Releveant speech from the Oslo Freedom Forum by exiled journalist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pECH8Co_oxE (also provides some background - 40 000 put in camps during 2005 elections)
Having lived in Ethiopia for almost 10 years, this is has been systematically going on for years. It ofcourse started as a way to keep revenue coming in from long distance phone calls, blocking services like net2phone. I've also been told that the whole country had a 2Mb satellite connection and everything was dialup. Traceroutes left Ethiopia and came back 750ms later in New York, but they now have fiber connections and seem to be connected through Djibouti.
Now they're blocking Tor and snooping on opposition parties (what's left) and bloggers. SMS traffic also can be shutdown whenever they want.
You can say what you like about the Constitution, but my tin foil hat says that the reason you don’t have laws like this in North America is because we have the technology and can afford to snoop on Skype, email, and so forth at scale. Ethiopia simply doesn’t have the money and/or know-how to monitor VoIP and Email at scale. There’s no salient difference in policy between them and us.
If we rewrite the law to say, “Thou shalt not use a communication mechanism we can’t monitor,” the behaviours of Ethiopia and US/Canada aren’t all that different.
The Ethiopian decision isn't about monitoring, it's about protecting a monopoly. It's the same sort of thinking that has a certain political party opposing free trade agreements out of a fear that it will bankrupt manufacturers using inefficient processes. It's a classic case of violating Henry Hazlitt's economics lesson: "The art of economics consists in looking not merely at the immediate but at the longer effects of any act or policy; it consists in tracing the consequences of that policy not merely for one group but for all groups."
While this prohibition has the immediate (apparent) consequence of 'saving' the state-controlled telephone industry and ostensibly the jobs of its workers, it has a long run consequence of raising telecom costs for the rest of the country which results in less money available for other investment, resulting in a net-loss for the economy. This will also result in an expansion of the "industry" of catching illegal Skypers and prosecuting and incarcerating same -- thus magnifying the net economic loss. Instead of diverting government and/or private resources into innovation, those resources will instead be consumed by reactionism.
The Ethiopian policy is entirely about protectionism and has nothing to do with communications security.
This country is controlled by one man, Meles Zenawi, who is not very nice to his political rivals or to people who disagree with his rule. Protecting the monopoly and communications security are not necessarily mutually exclusive goals. Although I am personally in no position to say with authority, I submit that Zenawi is far more interested in protecting his personal/political interests than in protecting an industry. While the two goals align, he protects the industry. Should they become malaligned, he goes with whatever serves his interest.
If you have evidence that the situation is otherwise, please share it.
It's the same sort of thinking that has a certain political party opposing free trade agreements out of a fear that it will bankrupt manufacturers using inefficient processes.
If by 'inefficient processes' you mean 'workers who are paid a living wage', then yes.
As a general rule I support free trade, but I think you're misrepresenting the concerns coming from the left about free trade.
And as other things, substinence wages are not context dependent, and are very common in places which "free trade" proponents tout.
Plus, their arguments which amount to "working in a sweatshop for our cheap shoes is doing them a favor, because otherwise they'd have no jobs at all" I always found as mere justification for the continuation of slavery and colonization in modern terms.
You don't need fancy technology to snoop on people in America. All the companies are based in the US, so it's just a matter of the government compelling them to build the spy mechanisms into their products or turn over their data. Ethiopia is functionally doing the same thing (massive surveillance of its populace), but without the power to influence these companies, it just bans the products.
I might add, if you think 15 years in prison for using Skype is outrageous, what is the penalty for refusing to cooperate with a US court order or National Security Letter? And how is that functionally different from what Ethiopia is doing? The consequences are the same: surveillance, any time, anywhere the authorities please.
Not so long ago in the 90s people were being persecuted for developing and using cryptographic technology. Specifically, the author of PGP, Phillip Zimmerman, was prosecuted for developing the original PGP -- sparking considerable outrage. If you weren't around and paying attention in the 90s these links can help give you a feel of the general political climate:
Well I still think the intentions of monitoring here are still "good". There are people who think terrorists are a bigger threat to us than us turning ourselves into a more fascist nation. I disagree. But I still think the drive here is still primarily for security... albeit it theater. But the theater is just covering up incompetence, not evil malice.
But in Ethiopia I think I recognize the familiar pattern of government wanting to prevent communication, especially large scale fast or instant communication, because that's what leads to popular revolutions.
Totalitarian governments do that often, this is why the USSR slowly leaked the news of Chernobyl over three days. And why North Korea would not show its national soccer team's World Cup games live. Too much opportunity for too many people to find each other in the streets at the same time.
We are not there yet. However, it's not like our current path leads any place else. And I wonder if well-of people like Singaporeans for example, simply don't engage in violent popular revolutions? This would mean, that as long as our quality of life stays mostly at industrialized world levels, we won't do anything that extreme.
It's quite ironic - the current government overthrew a communist dictator Mengistu Haile Mariam who now resides is thought to be in Zimbabwe. Many government processes, offices and thoughts however are still stuck in the era - lots of paper pushing (believe it was 14 different counters to get your drivers license renewed every year).
I am not nearly as cynical as you. The culture in the US is quite different, and the citizens would have to be scared into letting something like that happen. There would be a huge debate and a groundswell of outrage. Perhaps the fearful, reacting more emotionally than rationally, would eventually persuade the majority. But I don't think so. We still expect a certain amount of freedom and privacy in the US.
The fact that we even have these expectations is what sets us apart from a lot of other nations. Sometimes we (especially those of us, who, unlike you, don't have a public writing persona that lends to the occasional "I wonder what the reaction to this will be" moment) forget to step back and appreciate them. Indeed, many of our discussions are framed around these very expectations.
Where was the groundswell of outrage over the warrantless wiretapping program? Who is protesting the use of National Security Letters with no due process or oversight? Americans celebrate freedom and privacy but are complacent and apathetic when it comes to the erosion of those rights.
There was certainly a groundswell of outrage over warrantless wiretapping. There was plenty of anger and suspicion over things like 'get-mo'.
But those policies were put in place when fear ruled the land- especially the republicans, who had expressly ignored the terrorism threat to the US in favor of defense spending aimed at missile defense.
But what we haven't seen, in the wake of these disturbances are the powers being used for anything other than what they were intended. Nobody is rounding up prostitutes, or drug dealers, or even pedophiles with the powers granted by the Patriot Act.
And we've seen a new administration take over and change its mind on the issue. That is: before having access to all of the information AND being the one responsible, I believe X. Now that I have the security access and is the one responsible, I believe Y.
You don't have to be a genius to see what is happening. And it has nothing to do with corruption, power-grabbing, etc. My guess is John McCain wouldn't have closed the base at Guantanamo either, despite his campaign stance.
It's easy to sit in the cheap seats and lob mortars of accusations at these people. It's harder to try to understand how they are trying to do the best job they can without letting go completely of their ideals.
It's a wobbly boat. I hope we get some ballast good and low before too long. But I think we're still doing reasonably well-- and much better, I'm happy to say, than I feared when the Patriot Act was passed.
His point is: there, people will go to prison for making an unmonitorable call; here, our government has the technology to monitor any call ... if here someone could make an unmonitorable call here, doing so would be made illegal and violators imprisoned.
The Constitution is merely an expression of sentiment. Its force comes not from the fact that it is the "law of the land", but from its general support amongst the populace.
Could government agents flout the Constitution and public sentiment? Sure. But they couldn't get away with it for long without public support.
"How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror."--V for Vendetta
Here is a blogger (a lecturer at Arba Minch University) who the Al-Jazeera aggregation links to; he has some interesting insights on what it means for the average Ethiopian:
Something similar, to a lesser extreme, exists in Egypt. I believe this isn't an issue of security but an issue with the profits telecoms make on international calls. Telecom Egypt is sustaining significant losses due to VOIP and I assume it must be the same with Ethio Telco.
Yep that is why in third world coutries the PTT minister is a highly desireable job - lots of opertunities for diverting cash to ones swiss bank account.
Cleptocracies exist. Systematic diversion of state and aid resources to personal accounts is a real and persistent problem in many parts of the world. To not acknowledge that out of fear of appearing neo-colonialist is, I think, misguided.
Certainly North America and Europe (I assume that's what you meant by "we") have corruption issues, especially with deferred bribes in the form of industry appointments, and contract money flowing to well-connected companies. But that's decidedly different than seeing large percentages of tax revenue ending up as personal property, or state industries like telecoms being awarded as personal fiefdoms to cronies, who then use revenues like a piggy bank.
"Political correctness" is not a dirty word in my vocabulary -- I usually see it as sensitivity or tact -- but censoring our appraisal of corrupt governments because there are elements of corruption in the west, out of fear we'll be accused of hypocrisy or colonialism, is not helpful.
well shall we say south of the border there was lots of Qustionable conduct "Hem Hem" - though Argentina expropraiting Telefonicas assets gave me a good laugh.
regulatory capture + an effective duopoly means I get to pay for gold plated service and actually get telcom services that the rest of the world laughs at.
The sentence " The new legislation empowers the state-owned telecom to prohibit the use not only of VoIP services, but also of video chatting, social media, e-mail, and any other data transfer service capable of communicating information. So that encompass pretty much all communication except for speaking aloud and talking within your own mind." scares the shit out of me...
The sad part is that they're crippling innovation and thus, in the long run, crippling their and all their people's economic prospect. The digital industry is a lot like the invention of the steam machine. Ethiopia will feel, in several years to come, what it would have been like for an early European country, to back out of the industrial revolution.
Once again, politicians are trading the long term for short term monetary gains. (by gains I mean probably the ability to snoop on citicens and to make more money).
We deploy many research projects in Ethiopia, and the situation has always been murky. For example, it has been long outlawed to provide calling services for others over VOIP. So, if you run an internet café, and provide a calling service charging people, you faced jail. Private use of internet has been mostly unmonitored so far---but far too many people are now using their home internet for calling other people it appears. Given its very big diaspora population, communication is a very lucrative business in Ethiopia, and the government has made it clear in the past that the monopoly is going to continue this way because "it is one of the major sources of funds for development". This sounds like the next step in that approach.
The only reason they get away with this is that it makes no difference to the day to day lives of the average Ethiopean. It's a bit like us in the west having legislation passed that says you are not allowed to go over Mach 2 in your private jet. I wouldn't expend energy fighting that, but take away my comms rights, and I'll burn your mansions to ashes.
Not digging the analogy. The Arab Spring reinforced the role of free communication in the process of overturning tyrannical regimes. All analogies are broken at some level, but the discord in relevance here is too much.
It may not be the case for the people of Ethiopia today, but mobile phones have proven to be a powerful disrupter in similar countries. Skype acts as a conceptual anchor for the reader in the article, but the law is not limited to Skype.
You can't downplay this legislation. It is an assault on the very foundation of freedom. Make no mistake about it.
I agree that this is a very serious assault. My intention was not to downplay this legislation but to point out how it passed so easily in a population of 85 million. Their priorities are fending off starvation. i.e. they are being kicked while they are down.
Not the same. Technology is making every day Internet use cheaper and cheaper. So it's not hard to imagine a broad adoption in a few years there. It's absurd to think the same happening with match 2 jets any time soon. (even when I'd like that). Also, Internet comms enables a lot of business to flourish, that will otherwise be badly damaged.
The analogy is apt. His point was that to most Ethiopians, VOIP calls are a luxury that requires other attendant circumstances, i.e., wealth, similar to the circumstances in which a Westerner would have a private jet capable of going Mach 2.
Electricity, computers, and the internet are considered a necessity (or in Europe, even a right) by First World countries, but in Third World Countries like Ethiopia, whether you're going to have enough food to feed your family is still the biggest daily concern.
There was a time when U.S. Americans would have condemned any attempt by the government to inject itself into their lives. However, that time has long since passed, and with very little effect on the way most Americans live their lives.
Though the government is surely monitoring internet communications, at least people aren't being disappeared. I'd like to see an amendment to the constitution that protects the citizens' right to privacy for all forms of electronic communications and personal digital storage. I think your online identity should fall under the same right of non-self-discrimination that spouses and accused persons have.
"Can't imagine why they are one of the poorest countries on earth."
Agreed !
I would add this relevant idea by Matt Ridley from The Rational optimist (http://amzn.to/KvuK4S) :-
As long as human exchange and specialization are allowed to thrive somewhere, then culture evolves whether leaders help it or hinder it, and the result is that prosperity spreads,technology progresses, poverty declines, disease retreats, fertility falls, happiness increases, freedom grows, knowledge flourishes and the environment improves.
I have to think that VPNs will be targeted soon enough, along with any other solution that obfuscates/encrypts/etc the details of your Internet traffic. We've already seen China's firewall being tweaked to counter such measures. In the West, we'll probably see the usual suspects, like the UK, cracking down first.
Technology and information is on the verge of bringing disruptively empowering change to people and societies everywhere. Politicians have lately realized how dangerous that can be to their entrenched positions in power. Even places like India, America and many other supposedly democratic countries are now clamping down hard on the Internet using various excuses. All of this is disheartening to say the least. China seems to be the role model for where we are headed.
Protecting the state owned company its just the excuse to protect the corrupt government from having the same destiny as the egyptian, gaddafi's and so on.
Some state monopolies are essential to democracy, for example justice, military, law enforcement. Imagine private judges.
I can not only imagine private arbitration, I've seen it. I don't wish to claim that applying this to the entire judicial system would be simple or without potential pitfalls. Private security, meanwhile, has been around for a long time, and is used extensively today.
Just curious, but are you actually using a conspiracy theory site as evidence of "not hard to find"? My favorite part of the article was perhaps this line:
"The evidence comes from events that revealed the NSA’s true motives from 2005 through 2009."
It sure is a shame that the author forgot to link to such evidence and actually present it; someone should notify the webmaster.
I cant help thinking that while there are so many issues like this in the EU and US, having a pop at Ethiopia is a bit ridiculous. If we cant get privacy and freedom sussed out, why on Earth should Ethiopia be held up as some sort of evil?
Can't both Western laws and Ethiopian laws be bad? Why is it a must that the West fix their laws before Ethiopia consider fixing theirs? Isn't Hacker News for everyone, not just western readers?
Having lived in Ethiopia for almost 10 years, this is has been systematically going on for years. It ofcourse started as a way to keep revenue coming in from long distance phone calls, blocking services like net2phone. I've also been told that the whole country had a 2Mb satellite connection and everything was dialup. Traceroutes left Ethiopia and came back 750ms later in New York, but they now have fiber connections and seem to be connected through Djibouti.
Now they're blocking Tor and snooping on opposition parties (what's left) and bloggers. SMS traffic also can be shutdown whenever they want.