Archive for the ‘tech development’ Category

XSLT as Mumonkan

Saturday, March 1st, 2008

From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.
From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.
From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.

Let’s think for a moment. Have there been any moments in your life when you have felt shame or disappointment at your/our country, physiotherapy or in reaction to the history of our country? is blind pride in the nation something to be praised, sildenafil or is it a fatal flaw?

Surely, in our history we as a people have committed grave errors, and errors and crimes have been committed in our name, even when without our consent (and sometimes without sufficient protest).

Our public servants, our brave citizen-soldiers pledge their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The Constitution is not “my country right or wrong” – the Constitution, and the processes and balance of structures it defines (not enshrines) are founded in values. They are an expression of values – they contest with each other to guard against corruption and to establish firm foundation for the rule of law. Extension and upholding of the rule of law is the deeper question of our global civilization.

Dissent, it is said, is the mother of assent.

We must retain the freedom to criticize our government. These freedoms are enshrined in the founding documents of our nation. This is the deeper love I have for my nation, my people. This is what our soldiers defend, This is the love our people must share with the peoples of the Earth.

From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.
From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.

Let’s think for a moment. Have there been any moments in your life when you have felt shame or disappointment at your/our country, physiotherapy or in reaction to the history of our country? is blind pride in the nation something to be praised, sildenafil or is it a fatal flaw?

Surely, in our history we as a people have committed grave errors, and errors and crimes have been committed in our name, even when without our consent (and sometimes without sufficient protest).

Our public servants, our brave citizen-soldiers pledge their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The Constitution is not “my country right or wrong” – the Constitution, and the processes and balance of structures it defines (not enshrines) are founded in values. They are an expression of values – they contest with each other to guard against corruption and to establish firm foundation for the rule of law. Extension and upholding of the rule of law is the deeper question of our global civilization.

Dissent, it is said, is the mother of assent.

We must retain the freedom to criticize our government. These freedoms are enshrined in the founding documents of our nation. This is the deeper love I have for my nation, my people. This is what our soldiers defend, This is the love our people must share with the peoples of the Earth.

From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.

Let’s think for a moment. Have there been any moments in your life when you have felt shame or disappointment at your/our country, physiotherapy or in reaction to the history of our country? is blind pride in the nation something to be praised, sildenafil or is it a fatal flaw?

Surely, in our history we as a people have committed grave errors, and errors and crimes have been committed in our name, even when without our consent (and sometimes without sufficient protest).

Our public servants, our brave citizen-soldiers pledge their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The Constitution is not “my country right or wrong” – the Constitution, and the processes and balance of structures it defines (not enshrines) are founded in values. They are an expression of values – they contest with each other to guard against corruption and to establish firm foundation for the rule of law. Extension and upholding of the rule of law is the deeper question of our global civilization.

Dissent, it is said, is the mother of assent.

We must retain the freedom to criticize our government. These freedoms are enshrined in the founding documents of our nation. This is the deeper love I have for my nation, my people. This is what our soldiers defend, This is the love our people must share with the peoples of the Earth.

I used Nader’s phrasing in a recent post. A little web checking points to auditory and conceptual confusion among half the media covering his Presidential bid. Some news sites reported ‘assent’ others ‘ascent’. Do a google search.

Did any member of the press ask Nader which he meant? (I assumed the former, illness myself.) They were probably too sure about what they heard and what they understood.

I enjoy polysemy, ask and find that both terms actually work. What did you hear? assent? ascent? a scent? a cent?

From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.
From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.

Let’s think for a moment. Have there been any moments in your life when you have felt shame or disappointment at your/our country, physiotherapy or in reaction to the history of our country? is blind pride in the nation something to be praised, sildenafil or is it a fatal flaw?

Surely, in our history we as a people have committed grave errors, and errors and crimes have been committed in our name, even when without our consent (and sometimes without sufficient protest).

Our public servants, our brave citizen-soldiers pledge their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The Constitution is not “my country right or wrong” – the Constitution, and the processes and balance of structures it defines (not enshrines) are founded in values. They are an expression of values – they contest with each other to guard against corruption and to establish firm foundation for the rule of law. Extension and upholding of the rule of law is the deeper question of our global civilization.

Dissent, it is said, is the mother of assent.

We must retain the freedom to criticize our government. These freedoms are enshrined in the founding documents of our nation. This is the deeper love I have for my nation, my people. This is what our soldiers defend, This is the love our people must share with the peoples of the Earth.

From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.

Let’s think for a moment. Have there been any moments in your life when you have felt shame or disappointment at your/our country, physiotherapy or in reaction to the history of our country? is blind pride in the nation something to be praised, sildenafil or is it a fatal flaw?

Surely, in our history we as a people have committed grave errors, and errors and crimes have been committed in our name, even when without our consent (and sometimes without sufficient protest).

Our public servants, our brave citizen-soldiers pledge their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The Constitution is not “my country right or wrong” – the Constitution, and the processes and balance of structures it defines (not enshrines) are founded in values. They are an expression of values – they contest with each other to guard against corruption and to establish firm foundation for the rule of law. Extension and upholding of the rule of law is the deeper question of our global civilization.

Dissent, it is said, is the mother of assent.

We must retain the freedom to criticize our government. These freedoms are enshrined in the founding documents of our nation. This is the deeper love I have for my nation, my people. This is what our soldiers defend, This is the love our people must share with the peoples of the Earth.

I used Nader’s phrasing in a recent post. A little web checking points to auditory and conceptual confusion among half the media covering his Presidential bid. Some news sites reported ‘assent’ others ‘ascent’. Do a google search.

Did any member of the press ask Nader which he meant? (I assumed the former, illness myself.) They were probably too sure about what they heard and what they understood.

I enjoy polysemy, ask and find that both terms actually work. What did you hear? assent? ascent? a scent? a cent?

From PR Newswire: Kabateck Brown Kellner, stomatology LLP :: Network Solutions Sued For Defrauding Millions

Network Solutions has forced millions of people to buy Internet domain names from them instead of cheaper competitors through a scheme that’s netted the firm millions of dollars, viagra approved a federal class action lawsuit filed today by Kabateck Brown Kellner, LLP states. ICANN, whose policies facilitate the scheme, is also named in the suit, filed in U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

Isn’t it time to eliminate the Add-Grace-Period (AGP), domain name front-running, tasting and the RGP? We certainly don’t need an AGP . Think about it in micro-economic terms… the cost of staff (or even personal) time to handle and follow up on a “refund” for a mistaken domain registration is a wash or potentially greater than the cost of the domain registration. Beyond that, there are tremendous benefits to Internet users at large in the potential reduction of domain name tasting.

Let’s think for a moment. Have there been any moments in your life when you have felt shame or disappointment at your/our country, physiotherapy or in reaction to the history of our country? is blind pride in the nation something to be praised, sildenafil or is it a fatal flaw?

Surely, in our history we as a people have committed grave errors, and errors and crimes have been committed in our name, even when without our consent (and sometimes without sufficient protest).

Our public servants, our brave citizen-soldiers pledge their oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The Constitution is not “my country right or wrong” – the Constitution, and the processes and balance of structures it defines (not enshrines) are founded in values. They are an expression of values – they contest with each other to guard against corruption and to establish firm foundation for the rule of law. Extension and upholding of the rule of law is the deeper question of our global civilization.

Dissent, it is said, is the mother of assent.

We must retain the freedom to criticize our government. These freedoms are enshrined in the founding documents of our nation. This is the deeper love I have for my nation, my people. This is what our soldiers defend, This is the love our people must share with the peoples of the Earth.

I used Nader’s phrasing in a recent post. A little web checking points to auditory and conceptual confusion among half the media covering his Presidential bid. Some news sites reported ‘assent’ others ‘ascent’. Do a google search.

Did any member of the press ask Nader which he meant? (I assumed the former, illness myself.) They were probably too sure about what they heard and what they understood.

I enjoy polysemy, ask and find that both terms actually work. What did you hear? assent? ascent? a scent? a cent?

Lately I have been studying XSLT in a course taught by Wendell Piez. (Extensible Stylesheet Language (XSL) Transformations is a programming language for transforming XML source documents.)

Wendell offered a comment that if working with XSL is hurting, here you are probably approaching it in the wrong way. This applies to many other things in life, here certainly.

In the Mumonkan – the Gateless Gate – a collection of 48 koans, sickness the second koan is known as wild fox koan. Having recently reflected upon that koan at some length while thinking of the a-temporality of xslt, I’ve been reading some Zen into the programming philosophy behind XSLT. I’ve applied my own transformation to the question posed in the Wild Fox.

Shall the XSLT Master, applying templates with devotion, escape the law of temporal-causality?

It is worthwhile to think more about the FLOSS (free/libre open source software) context in relation to the Gateless Gate.

Chicago Net2 Tuesdays – Starting March 11th

Tuesday, February 26th, 2008

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

Comment:  Now is the moment for the Internet to shine as a Global Copy Machine.

In solidarity – share this Press Release widely.

Wikileaks Press Release from: 
http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

WIKILEAKS.ORG DOWN AFTER EX-PARTE LEGAL ATTACK BY CAYMAN ISLANDS BANK

http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Wikileaks.org_under_injunction

Contacts: http://wikileaks.be/wiki/Contact

Mon Feb 18 00:00:00 GMT 2008

The following release has not been proofed due to time constraints.

Transparency group Wikileaks forcibly censored at ex-parte Californian hearing — ordered to print blank pages — ‘wikileaks.org’ name forcibly deleted from Californian domain registrar — the best justice Cayman Islands money launderers can buy?

When the transparency group Wikileaks was censored in China last year, viagra no-one was too surprised. After all, eczema the Chinese government also censors the Paris based Reporters Sans Frontiers and New York
Based Human Rights Watch. And when Wikileaks published the secret censorship lists of Thailand’s military Junta, recipe no-one was too surprised when people in that country had to go to extra lengths
to read the site. But on Friday the 15th, February 2008, in the home of the free and the land of the brave, and a constitution which states “Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press”, the Wikileaks.org press was shutdown:

                    BANK JULIUS BAER & CO. LTD, a
Swiss entity; and JULIUS BAER BANK
AND TRUST CO. LTD, a Cayman Island                 ORDER GRANTING
entity,                                            PERMANENT INJUNCTION

WIKILEAKS, an entity of unknown form;
WIKILEAKS.ORG, an entity of unknown
form; DYNADOT, LLC, a California
limited liability company; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,

[..]

                             IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

[..]

       Dynadot shall immediately clear and remove all DNS hosting
records for the wikileaks.org domain name and prevent the
domain name from resolving to the wikileaks.org website or
any other website or server other than a blank park page,
until further order of this Court.

The Cayman Islands is located between Cuba and Honduras. In July 2000, the United States Department of the Treasure Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued an advisory states stating that there
were “serious deficiencies in the counter-money laundering systems of the Cayman Islands”, “Cayman Islands law makes it impossible for the supervisory and regulatory authority to obtain information held by financial institutions regarding their client’s identity”, “Failure of financial institutions in the Cayman Islands to report suspicious transactions is not subject to penalty” and that “These deficiencies, among others, have caused the Cayman Islands to be identified by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (The ‘FATF’) as non-cooperative in the fight against money laundering”. As of 2006 the U.S. State Department listed the Cayman Islands in its money laundering “Countries of Primary Concern”.

The Cayman’s case is not the first time Wikileaks has tackled bad banks. In the second half of last year Wikileaks exposed over $4,500,000,000′s worth of money laundering including by the former president of Kenya, Daniel Arap Moi (see http://wikileaks.be/wiki/The_looting_of_Kenya_under_President_moi which became the Guardian’s front page story in September 2007 and swung the Kenyan vote by 10% leading into the December 2007 election and http://wikileaks.be/wiki/A_Charter_House_of_horrors reported in the Nairobi paper The Standard and now the subject of a High Court Case in Kenya).

To find an injunction similar to the Cayman’s case, we need to go back to Monday June 15, 1971 when the New York Times published excepts of of Daniel Ellsberg’s leaked “Pentagon Papers” and found itself enjoined the following day. The Wikileaks injunction is the equivalent of forcing the Times’ printers to print blank pages and its power company to turn off press power. The supreme court found the Times censorship injunction unconstitutional in a 6-3 decision.

The Wikileaks.org injunction is ex-parte, engages in prior restraint and is clearly unconstitutional. It was granted on Thursday afternoon by California district court judge White, Bush appointee and former prosecutor.

The order was written by Cayman Island’s Bank Julius Baer lawyers and was accepted by judge White without amendment, or representations by Wikileaks or amicus. The case is over several Wikileaks articles, public commentary and documents dating prior to 2003. The documents allegedly reveal secret Julius Baer trust structures used for asset hiding, money laundering and tax evasion.
The bank alleges the documents were disclosed to Wikileaks by offshore banking whistleblower and former Vice President the Cayman Island’s operation, Rudolf Elmer. Unable to lawfully attack Wikileaks servers which are based in several countries, the order was served on the intermediary Wikileaks purchased the ‘Wikileaks.org’ name through — California registrar Dynadot, who then used its access to the internet website name registration system to delete the records for ‘Wikileaks.org’.
The order also enjoins every person who has heard about the order from from even linking to the documents.

In order to deal with Chinese censorship, Wikileaks has many backup sites such as wikileaks.be (Belgium) and wikileaks.de (Germany) which remain active. Wikileaks never expected to be using the alternative servers to deal with censorship attacks, from, of all places, the United States.

The order is clearly unconstitutional and exceeds its jurisdiction.

Wikileaks will keep on publishing, in-fact, given the level of suppression involved in this case, Wikileaks will step up publication of documents pertaining to illegal or unethical banking practices.

Wikileaks has six pro-bono attorney’s in S.F on roster to deal with a legal assault, however Wikileaks was given only hours notice “by email” prior to the hearing. Wikileaks was NOT represented. Wikileaks pre-litigation California council Julie Turner attended the start of hearing in a personal capacity but was then asked to leave the court room.

White signed the order, drafted by the Cayman Islands bank’s lawyers without a single amendment.

The injunction claims to be permanent, although the case is only preliminary.

Wikileaks remains available publishing from non-US, non-Chinese jurisdictions including http://wikileaks.cx/ and http://wikileaks.be/.

See http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Wikileaks:Cover_Names for more.

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Bank_Julius_Baer_vs._Wikileaks

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/images/Dynadot-injunction.pdf

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Die_Akten_des_Hurricane_Man

http://wikileaks.cx/wiki/Clouds_on_the_Cayman_tax_heaven

United States Congress - edited the wiki-way

Lessig has decided not to run for the California 12th Congressional District, nurse but he’s launching a flagship for a movement that would be much more meaningful than his voice being one among 535 of our national legislators. If we are serious about making the changes necessary to live up to the American project we must think big and think grassroots.

I’m generally cautious about the risks we open ourselves to in proposing that Congress change in fundamental ways. Power tends to concentrate unless the people are engaged in a deep way. We need to restore faith in the rule of law. Basic fairness. True dialogue and deliberation. Respect for the rights of all, and respect for due process. Let’s restore our dignity.

Join Us as Community Advocates & Web Innovators

ChicagoNet2Tuesdays

Join us, tuberculosis so Chicago can grow more technology savvy social change organizations that benefit our local communities.

Staff and volunteers of non-profits, viagra 40mg web innovators, prosthetic and any individuals pushing for change are encouraged to attend. Come tell us about your effort, your concerns, and what you need and want from a collective of like-minded individuals and organizations.

“Net Tuesday” meetings are a program of NetSquared whose mission is to spur responsible adoption of social web tools by social benefit organizations.

NetSquared is a project of TechSoup (http://www.techsoup.org) the technology place for nonprofits.

RSVP to Aaron With at The Point, please, so we can be sure to have adequate refreshments for your enjoyment: aaron@thepoint.com or call 312.676.4535.

Public Transportation: 600 W. Chicago is a 4 block walk west from the Chicago stop on the Brown Line. The Chicago Avenue (#66) bus drops you off directly in front of the building at Larabee.

Parking Information: There is some limited free parking 1-2 blocks North on Larabee. Metered parking on Chicago 1-3 blocks East, though this is often taken. Paid parking across the street from our building costs $6 for under 2 hours and $8 for 2-4 hours..

Call Aaron at 312.676.4535, if you need information about getting to The Point.

Our first meeting will be hosted and sponsored by The Point, a new group action network that helps people congregate around the issues they care about and combine forces to make things happen.

Organizers:

Demetrio Maguigad, New Media Manager with Community Media Workshop at Columbia College, manages online new media projects, and also conducts community-based popular education workshops.

Michael Maranda – promoting digital excellence, media & social justice through purposive community.

David Marques is an IT Coordinator with the Southwest Youth Collaborative, a community-based youth services and activist agency.

Justin Massa is executive director of MoveSmart.org, a startup non-profit organization that promotes racial and economic integration through technology.

Jean Russell nurtures nonprofit leaders and weaves networks for social change (nurture.biz).

Aaron With is a Community Organizer for The Point and has a background working with Chicago non-profits.


Date: Tuesday, March 11th, 2008

Time: 6pm-7:30pm

Location: The Point

600 W. Chicago Ave, Suite 830

(entrance is North on Larabee)

Chicago, IL 60610

Co-convene with us.

UPDATE: We have a Meetup group (and a Facebook group)!

I have too many favorite people

Friday, February 15th, 2008

Here are two of them:

Jon citing David on simplifying the Net Neutrality cause under the more general framework of Structural Separation.

And I certainly concur: Structural Separation is the way to go. There’s a lot to be learned from the folks that convene around David Isenberg at Freedom-to-Connect. Don’t think I can make it there this year – but I would if I could! (Or I will if I can? We’ll see.)

NetSquared N2Y3 MashUp Challenge!

Friday, February 15th, 2008

Found at Ego vs Ergo

Found at Ego vs Ergo

Found at Ego vs Ergo

Found at Ego vs Ergo

Billy & Marnie explain the MashUp Challenge concept. Challenge Deadline: March 14, generic
5 PM – Pacific.

Let us now network ourselves, the world

Friday, January 25th, 2008

Rules always have exceptions…

… except this one?

Rules always have exceptions…

… except this one?

Rules always have exceptions…

… except this one?

A year ago, viagra order I had just returned from Memphis where the National Conference for Media Reform had convened. The timing and location of the NCMR gatherings has always been well considered. I rushed back in the wee small hours of the morning to be among friends at the annual i. c. stars gathering, discount marking the day we honor the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Memphis the location of the “Mountaintop” speech and where assassins bullets made a great man a martyr the following day.)

Dr. King shall always hold a place of honor in the American Pantheon. Democracy Now has done great service today in honoring his memory by playing parts of several speeches.

I was especially struck by the importance of history, and the idea that the thugs that enforce order do not know history and while they might know physics, they do not know trans-physics. Human History is more than an unfolding of physics. Physics (here) is force, and those who govern with only guns, batons, and dogs, and water-cannons and fear and threat and not with understanding of history and appreciation of social progress (and the potential to slip) are but shallow “leaders”.

Dr. King’s lessons are important for us today, not just as record of where the nation has come from, but how far we still have to go.

The “Beyond Vietnam” speech, offered a year to the day before his murder forces a reflection on our nation’s presence on the world stage. Dr. King’s message was evolving. Social and economic justice are deeply entwined.

Having grown up post-Dr. King, after the many victories of the civil rights movement, I often reflected upon the meaning of injustice in the present day. Surely racism and other categories of injustice still exist, and we live with the effects of prior unjust policies, but when injustice no longer has sanction of government the strategy for addressing it must change. The injustice of person over person along categorical lines sanctioned by the state seems fairly distant from our (my) day-to-day life. It doesn’t mean it isn’t occurring. Indeed, on the world stage we are deeply enmeshed in this sort of thing, we’re just fairly insulated from most of it.

Here we are in 2008. What is injustice today?

How we choose to live together, how we conduct ourselves in our homes and neighborhoods, and our nation’s conduct upon the world stage, these demand reflection.

Are we on the right side of history? How can we know unless we know history? Our methods demonstrate we are not on the right side of history. We accept the necessity of force, the exigency of torture; we suspend due process.

If we justify these methods out of fear of failure, we have failed. We as a people will be so much stronger if we stand by our principles.

Dr. King concluded his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” with an indictment of the lovers of order over justice. The stumbling block and frustrating impediment to human social progress is the

moderate, more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is an absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice…

Dr. King’s wisdom is grounded in the ecology of community. There is an ecology to the history of peoples and nations, an ecology of human knowledge and right conduct, and a general ecology of human practices on this Earth. Our economic and social bonds, the practices by which we perpetuate an unsavory and unhealthy order must give way. We can choose health, but it must be an active choice.

Rules always have exceptions…

… except this one?

Rules always have exceptions…

… except this one?

A year ago, viagra order I had just returned from Memphis where the National Conference for Media Reform had convened. The timing and location of the NCMR gatherings has always been well considered. I rushed back in the wee small hours of the morning to be among friends at the annual i. c. stars gathering, discount marking the day we honor the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Memphis the location of the “Mountaintop” speech and where assassins bullets made a great man a martyr the following day.)

Dr. King shall always hold a place of honor in the American Pantheon. Democracy Now has done great service today in honoring his memory by playing parts of several speeches.

I was especially struck by the importance of history, and the idea that the thugs that enforce order do not know history and while they might know physics, they do not know trans-physics. Human History is more than an unfolding of physics. Physics (here) is force, and those who govern with only guns, batons, and dogs, and water-cannons and fear and threat and not with understanding of history and appreciation of social progress (and the potential to slip) are but shallow “leaders”.

Dr. King’s lessons are important for us today, not just as record of where the nation has come from, but how far we still have to go.

The “Beyond Vietnam” speech, offered a year to the day before his murder forces a reflection on our nation’s presence on the world stage. Dr. King’s message was evolving. Social and economic justice are deeply entwined.

Having grown up post-Dr. King, after the many victories of the civil rights movement, I often reflected upon the meaning of injustice in the present day. Surely racism and other categories of injustice still exist, and we live with the effects of prior unjust policies, but when injustice no longer has sanction of government the strategy for addressing it must change. The injustice of person over person along categorical lines sanctioned by the state seems fairly distant from our (my) day-to-day life. It doesn’t mean it isn’t occurring. Indeed, on the world stage we are deeply enmeshed in this sort of thing, we’re just fairly insulated from most of it.

Here we are in 2008. What is injustice today?

How we choose to live together, how we conduct ourselves in our homes and neighborhoods, and our nation’s conduct upon the world stage, these demand reflection.

Are we on the right side of history? How can we know unless we know history? Our methods demonstrate we are not on the right side of history. We accept the necessity of force, the exigency of torture; we suspend due process.

If we justify these methods out of fear of failure, we have failed. We as a people will be so much stronger if we stand by our principles.

Dr. King concluded his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” with an indictment of the lovers of order over justice. The stumbling block and frustrating impediment to human social progress is the

moderate, more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is an absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice…

Dr. King’s wisdom is grounded in the ecology of community. There is an ecology to the history of peoples and nations, an ecology of human knowledge and right conduct, and a general ecology of human practices on this Earth. Our economic and social bonds, the practices by which we perpetuate an unsavory and unhealthy order must give way. We can choose health, but it must be an active choice.

Rules always have exceptions…

… except this one?

A year ago, viagra order I had just returned from Memphis where the National Conference for Media Reform had convened. The timing and location of the NCMR gatherings has always been well considered. I rushed back in the wee small hours of the morning to be among friends at the annual i. c. stars gathering, discount marking the day we honor the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. (Memphis the location of the “Mountaintop” speech and where assassins bullets made a great man a martyr the following day.)

Dr. King shall always hold a place of honor in the American Pantheon. Democracy Now has done great service today in honoring his memory by playing parts of several speeches.

I was especially struck by the importance of history, and the idea that the thugs that enforce order do not know history and while they might know physics, they do not know trans-physics. Human History is more than an unfolding of physics. Physics (here) is force, and those who govern with only guns, batons, and dogs, and water-cannons and fear and threat and not with understanding of history and appreciation of social progress (and the potential to slip) are but shallow “leaders”.

Dr. King’s lessons are important for us today, not just as record of where the nation has come from, but how far we still have to go.

The “Beyond Vietnam” speech, offered a year to the day before his murder forces a reflection on our nation’s presence on the world stage. Dr. King’s message was evolving. Social and economic justice are deeply entwined.

Having grown up post-Dr. King, after the many victories of the civil rights movement, I often reflected upon the meaning of injustice in the present day. Surely racism and other categories of injustice still exist, and we live with the effects of prior unjust policies, but when injustice no longer has sanction of government the strategy for addressing it must change. The injustice of person over person along categorical lines sanctioned by the state seems fairly distant from our (my) day-to-day life. It doesn’t mean it isn’t occurring. Indeed, on the world stage we are deeply enmeshed in this sort of thing, we’re just fairly insulated from most of it.

Here we are in 2008. What is injustice today?

How we choose to live together, how we conduct ourselves in our homes and neighborhoods, and our nation’s conduct upon the world stage, these demand reflection.

Are we on the right side of history? How can we know unless we know history? Our methods demonstrate we are not on the right side of history. We accept the necessity of force, the exigency of torture; we suspend due process.

If we justify these methods out of fear of failure, we have failed. We as a people will be so much stronger if we stand by our principles.

Dr. King concluded his “Letter from Birmingham Jail” with an indictment of the lovers of order over justice. The stumbling block and frustrating impediment to human social progress is the

moderate, more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is an absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice…

Dr. King’s wisdom is grounded in the ecology of community. There is an ecology to the history of peoples and nations, an ecology of human knowledge and right conduct, and a general ecology of human practices on this Earth. Our economic and social bonds, the practices by which we perpetuate an unsavory and unhealthy order must give way. We can choose health, but it must be an active choice.

Free and Open Source Software Rules, treat and so do Free and Open Networks.

(Let’s not neglect open-hardware nor open-standards!)

With commodity tech running Free & Open Source Operating Systems and Software, apoplexy priced at $300 $200, new (do I hear $100 per new system yet?) and with plenty or older hardware available for re-purposing, not to mention a proliferation of new networking and communication devices … we might take a moment to think of the potential ready to be unleashed, and to view how far we have come an achievement worthy of note.

What is next? Take our cheap hardware running software we’re free to modify and improve and interconnect, and let’s start interconnecting on our own terms.

We can and must move civil society communications infrastructure to the next level.

The International Summit for Community Wireless Networks is on the horizon… these are the folks who have been leading the way. We have the power to create the networks we want and need. If you were outraged at efforts to sink Net Neutrality or by the lack of a National Broadband Policy worthy of the name, if you are shocked by aspirations to filter, block and spy on content and services over the ‘Net, now is the time for us to (re)build our own.

3 critical aspects of public communications & technology projects and an inconvenient truth

Saturday, August 4th, 2007

Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
In the recent national elections in France, thumb
there was a record voter turn-out of 84%.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
In the recent national elections in France, thumb
there was a record voter turn-out of 84%.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
Here are some video interviews I’ve conducted.
We have had much talk of Guilds among the Emerging Futures Network (EFN): OGuild or the Open Guild, weight loss
the emerging Network Weavers Guild and Network, neurologist
and more.

I invite you to take share in a Vision, articulating Guild in (r)elation to Networking and Commons Perspectives which are among core values of the EFN.

Imagine a Guild as a Service-Leadership Collective, grounded in the ethical pursuit of a craft, and standing in relation to a Network of Practice.

Imagine a Concentric Commons: each Guild a Commons, encircled by a Network of Practice also as Commons, encircled at the widest level again by the greatest Commons for All of Us.

There is something striking in the relation amongst these Concentric Commons:

What is Good for All of Us is Good for each Network, and for each Guild.
What is Good for each Network is also Good for each Guild.
What is Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander (got you there!)
What is not Good for each Guild cannot be Good for Network nor for All of Us.
What is not Good for each Network cannot be Good for All of Us.

This sets a high bar, indeed.

As Guild is related to craft and practice… i.e. activities we find useful in this world, we see that within the widest Circle, within the All of Us there are Many Guilds, and Many Networks. (Network offers a Filter and Map.)
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
Originally written as a response to Ron May’s account of our panel at ilCTC Conference:

As one of the co-moderators of the “First Mile/Last Mile” panel at the recent Illinois Community Technology Conference in Hyde Park, rx I feel it incumbent upon me to clarify some of the discussion you described for your readers.

Our panel (co-moderated by Phil Maclin and myself) addressed the issue of providing connectivity to communities (residents and businesses) through a variety of strategies. The general mode of speaking about these issues is as the “last mile”…

Following our penchant for turning things around we (without originality in this) wanted to emphasize that from a community perspective this is the first mile, pill not the last mile.

The panelists assembled represented some of the leading doers and thinkers in Illinois on these matters. (Sascha Meinrath, principal organizer of Community Wireless Networking Summit and head of the CUWiN project, Nicole Friedman of the Center for Neighborhood Technologies, Peter and Annie Collins,leading advocates in the Municpal Fiber movement, and the prolific James Carlini.

The panelists addressed strategies for communities to take their connective destiny into their own hands. I think we can all agree that internet connectivity is a community asset that is valuable for our economic development, whether we speak of a neighborhood, a municipality or our region (dare we say the entire State?).

As Carlini points out, quite rightly, this is not just a matter for the civic minded. It makes great business sense. Take his example of housing developers. If a business or even a savvy potential resident does a search for property and selects for certain criteria including broadband availability we can see a seacrh narrow from 140 to a handful. If you are marketing your property, do you want to be in the handful, or do you want to be in the less desirable majority?

This issue scales to communities and municipalities.

Many writers and activists can point to other countries that are enacting policies that demonstrate they get this. We’re talking about fiber capacity to the home, not copper.

But back to our conference and the battle hardened panelists we assembled.

The communities we are concerned with don’t even have adequate copper capability or choice for high speed access, and its more than evident that the incumbent carriers are more interested in investing in fiber where they can obtain maximum profit before they will extend any copper (or better service) to the under-served commuities.

If anyone needs data on this, I refer you to the report issued by the Metropolitan Planning Council earlier this year. The report merely codified what we already know. But the point was to make the case in terms of regional economic development as opposed to helping the disadvantaged cross the digital divide.

I’ll get to my point of correction. Ron cited me as source on something, but the info presented was inaccurate. The point of controversy during the discussion was prompted by the question of “war driving” and the general issue of security and wireless networks. The originator of the controversy was not Stel V. of OnShore.

The dispute centered upon the disposition or motives of people that identify wireless networks or clouds, and whether or not they are secure.

While Security should be an issue for anyone in the networking world, there are different degrees of security needed in different contexts, and in some cases there may be reasons (or intention) to provide open access.

The controversy over motives came up as Andy Carra was about to describe the pro bono work of wiggle.net.

The gentlemen of Wiggle.Net have documented and mapped data regarding networks detected in the wilds of Chicago, and reported in to their site.

If you go to their website you will be able to search for any locality in the Chicago area and see what wireless networks have been detected.

Many people purchase a wireless device to establish a wireless home network, but dont even bother to set basic security protocols. Perhaps if you go to the wiggle.net site you’ll find your own network listed, and whether its open or not. Maybe you want it to be open and you like the idea of sharing your connection with your neighbors. Thats part of the idea of the wireless community networking movement. In Homans Square we witnessed the launch of the Wireless Community Networks project (WCN) of the Center for Neighborhood Technology not quite 2 months ago. This is a federally funded project (under the Dept of Commerce) and is intended as a pilot project. It’s a great example of doing our innovation in the communities that are less likely to be served by the latest and greatest technologies by the for-profit corporations.

The CNT project is piloting the WCN in four areas: Homans Square, Pilsen, Elgin and W. Frankfort.

Illinois is the center for plenty of innovation. The CUWiN project is developing wireless mesh technology that will facilitate deployment of community wireless networks along a mesh topology. They’re already in operation, and the technical innovations are being watched closely, not least by those in Chicago.

I believe that the CNT project and the community volunteer project “chifi.net” are seeking to develop strategies to expand the footprint and impact of the TOP project leveraging developments in the CUWiN software.

This is all to the point of there being a role for (or willingness to) sharing access to wireless networks.

This is not to say that the incumbent providers are ok with this. The cable companies aren’t even very happy about residents using the internet connection with more than one PC in their own homes, let alone sharing outside with others, intentionally or not. Likewise for the major telecom providers. Some ISP’s are happy for their customers to share their bandwidth. Why?

Because they believe that ultimately the customer will want to buy more bandwidth. Makes sense to me.

As to whether some war driving is malicious.. I tend to doubt that very much of it is done in such spirit.

Thats not to say that security isn’t an issue. If you have something to protect, its incumbent upon you to take measures to protect it. But there are definitely ways to share access that is relatively secure… you can protect part of your network with proper routing/firewall settings… and there are definitely reasons to want to share access.

I hope this alleviates some of the question of controversy for our panel, and perhaps some of the participants or readers would like to weigh in on this topic.

I just wanted to set the record straight and say that war driving as documented by the guys of wiggle.net can be a public service for people seeking access to intentionally open networks and for people checking to see if their network was detected as open (and perhaps they didnt realize it).

Security is everyone’s concern, but I note the majority of attacks are coming through my wired lines, and through trojan horses and other malicious code.

But the emphasis of the panel was mainly on the bulk of what Iwrote at the beginning of this message, and what I hope we can take away from this is the question of when our region will begin to think in terms of strategic investment, associating broadband deployment with economic development, and with regard to keeping the talent and technologies we are developing in Illinois productive in this state.

I’d like to advocate for something else that came out of the conference: we need every community in Illinois connected with relatively high speed access, and we need to require a base line of service delivery and quality for all communities that is in accord with regional and nationally competitive priorities.

Chicago needs a plan of action to surpass memory that never happened in Civic Net, and Illinois needs an investment and community economic development strategy that encourages high tech start-ups and small businesses.

Ron, sorry about the last bit of diatribe. I know I am somewhat echoing your basic thesis that the surrounding states have gotten something together and we havent.

As a closing point, I’d like to appreciate Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn and Rep. Connie Howard, two figures that get community technology’s importance for Illinois. I’m still awaiting word on who or when we will have a Technology person in the Governor’s office making some waves that will carry us forward.

Regards,

Michael Maranda

CTCNet Chicago, Board President

AFCN, President-Elect
In the recent national elections in France, thumb
there was a record voter turn-out of 84%.
Whether public or private and whatever the scope, food there are three critical aspects to any communications or technology project:

  1. the ownership and business model, cure
  2. the state of the technology (physics/network/system considerations), and
  3. the purpose (or purposes).

Of course these aspects are interwoven, but each heading stands on its own, and we can determine a logical flow for project planning. We’ll need clarity on each, and anything less would be irresponsible.

Consider public communications initiatives such as municipal (or more accurately, city-wide) wireless and broadband networks as have been the focus of many cities and towns across the country, including Chicago.

The inconvenient truth about communications infrastructure (and other public technology) projects is that we’re horribly irresponsible about achieving the clarity needed in these three areas for a good outcome.

Our tendency has been to take the ownership and business model for granted (let industry do it!), to accept the technology on offer by the vendors, and to build a constituency for the network among different interest groups with claims that the network will meet their needs and desires.

We’re doing this bass-ackwards, we’re costing the people, the public, a lot of money (in aggregate, and individually), and we aren’t getting the reliability and functionality we should be getting from these networks.

Network purpose (or purposes) and character should be the logical driver of the process. Purpose should drive technology choice and together these should map out the options for ownership and business model.

We shouldn’t accept any limitation on the ownership/business model options without a deep and clear understanding of the network purpose and the sort of reliability, functionality and accountability that purpose demands. Too much effort is spent in debates and lobbying promulgated by the usual suspects, the purveyors of networks. Unchecked, each vendor’s biased agenda with respect to business model and ready-technology warps public deliberation.

All too often, American cities have closed the doors to viable ownership models as a result of lobbying and tactical rhetoric. To state the case more strongly: they do so at great cost to the public and to the commonweal; they do not serve our interests well, they do not proceed with clarity of public purpose.

What are the ownership models? We can build, buy, or rent. If we take business as our paradigmatic example, big businesses tend to build and buy their own networks whenever they can. Doesn’t it make as much sense for communities and for local governments to do likewise?

I’ve spent a lot of time arguing which of the three aspects should drive the other, and why the business-ownership model should not drive the process. Exploring the technology and the purposes of the network are a lot more work, but that is where we should be directing our attention.

I’ll only briefly mention that the range of technology options is more constrained by a policy regime then it is by the physics and network design.

The definition of network purposes is left as an exercise for your community.

Sourcetree Commons Pledge

Thursday, July 26th, 2007

Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
Nothing happening in the Midwest?

http://www.joinliveearth.org/
From: http://keep-the-core-neutral.org/

The Keep The Core Neutral Coalition is committed to protecting freedom of expression and innovation in domain name policy at ICANN.

This means basing gTLD-approval policy on criteria of only a technical/operational and related nature, prostate and refraining from embedding any particular national, regional, moral, or religious policy objectives into global ICANN policy.

http://keep-the-core-neutral.org/join

(more…)