Zoning Speech on the Internet: A Legal and Technical Model

Speech, it is said, divides into three sorts - (1) speech that everyone has a right to (political speech, speech about public affairs); (2) speech that no one has a right to (obscene speech, child porn); and (3) speech that some have a right to but others do not (in the United States, Ginsberg speech, or speech that is harmful to minors, to which adults have a right but kids do not). Speech-protective regimes, on this view, are those where category (1) speech predominates; speech-repressive regimes are those where categories (2) and (3) prevail. This divide has meaning for speech and regulation within a single jurisdiction, but it makes less sense across jurisdictions. For when viewed across jurisdictions, most controversial speech falls into category (3) - speech that is permitted to some in some places, but not to others in other places. What constitutes political speech in the United States (Nazi speech) is banned in Germany; what constitutes obscene speech in Tennessee is permitted in Holland; what constitutes porn in Japan is child porn in the United States; what is harmful to minors in Bavaria is Disney in New York. Every jurisdiction controls access to some speech - what we call mandatory access controls - but what that speech is differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. This diversity creates a problem (for governments at least) when we consider speech within cyberspace. Within cyberspace, mandated access controls are extremely difficult. If access control requires knowing (a) the identities of the speaker and receiver, (b) the jurisdictions of the speaker and receiver, and (c) the content of the speech at issue, then as cyberspace was initially designed, none of these data are easily determined. As a result, real space laws do not readily translate into the context of cyberspace

Code: Version 2.0

Discusses the regulation of cyberspace via code, as well as possible trends to expect in this regulation. Additional topics discussed in this context include intellectual property, privacy, and free speech

Perceptions of illicit drugs and drug users: myth-understandings and policy consequences

This submission to the University of Greenwich for a Ph.D. by published works is composed of ten peer-reviewed articles, five book chapters, and one journal editorial. The earliest publication is dated from 1992 while the two most recent articles have been formally accepted for publication and are to be published in the near future. The pieces, to aid coherence, are not arranged in strict chronological order but rather in an order best able to demonstrate coherence and theme. The central theme running through these published works relates to the ways that drugs, drug users, and the activities which surround them are often subject to exaggeration, distortion and untruths and that drug control policy, rather than being rationally based is often the result of fear, prejudice and unreason. The core of the submission, eight papers researching the dangerous adulteration of illicit drugs, reflects these issues strongly. An area almost untouched by social science prior to this research these papers represent an attempt to pull together a range of evidence to inform more fully about drug adulteration practices. A wide range of methods, including a relatively innovative approach to researching hard to reach groups via the Internet and World Wide Web were employed. Almost all of the findings are at odds with what is commonly and professionally (drugs field) assumed to happen as regards the adulteration/dilution of illicit drugs. The other contributions all reflect similar concerns but are focussed on other drug related areas. Each piece is preceded by a short contextualising introduction. The appendices include a complimentary unpublished paper on drug adulteration, the preface to one of two books to which I was sole editor, some shorter contributions to drug field publications which, whilst widely read are less academic in their tone and approach, and two publications which represent the culmination of earlier joint research on drug policy

The politics of cyberconflict: ethnoreligious conflicts in computer mediated environments

This thesis argues that it is important to distinguish between two different phenomena in cyberpolitical spaces: First of all, between ethnic or religious groups fighting over in cyberspace, as they do in real life (Ethnoreligious cyberconflict) and second, between a social movement and its antagonistic institution (Sociopolitical cyberconflict). These different kinds of cyberconflict can be explained in the context of international conflict analysis for ethnoreligious cyberconflict and social movement theory for sociopolitical cyberconflict, while keeping in mind that this takes place in a media environment by using media theory. By combining elements of these approaches and justifying the link to cyberconflict, it is possible to use them as a theoretical light to look at the environment of Cyberconflict (CC) and analysis of incidents of CC. Consequently, this work looks at the leading groups using the internet either as weapon or a resource against governments, while also looking at networks, international organisations and new social movements. Searching for a satisfactory theoretical framework, I propose the following parameters to be looked at while analysing cyberconflicts: 1. Environment of Conflict and Conflict Mapping (real and virtual). The world system generates an arborescent apparatus, which is haunted by lines of flight, emerging through underground networks connected horizontally and lacking a hierarchic centre (Deleuze and Guattari). The structure of the internet is ideal for network groups, (a global network with no central authority) has offered another experience of governance (no governance), time and space (compression), ideology (freedom of information and access to it), identity (multiplicity) and fundamentally an opposition to surveillance and control, boundaries and apparatuses. 2. Sociopolitical Cyberconflicts: The impact of ICTs on: a. Mobilising structures (network style of movements using the internet, participation, recruitment, tactics, goals), b. Framing Processes (issues, strategy, identity, the effect of the internet on these processes), c. Political opportunity structure (the internet as a component of this structure), d. hacktivism. 3. Ethnoreligious Cyberconflicts: a. Ethnic/religious affiliation, chauvinism, national identity, b. Discourses of inclusion and exclusion, c. Information warfare, the use of the internet as a weapon, propaganda and mobilisational resource d. Conflict resolution depends on legal, organisational framework, number of parties issues, distribution of power, values and beliefs. 4. The internet as a medium: a. Analysing discourses (representations of the world, constructions of social identities and social relations), b. Control of information, level of censorship, alternative sources, c. Wolsfeld: Political contest model among antagonists: the ability to initiate and control events, dominate political discourse, mobilise supporters, d. Media effects on policy (strategic, tactical, and representational)

Semantic discovery and reuse of business process patterns

Patterns currently play an important role in modern information systems (IS) development and their use has mainly been restricted to the design and implementation phases of the development lifecycle. Given the increasing significance of business modelling in IS development, patterns have the potential of providing a viable solution for promoting reusability of recurrent generalized models in the very early stages of development. As a statement of research-in-progress this paper focuses on business process patterns and proposes an initial methodological framework for the discovery and reuse of business process patterns within the IS development lifecycle. The framework borrows ideas from the domain engineering literature and proposes the use of semantics to drive both the discovery of patterns as well as their reuse

Strategic Latency Unleashed: The Role of Technology in a Revisionist Global Order and the Implications for Special Operations Forces

The article of record may be found at https://cgsr.llnl.govThis work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in part under Contract W-7405-Eng-48 and in part under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. The views and opinions of the author expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. ISBN-978-1-952565-07-6 LCCN-2021901137 LLNL-BOOK-818513 TID-59693This work was performed under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in part under Contract W-7405-Eng-48 and in part under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344. The views and opinions of the author expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. ISBN-978-1-952565-07-6 LCCN-2021901137 LLNL-BOOK-818513 TID-5969

Bowdoin Orient v.133, no.1-25 (2001-2002)

https://digitalcommons.bowdoin.edu/bowdoinorient-2000s/1002/thumbnail.jp