April 23, 2001– Newsletter #127

Greetings, Weekend Silicon Warriors,

Whew! What a tough day. Just before writing this
newsletter, I received about ten panicked emails from the
people at Internet.com. The Goodies site wasn’t showing
up in any version of Netscape. I went in and fixed one of
the SSI’s and every page came back except the
homepage. How about that, huh? After an hour plus of
banging my head against the desk, I found the problem.
It was a single missing end TR command. One command
and the entire homepage died in Netscape. Oh well, at
least it will be a good example for my students as to why
they always need to check their code in multiple
browsers.

Did you hear…

When was the last newsletter that didn’t have a warning
about a hack or virus? Keep an eye out for a Melissa
clone that arrives with the subject line “Matcher”. The
body of the message then has the text:

Want to find your love mates!!!

Try this its cool…

Looks and Attitude maching to opposite sex.

(Misspellings left in on purpose – Joe)

There’s an attachment and if you click on it – you’re
infected. The virus is seen as a medium level concern. It
has two things going for it. First off, it’s a Trojan horse
virus so it isn’t immediately apparent that it’s been
planted. Second, people are still falling for opening an
attachment in droves. I simply do not open attachments.
Period.

Privacy is still a concern on the Internet. Attorney
General John Ashcroft met with privacy advocates to
discuss how the U.S. government deals with privacy
issues. One of the big sticking points, Carnivore, will
remain sticky. CNN reports that Ashcroft will offer no
assurance that Carnivore use will be curtailed.

In these darn times of falling (and some rising) stock
prices, can any one site claim to be the best site on the
Web? Well, if you’re talking strictly about profit
potential and stock ratings, one site shines above all
others. Ebay.
(
Source)

On a personal note, you may remember a few newsletters
back that I raged against cell phones and PDA’s. Well,
maybe I’ll be brought around on one of them. My
university has purchased a PDA just for me. It should be
here in about a week. We’ll see if I step over to the dark
side. I hope it comes with games.

Now on to today’s topic…

On May 16th, Timothy McVeigh will be executed by
lethal injection in a federal penitentiary in Terre Haute,
Indiana. He will be put to death for the 1995 killing of
168 persons in the Alfred P. Murrah federal building.
McVeigh has not shown sorrow for his crime. In fact, he
has referred to the children killed in the blast as
“collateral damage”.

Now, please understand I am not supporting nor decrying
the death penalty. I am simply stating fact. McVeigh
will die. The execution will go through. McVeigh
welcomes it. There will be no appeal.

The question I want to put forward is, “should Americans
be able to watch the execution on the Internet because it
is our First Amendment rights as citizens?”

If that statement knocked you for a loop, it did me too.
My concern is that the statement is not a hypothetical
question being posed to a University ethics class. It is a
real statement that is being fought right now in the federal
courts.

U.S. District Court Judge John Tinder has denied a claim
by the Entertainment Network to “broadcast” the
execution over the Internet. Entertainment Network chief
executive David Marshlack claims an appeal will be
brought. Marshlack is the same person who provides the
soft-core site Voyeur Dorm.com and hosted the one-day
event AskOJ.com where OJ Simpson answered questions
online.

If you’re wondering, as I was, if there aren’t already rules
in place regarding broadcasting an execution, there are.
The Bureau of Prisons guidelines and federal law clearly
state that allowances will be made for the media to be
present at executions, but that no sound or video
recording devises may be used.

That should pretty much put an end to the entire question
but it doesn’t. The federal government is breaking its
own law. The execution will be broadcast. A closed
circuit feed from Terre Haute, Indiana will be sent to
families of the bombing victims in Oklahoma City, OK.
U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft defends the
broadcast stating that it will bring some closure to those
who lost loved ones in the attack.

In addition, McVeigh has expressed a want to have the
execution broadcast. Should that make a difference?

Entertainment Network will broadcast the execution for a
fee. I don’t care about the money. What I do care about
is someone seeing the execution after the protected feed
is finished. My main concern is that once the pay-per-
view broadcast is over, then just about anyone will be
able to see the execution. Many who paid the fee will
capture it. Once the feed is captured, I can easily see
animated gifs and copies of the actual death scene
popping up all over the Web.

One student I spoke to thought the concept of Web
broadcasting an execution was abhorrent. The student
with her said we should be able to view the execution
adding, “it’s no worse than what is out there now”.

I think this is the real crux of the matter. Your opinion on
the subject most likely lies within your moral stance.
Who is profiting? Who is winning? Who, in your eyes,
is getting what they want, but shouldn’t? That shows the
fight to broadcast the execution as what it really is, an
ethical battle within society. However, ethics are not
what will make the decision. An interpretation of the law
by a court will make the decision to grant permission to
broadcast or not.

By now you must have formed some level of opinion.
Let me see if I can alter it or if you stand firm. What if
the Entertainment Network proclaimed they would give
all of the money raised from the Web broadcast to
charities created to help victim’s families? Should then
the execution be broadcast?

What if I told you that the scenario above is true?
Entertainment Network wants to provide the feed for
$1.95, all of which, they say, would go to charities set up
to help families of the bombing victims. (
Source)

Do you feel differently about the broadcast now that you
know that?

I was told once that the first amendment only works if the
Larry Flints of the world are given the same access to
freedom of speech as everyone else. That’s true, but
there are still limits on that first amendment freedom.
For example, you may not incite hatred or enrage a crowd
through your speech. The one limitation that always pops
up is yelling “fire” in a crowded movie house. That’s not
protected speech.

So now the question is once again being put to not only
the people of the U.S., but also to the Internet itself.
The Internet is often lauded as being open and free from
governmental restrictions. It is freedom of speech
incarnate.

The First Amendment is tested again and again in regards
to pornography on the Web. This somehow seems bigger
in my mind.

I have my opinions but they are certainly not federal law
and my purpose here is not to sway you, but only to
inform you so that you might get a dialogue going with
those around you.

Does the first amendment stretch that far? If someone is
allowed to go online and rant on against Wal-Mart,
should the Entertainment Network be allowed to
broadcast the execution of Timothy McVeigh?

If the answer is “no”, then where must we, as a society
(even a global society), draw the line? At what point is
something no longer protected?

Is the Internet truly open to any and all forms of self-
expression?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That’s that. Thank you for reading. Hopefully I can
spark some discussion. I only wish I had a class later
today I could put this to. The next time I’ll be able to
bring this up is Tuesday, and I will.

Joe Burns, Ph.D.

And Remember: I’m readying my lectures for next
semester when I’ll teach Advanced Audio. As you can
tell, I’m a big fan of trivia and I often pepper it into my
lectures. While searching for audio tidbits,
I ran across this one. It is generally agreed that the
loudest sound ever produced (in recorded history) was
the volcanic eruption on Krakatoa in 1883. The blast
created a sound wave that sent a tidal wave halfway
across the world. The wave was so strong that it
blew a Dutch warship 30 feet onto the land in the
Harbor of Batavia (now Djakarta).