to child porn and whatnot. His gripe is that the "nanyware" itself SUCKS. It has no rhyme or reason to it. You can get X, but not Y, when X and Y are pretty much equal. Stupid things are filtered out.

Sheeesh. What, you think Mayor Menino is gonna sit around trolling the net looking for instances where his name appears? He's got a fucking city to run. How is this supposed to be corrected if no one MENTIONS it?

I dunno; I come from a place where, if I find a problem with a government service, I complain about it TO the people who have the ability to change it.

If that's "saluting smartly" well, what-the-fuck-ever.

Sheesh.

[Solo_in_MD]

4. I am sure there has been enough griping as it is...

While I do not support kiddie porn I am not sure ISP level filtering is the answer. If Comcast or Cox does not filter, why should the free WiFi filter, since effectively the city is becoming a free ISP with this.

As cities go, I am not sure that Boston is "runable" tradition and the facts on (or in) the ground work heavily against it...

[MADem]

6. You need to reread the article.

It is a PILOT program--an EXPERIMENT.

It is a single, again, experimental, HOTSPOT, not the whole city.

The writer of the article AGREES with some "decency" filters. His argument is that the filtering is done absurdly, poorly, without rhyme or reason. It results in lunatic blocks. That's his gripe about it--that it's lousily executed.

And as someone else here pointed out--you DO get what you pay for.

Don't like Boston's "free" WIFI? Go get yourself a SPRINT card, big spender!!!

[Solo_in_MD]

7. So you support censorship software at public libraries?

How progressive of you. :sarcasm:

If the city is going to provide access, free or otherwise, it needs to be full access. There is yet to be nannyware that works as it should, and as a pratcial matter never will be. The content is more diverse than spam, which we can't manage either. If the city is going to be in the ISP business, even as a free provider, it should act like and ISP and not filter.

And yes, I read the article.

[MADem]

8. Call me a fucking Nazi because I think nine year olds shouldn't be exposed to porn or slasher pics!!

Go ahead, I don't mind!!!

And call me (oooh, the ULTIMATE sin!!!! GASP!!!!) NON PROGRESSIVE, too!!! It won't hurt my feelings, really. Because my mind won't be moved on that issue. Kids should have a right to be kids without being exposed to some of the SHIT that comes up in an unfiltered search.

Ya shouldn't be looking at porn or go whacking off at the library, anyway--it's unkind to the furniture and the patrons around you. To say nothing of indicative of poor self-control.

If you don't like it, get your ass out of the library, or the free, no-cost-to-you WIFI hotspot, and go get yourself a subscription to PEOPLEPC or one of those cheapo services if you're poor, or get the full fancy high speed shit if you're rich. No one will censor you at home, enjoy!

As for this WIFI spot, what part of EXPERIMENTAL and PILOT don't you comprehend? When programs are in those stages, they're working out the BUGS. There are typically problems, mistakes, errors, glitches. And we certainly do not 'know' if these problems have been reported. I would not make the leap to assume they had, certainly. The conscientious citizen doesn't sit there and criticize the effort in snarky, superior fashion, assuming the worst, they become part of the solution, and input their concerns and recommendations to the agency overseeing the effort. That's how participatory government works. Sheesh.

And providing a service, like Boston is doing, isn't the same as being IN the ISP business. People in that business are making money off it. Boston is trying to improve quality of life for their citizens, and make specific areas more friendly and vibrant by attracting the citizenry to them.

Jesus, you must be pretty fucking perfect, everything you do must work out brilliantly, first time, every time. Lucky, lucky you.

You be sure to avoid Boston now, so these dreadful experimental hotspots don't suck you in...or head for Starbucks and buy a coffee to surf the web....

[Solo_in_MD]

9. Your "its only a test case" meme is specious

since the testing is not of the nannyware and its existence is an minor adjunct to the demonstration. However, letting its existence in that system pass unchallenged is a mistake. This is not a case of minor tuning, that level of nannyware is a major conceptual decision. It has nothing to do with me being perfect, its a grevious conceptual flaw and smacks of pandering to those with a feeling of moral superiority.

Supplying bandwidth is the core of the ISP roll, whether or not its profitable. Boston is far from the only community offering it at no cost and in some places for many years the only viable ISPs were municipal non-profits. Given the digital divide, I would expect more communities to do so. However, in some states Big Telecoms (sort of like Big Pharma) have managed to get laws passed to stop what Boston and other communities are doing like this. My kneejerk reaction is that if they want to block it, it means its probably a pretty good idea. However, big business tends to get their way with the government and Boston is no different.

Libraries are also having a hard time with nannyware, though their discussion of it is a much more restrained in tone than yours. Several approaches have been tried, none of them satisfactory to all users. I tend to err on the side of openess and expect parents to monitor their young children and not leave that to the state. Any potential lewd acts in public can be handled as they have been for years.

I don't do Starbucks (ever) and haven't been in Boston for about 6 months, since the project we had with Draper wound down. Lousy traffic and airport access, decent food. I don't need the free sites and risks that they bring. Most hotels have hardwired or wireless bandwith.

This story has been floating around the geek community as well and my reaction is pretty much the norm. In some of those discussions, someone referred to the mayor as "Mumbles". What is the story behind that? His prior willingess to obviate the 1st Amendment is troubling.

[MADem]

10. There you go with the "unchallenged" and when I say report it, you get snarky

as though you expect the Democratic administration not to take appropriate action.

The nannyware's pisspoor performance is the ENTIRE problem. The site is firing up just fine. It's the stupid filtering software that is a mess. It's not working intelligently. It is working STUPIDLY, without rhyme or reason, using dumb keywords. It's blocking silly things. It's not OMINOUS. It's just...STUPID.

In the libraries, they solved the problems. The kiddie section has filters, and if parents want their kids to go to the adult (unfiltered) area, they have to sign a permission slip. This area is a public area for all--so there's gotta be some filters out there, because there's no librarian monitoring access to machines.

The problem with the WIFI software is that it has no logic behind it. It lets you look at some dating sites, and not others. It blocks out any references, even medical ones, to cocaine. It will let you look at some government sites, but not others. It's just idiotic.

Tom Menino is an OK guy. He's a Democrat who gives a shit about the city. He's not an absentee leader like Mitt the Shitt was.

I have to wonder who you're hanging out with, though. The guy who calls our Mayor 'Mumbles' is a far rightwing FUCKSTICK and total GOP asshole named Howie Carr, he should rot in hell. Menino is well known for murdering the English language in his daily speech, thus the name. And we know how the GOP loves to make fun of physical characteristics of their opponents. There's nothing wrong with Menino's brain though, and I can't say that for that asshole Howie.

Menino hasn't had an easy time of it under Mitt the Shitt--Mitt took a load of state money away, stripping essential services, and over time lo and behold, a gang problem developed where none existed before. Menino took issue with "Stop Snitchin'" tee shirts and I don't blame him. You tell a mother whose kid's brains are all over the stoop that she's not getting any justice, ever, because the code is 'don't tell.' The state's safety ranking went to shit under Romney, because Mittens cared more about cutting expenses while screwing the citizenry than making the state a better place to live--of course, why would he give a shit? He spent most of his time at his lake house in NH.

Hopefully he and Patrick can reverse the worst of the tide.

[Vickers]

5. You get what you pay for.

:P