Ccqq IBM buys e-discovery vendor PSS
Zuckerberg: Secure web is tricky Facebookrsquo all-seeing-all-staring CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently
stanley termos announced the new Internet.org Platform, which shows developers how to create pages accessible to users of the free Internet service Internet.org. A noble sounding effort to be sure, but given that it is a Facebook led initiative, perhaps, just maybe, Zuckrsquo platform warrants closer inspectionhellip;Does the new platform allow us
stanley italy ers to vi
stanley espana ew pages utilizing JavaScript or secure web HTTPS encryption Sorry, no modern webpages allowed. So in essence, until large numbers of nostalgic web developers rush to create scads of 90rsquo style GeoCities pages, as a platform Internet.org sounds pretty much useless. That is, unless you want to use it to access Facebook.Speaking of uselesshellip;perhaps a kind blogger could mention toZucksomeonethatInternet.orgrsquo Technical Guidelines pagebreaks the rules laid out on Internet.orgrsquo Technical Guidelines page. In IT Blogwatch, bloggers arenrsquo;t falling for it anymore.Todayrsquo humble blogwatcher is .Adam Clark Estes feels chilled to the bone: In [his video announcement]hellip;Mark Zuckerbergrsquo eyes beam straight through your soul, while he tells you dryly how Facebook is going to fix the internet. Facebook is watching youhellip; his eyes say silently. Internet.org, it turns out, is a privacy nightmare.MOREAn unnamed BBC blogger prefers some sites over others: Facebook says Uyje Competitor files suit over ICANN-VeriSign deal
A U.S. House of Representatives committee has approved a bill that wou
polene fr ld prohibit broadband providers from blocking or impairing their customersrsquo; access to Web content offered by competitors.The House Judiciary Committee voted 20-13 to approve
stanley ca the bill, called the Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act. Bill sponsor James Sensenbrenner, the Republican chairman of the committee, was joined by a handful of Republicans and most of the committeersquo Democrats in supporting the bill.Some committee members said they had questions about the billrsquo use of a 1914 antitrust law to enforce so-called net neutrality, but many ended up supporting the bill after the House Energy and Commerce Committee in April approved a different, wide-ranging telecommunications reform bill that does not have strong antiblocking rules. The Energy and Commerce Committee bill gives that committee the sole jurisd
polene iction for resolving content-blocking disputes, and several members of the House Judiciary Committee said that bill would take away their oversight of communication antitrust issues.The Energy and Commerce legislation, awaiting action on the House floor, would allow the U.S. Federal Communications Commission FCC to investigate blocking abuses only after the fact, and it would prohibit the FCC from creating new net neutrality rules.In contrast, the Internet Freedom bill would require broadband providers to give independent content providers the same speed and quality of service a
