Qtel haven't answered the charge that they block sites which need not be blocked. My main beef with Qtel is their incompetence. I'm against web filtering, but if there are local rules, then Qtel should try at least to make a half-decent job of the implementation.
Anyone can visit a search engine and search successfully for pornography. Many search engines even give previews of the images which aren't blocked. This seems to be a huge gap in the filter.
Anyone can also search for radical political messages, and the search engines will usually provide a unfiltered cache of the text, even if the target site itself is filtered. This is another gap.
Anyone can set up a secure tunnel that bypasses the filter entirely. It's not technically challenging, and the setup is very well documented. This is another gap.
From my experience, Qtel doesn't unblock sites. When sites are blocked incorrectly, and there is no remedy, it encourages internet users to find methods to avoid the filters. This is another gap.
Qtel haven't answered the charge that they block sites which need not be blocked. My main beef with Qtel is their incompetence. I'm against web filtering, but if there are local rules, then Qtel should try at least to make a half-decent job of the implementation.
Anyone can visit a search engine and search successfully for pornography. Many search engines even give previews of the images which aren't blocked. This seems to be a huge gap in the filter.
Anyone can also search for radical political messages, and the search engines will usually provide a unfiltered cache of the text, even if the target site itself is filtered. This is another gap.
Anyone can set up a secure tunnel that bypasses the filter entirely. It's not technically challenging, and the setup is very well documented. This is another gap.
From my experience, Qtel doesn't unblock sites. When sites are blocked incorrectly, and there is no remedy, it encourages internet users to find methods to avoid the filters. This is another gap.
--nigel