I dropped into Westminster this afternoon to have a chat with MP, Jeremey Hunt about internet content and child protection. Is it feasible to even consider some kind of government action which places the responsibility on internet service providers to be more aggressive in filtering out inappropriate, illegal or downright unacceptable content or should we simply surrender to the American model of everything or nothing? There's a powerful moral argument for more direct action but it's a subject that makes politicians uncomfortable, with its tacit implication of internet control in a free society. Now's not the time, it being very late, for me to start thinking out loud about a problem which is starting to show signs of provoking a political confrontation with a moral dilemma.
With the world's law-enforcement gathering for the ecrime congress, en masse, now busily engaged in the pub across the road, I'm struck by how many I now recognise on first name terms. The head of Ukraine's unit, the FBI and this year, both "Tiger" from the Hong Kong police and his counterpart, the director of the People's Security Bureau in Beijing. Even the Cubans have pitched-up with the South Africans, Australians, Vietnamese and forty other countries.
Most interesting of all is the head of the Russian cybercrime unit from Moscow, whose name happens to be the same as the new President. I wonder if they are related?