Uncategorised

A list of websites supposedly blocked by the Great Australian Firewall, most of which (but by no means all) are porn sites, has been posted at Wikileaks.  Since the list was posted, there have been recurring reports that Wikileaks has been blocked or shutdown.  It's also possible that high traffic in response to this and other stories has overwhelmed the Wikileaks servers. 

According to Wikinews, blocking is taking place (Portions of Wikileaks, Wikipedia blocked in Australia):

Portions of Wikileaks.org, the "uncensorable Wikipedia for untraceable mass document leaking and analysis", has been blocked in Australia. Wikinews has also learned that portions of Wikipedia, the free, online encyclopedia anyone can edit, have also been blocked. Portions of the video sharing website YouTube have also been blocked.

The websites are among thousands of others that the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), a government owned entity, block access to when using their blocking software. The alleged three lists, from 2008 and 2009, were leaked to Wikileaks who published the documents. Most of the blocked websites are ones hosting hardcore pornography. According to their website, the ACMA's role in regards to the internet is to "address community concerns about offensive and illegal material online and, in particular, to protect children from exposure to material that is unsuitable for them."

Despite the alleged leak, Stephen Conroy, the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy in Australia, much of the listed websites were never an issue with the ACMA, but that some of the websites are. He also goes on to say that anyone publishing the content of the ACMA's list will face criminal prosecution.

The Great Australian  Firewall, is ill-conceived, and will probably be ill-executed.  Responsibility for children's well being in ths sort of matter should rest with their parents rather than with shadowy web censors, who's list of unacceptable web content is not only kept secret but is protected by draconian legistlation.  As I have blogged recently, similar issues exist with respect to the UK's Internet Watch Foundation, which employs four people to evaluate websites (suggested by members of the public) for possible illegality.  Note the emphasis.  These shadowy bodies need real oversight, particularly where banning of images and websites can be extended, whether through malice or ineptitude, to make entire sites or domains inaccessible.

The Australian legislation says that sites linking to banned URLs face a fine of $11,000 per day.   

The Register reports that "Wikileaks tells Aus censorship minister to rack off".  Visit that story for further links on the Australian  net censorship story.

Cyclingnews.com reports that a German laboratory has developed a test for genetic doping.  This is quite interesting, as there have been reports that genetic doping, if not in widespread use at the moment, may well be the next battlefront in the war against doping.

I have always understood that genetic doping would probably involve either insertion of genes for biochemical factors that might alter or enhance physiological response to exercise (either impacting endurance or the capacity to respond to training stress), or transient expression of such genes.  Likely target tissues would be muscle groups.  These sorts of techniques carry considerable risks - insertion of exogenous DNA into the human genome can have dangerous consequences - in particular one might worry about the potential to induce cancerous tumours.

One problem is the detection of such doping techniques, and whether it would be possible to detect such changes via blood or urine tests (presumably for whatever the novel gene's product influences).  So I was interested to know what the cyclingnews.com report had to say:

Scientists in Cologne, Germany, have developed a test to detect genetic doping. The test will detect GW1516, which has been added to the list of doping substances list year. GW1516 has been developed to fight obesity by stimulating fat oxidation.

Actually, this sounds like a new doping compund, rather than genetic doping.  And in fact, the Wikipedia entry for GW1516 indicates that it is a relatively small molecule  as shown below

So, this sounds like a new test to identify a new doping compund on the block, rather than a test for genetic doping.

The scientists have been working on the test for about a year. "The test is ready and we will be able to do genetic doping controls at the Olympics in 2012 and likely a lot earlier than that," Mario Thevis told Spiegel Online. Thevis is professor at the Deutsche Sporthochschule in Cologne.

This sounds more like a story about genetic doping - perhaps the report is combining two stories into one?

The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) distinguishes two types of genetic doping, either the addition of foreign DNA or the concrete change of one's own DNA. GW1516 belongs to the latter category.

Thevis added that tests with animals showed that the substance increases one's endurance.

Presumably GW1516 has some effect on exercise physiology, but I don't think it can fall into the second WADA category - a concrete change of one's own DNA.  Unless I am missing something.

In any case, if this report indicates that testing laboratories are moving to develop tests for genetic doping, that's all to the good.  Many modern doping products are particularly dangerous, as they are often hormones and other bioactive molecules that can alter the physical and physiological development of athletes' bodies, possibly irreversibly in some cases and in any case dangerously.  Genetic doping will quite possibly be associated with other more sinister and even lethal side effects.

So, after contributors to the nodpi.org forum posted publicly available information that incuded Kent Ertegrul's phone number, legal threats were made (Shoe on the other foot).  Presumably nodpi.org is a big enough thorn in Phorm's side that they decided to have go at them.

As usual in such matters, it's spurred the indefatigable band of anti-Phorm activists on to deeper investigations.  Read for example this contribution to the Trouble at Mill thread at the nodpi.org forum.  The author provides many supporting internet links.

It astonishes me that a respectable company such as British Telecom would get mixed up with a company run by someone like Kent Ertegrul, particularly in an endeavour which intrudes deeply in people's private internet activity.  Recent pronouncements from BT give the impression that they are cooling on the BT-Phorm tie-up.  Let's hope these impressions turn out to be true, and that BT have decided that working with a company with known links to spyware, and with antecedent companies that distributed spyware software makes little business sense.

Sunny;  Temp: 7°C;  Wind: WSW 8mph;  Hum: 67%;  Press: 1031mB;  Vis: Very good

It's been a very pleasant week here - mostly sunny, though rather cold first thing in the morning.  Not an excellent week of training, unfortunately.  I did manage a 20 mile morning road training ride on Tuesday (this was a mixture of level 2 and level 3), but later in the week I wasn't very well so didn't do further sessions.

This event was the first counting event in the North Bucks Road Club time trial league, and was once again based on the Astwood sporting course.  On a lovely sunny (but quite cold) morning, this contributed to a pretty large turnout.  I found it pretty chilly lining up to start, and once on the road, felt pretty weak en route to Chicheley and the first turn.  In fact, I felt so lacking in power that I nearly packed there and then.  Fortunately I felt a bit better after the turn, as I had a slight tail wind.

The rest of the race was relatively uneventful, though the climb up to the finish seemed rather tough!  I finished with 24:55, which was a 5 second improvement over my last solo performance on this course two weeks ago.  Given how crap I felt in the first 3 miles or so, I was quite pleased with that.

Result of the NBRC Time Trial held on Saturday 21st of March 2009
Course:- F5v/10 (Astwood)

Time keepers :- Mary Hartley, Steph Cousins & Tony Farmborough. NBRC

Pusher off :- Bryan Scarborough. NBRC