Speaking just for myself.
On Sep 23, 2009, at 9:56 AM, Ben Campbell wrote:
On Sep 22, 2009, at 10:14 PM, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
I'm not talking about incitement to riot, advocacy of terrorism,
expressions of racial hatred, or anything of the kind. As I have
expressed several times in this thread, I'm talking about
discussion of
technical topics that impinge on the political realm: things like the
use of encryption to protect personal privacy (especially from the
prying eyes of Isaac and Justin), the Internet as a technology that
routes around censorship as damage, and the simple human right to be
*left alone* by government bureaucrats and other such busybodies if
one
is going about one's business in a peaceful manner.
Concrete example:
Would a presentation on how tor was used to bypass state controls on
news during the recent election protests in Iran be acceptable under
the terms of the agreement?
I don't see why not. We have been invited to come. IETF's talk about
these sorts of things as part of our technical discussions. Our hosts
know this, and must be prepared for it. I would have no hesitation in
giving such a talk myself, if I felt it was appropriate on technical
grounds (and if the topic was appropriate in terms of the IETF
process, WG charter, plenary session topic, etc.).
Note, by the way, that technical knowledge is almost always a double
edged sword. What you see as a survey of
means to escape censorship others might see as a survey of means to
improve censorship. When I gave talks about arms control, I always saw
people from "the other side" in attendance. I would assume that the
same is true here.
Regards
Marshall
That would sound like a perfectly appropriate and timely plenary
presentation. And it seems to me to violate the plain language of
the agreement concerning "human rights".
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf