Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Submission Summary: 0 pending, 2 declined, 1 accepted (3 total, 33.33% accepted)

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

+ - Nations Differ on "Information Weapons"->

Submitted by DrgnDancer
DrgnDancer (137700) writes "There's an interesting story on NPR's website about recent efforts to control so called "information weapons" on the Internet. What's interesting here is that the term "information weapon", as defined by many of the countries trying to limit them, doesn't mean what you would think. From the article:

"At a U.N. disarmament conference in 2008, Sergei Korotkov of the Russian Defense Ministry argued that anytime a government promotes ideas on the Internet with the goal of subverting another country's government — even in the name of democratic reform — it should qualify as "aggression." And that, in turn, would make it illegal under the U.N. Charter.

"Practically any information operation conducted by a state or a number of states against another state would be qualified as an interference into internal affairs," Korotkov said through an interpreter. So any good cause, like [the] promotion of democracy, cannot be used as a justification for such actions.""

The Russians, and a lot of other countries (Iran and China notable among them), apparently consider the free exchange of information to be an information technology threat. One that must be managed by treaty."

Link to Original Source

The end of labor is to gain leisure.

Working...