The Department of Defense has been asked to reconsider its decision to block military access to social networking sites on its computers. In regardes to use of the sites, where soldiers share photos, videos and audio recordings with family and friends back home, the DoD cited bandwidth and security issues. In a May 15 letter to the Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, U.S. Rep. Edward Markey argued: "If network congestion was an issue, for instance, it is surprising that no bandwidth-intensive gaming sites are on the list of prohibited sites. I believe the military should have opted to ration any scarce bandwidth resources it was encountering rather than summarily blocking access by U.S. troops completely."
DoD spokesman Air Force Major Patrick Ryder said a response was being prepared to Markey's letter. "We have received the congressman's letter and are developing a response. However, as a matter of policy, we don't discuss the specifics of correspondence intended for Congress, so it would be inappropriate to comment. In regards to the issue of DoD's decision to block certain recreational Web sites, I can tell you that this step was taken to ensure DoD computer networks are available for combat operations and critical support activities." Rear Adm. Elizabeth Hight, vice director, Defense Information Systems Agency, said more sites could be blocked in the future.
News source: PC World
DoD spokesman Air Force Major Patrick Ryder said a response was being prepared to Markey's letter. "We have received the congressman's letter and are developing a response. However, as a matter of policy, we don't discuss the specifics of correspondence intended for Congress, so it would be inappropriate to comment. In regards to the issue of DoD's decision to block certain recreational Web sites, I can tell you that this step was taken to ensure DoD computer networks are available for combat operations and critical support activities." Rear Adm. Elizabeth Hight, vice director, Defense Information Systems Agency, said more sites could be blocked in the future.
News source: PC World
Thats would kill 2 birds with 1 stone... soldiers keep in touch and the DoD have control of the servers.
Thats would kill 2 birds with 1 stone... soldiers keep in touch and the DoD have control of the servers.
Because, technically, the DoD controlled internet isn't supposed to be used for this kind of communication; it's for business use only.
Besides the DoD has always reserved the right to limit comercial access when it is required for mission.. this is all jsut old news rehashed and has no real value. All these sites actng like its news........
This doesn't mean that the networks don't suffer. I won't tell you where I am but I have seen network utilization reports and beleive me. You give a soldier a way to sham (I am a former soldier as well) he will find a way to shaw even more.. Instead of doing the job he was paid to do during duty hours s/he will be out surfing for porn, ebay, etc... I have seen it all to often. And all use of any U.S. Gov system is consent to monitoring. Limited Moral use has always authorized unless critical network use was required to supercede it. That is normal practice for almost any employee's org.
It was designed for Command and Control not to surf porn, buy off ebay, or go to migenta.com . There are MWR facilities in most locations that let you do most that - the porn. But tell me if you are a US tax Payer ..how would you want your dollars spent.. Paying you to do a job... or paying you to sit and leech bandwidth for your own personal gain?
Remember the INTERNET was developed form ARPANET and the DoD maintained many of the Root DNS servers for many years. ( I know one of the DNS admins)
I have supported communications with testing for 78 countries (actively invloved in 46 personaly) and even if thier ethics aren't the same as the US Military every country, every workplace has rules. They all have similar restrictions for the same reason.
From Albania to Turkey, from UK to France, for Kyrgzystan to Armenia, to South Africa and back again.
"only in america" is such a mindless over used response. Considering that Canada and United states both make up North America, and there is Central and South America too ... ohh you mean America as in people who claim to be "Americans" aka United States Citizens.
or were you saying "only in america" it would make the news... well in that case I guess I agree with you. Many countries wouldn't even let views, stories or comments like that even be posted (not yours I mean the org article).
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.