Here be dragons

It`s widely believed that explorers in olden times indicated uncharted territory on their maps with a dragon and the words "hic sunt dracones". According to MapHist this is untrue, but I`m not joining that debate today. I`m using it to express my sympathy with a particular psychological response - that of drawing the line somewhere, of recoiling from disgusting, depressing, scary or otherwise repulsive things.

Should a grown person and columnist ever look away? I`d say it`s wholly up to the individual. To help you make up your mind, I should point out that the past week alone convinced me that the Internet has become just the sort of dangerous-minded, venal and repulsive place that should have clearly demarcated areas with warnings of "explicit", "graphic", "morally questionable", "depraved" or "war-zone".

I haven`t yet managed to actually look at the beheading that disgusted everyone so last week, and I don`t yet know what compels me to try. Each time I try, I am filled with such a nauseating mix of emotions that I come to the same realisation: I shouldn`t even attempt such things.

My conviction about human life is simple: I don`t think we have a right to kill anything or anyone, under any circumstances. The fact that some of the most criminally imperialistic Western nations routinely use such Christian dogma to escape justified backlash from developing nations doesn`t compel me to change my mind. So, as far as I`m concerned, this incident disgraces all of humankind. But the beheading is the subject of another column by a colleague this week, so I won`t say any more.

My conviction about human life is simple: I don`t think we have a right to kill anything or anyone, under any circumstances.

Carel Alberts, special additions editor, Brainstorm

There is plenty of other proof that the Internet is not what it used to be. The New York Times reported this week that crime rings are now using job sites to recruit money launderers. The paper cites the case of a student, who took a telecommuting job processing payments for a European software company.

She had to accept payment for sales, take the money out of her PayPal account and wire it to the company in the Ukraine, in exchange for commission. But after a month her account was shut down, because of fraudulent activity, she was told. The cash had come from nicked credit cards and she owed PayPal the $2 000 that it transferred to her from those cards. Lovely.

Although the woman`s actions were at best careless, and probably a bit suspicious, this goes to show Net sites can`t always be trusted, especially if you`re given to rushing in where angels fear to tread.

Then there is the ugly fact that the Net is a huge porn-enabler. I read yesterday that a six-month US investigation into peer-to-peer networks has yielded more than 65 accused on charges of child pornography distribution.

Can we say that any one technology is more prone to abuse than others? According to the US General Accounting Office, the risks of exposure to pornography using peer-to-peer software are no greater than those posed by other Net applications. However, the exploding popularity of the file-sharing software has raised concerns that they provide a safe haven for child porn traffickers.

And so the US Department of Justice promises to "pierce" the "perceived but false cloak of anonymity" in peer-to-peer networks.

Just to give you a clue about the types of people lurking in the Web`s information alleyways - one of those arraigned was asked why he used P2P networks, and he replied, "Because the cops are in the chat rooms."

Finally, the Internet is fast becoming a battlefield of vested interests that the rest of us have no interest in.

For instance, the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution (ADTI) made startling claims in the past week that Linus Torvalds isn`t the creator of Linux after all. Torvalds responds: "OK, I admit it. I was just a frontman for the real fathers of Linux, the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus. I`m actually relieved that it`s over, and that the...institute finally uncovered the lie. I can now go back to my chosen profession, the exploration of the fascinating mating dance of the common newt."

Droll as this exchange is, it doesn`t stop there. The site on which the study appeared then mysteriously disappeared. And allegations from inside the ever-vigilant OSS movement started doing the rounds. It reminds me of other, more serious flashpoints in the simmering battle between Microsoft and OSS, specifically Capitol Hill marches and two recent consumer campaigns (Get the Facts and Go Open Source), reported on by ITWeb last week.

It gets even uglier. Groklaw (on Slashdot) reports that the ADTI gets funding from Microsoft (but shuts up about funding for the specific report), and reminds us that the same institution once "found" that the US`s IT troubles are the result of free software eating into intellectual property rights. The ADTI was also responsible for saying OSS presented an easy terrorism target.

While this is all very interesting, it makes me wonder whether, resultant column or not, I`ve wasted my time listening to petty squabbles between entities that should really focus on providing me with a better service. I haven`t got the time for this.