No YouTube for you, private! (and Gears of Bore)

At ease! It's IT Blogwatch, taking a look at the military and civilian response to the U.S. Defense Department's decision to restrict soldiers' access to MySpace, YouTube, and other popular sites. Not to mention a machine with a middling mission ...

The U.S. military newspaper Stars and Stripes reports on the Defense Department decision to restrict access to certain websites:

Starting Monday, the Defense Department will block access to MySpace, YouTube and a host of other sites on official department computers worldwide, in an effort to boost its network efficiency.

Troops and families living on U.S. bases will still be able to view the sites through private Internet networks, but the move leaves servicemembers in Iraq and Afghanistan who use the popular picture- and video-sharing sites with little or no access to them.

Defense officials said the move is solely a reaction to the heavy drain the streaming video and audio can put on the defense computer network.

Computerworld blogger Preston Gralla wonders: Sensible policy, or something else?

While there are obvious reasons why the Pentagon is doing this, there are some potential problems as well. The move follows on the heels of the Pentagon cracking down on bloggers. Some people believe that it's an attempt to blunt any criticism of the Iraq war.

ZDNet's Russell Shaw hints at a vast anti-rock and anti-rap free-speech conspiracy, or something like that:

I call it censorship. You don't want soldiers posting videos that can be readily accessed by friends back home.

But I am sure that in terms of showing anything the enemy (mostly from a nation who sent no 9/11 hijackers, and from a group that attacked us on 9/11 but wasn't in Iraq until we got there), hasn't there already been a prohibition?

MySpace could also be a good recruiting tool for the Armed Services, but the DoD doesn't seem to get that. And what about PhotoBucket photos of smiling platoons.

Interesting, too, that the music sites banned are mostly rock and roll and urban. So does that mean that if soldiers accessed music sites for country music, or contemporary Christian, that'd be OK?

Techdirt is also concerned:

In a time where the Defense Department probably should be doing its best to keep soldiers happy, cutting them off from one of their main sources of entertainment and communication seems like a particularly short-sighted move. Obviously, if you had to chose between, say, body armor and more bandwidth, you could make the argument that body armor could be more important -- but it certainly seems likely to greatly upset a lot of soldiers.

To which Soldier Dan replies:

As a Soldier who was in Afghanistan and needed to use the Government provided network for work this is a great move.

Since we were relying on satellite communications the internet speeds were not fast to begin with, then we had to deal with everyone swarming the office computers to check their myspace or upload the pictures they just took. The afternoon / evening hours it would take forever to get documents to load. If I had to scan and send documents stateside I would go in at 0400 just so it didn't take me all day to send.

There are other internet options available for Moral boosting. The USO had its own connection providing wireless connections with no blocks. There was also a service you could buy for $35 a month to have internet in your quarters. I'm pretty sure the MWR available computers were also on a separate connection because they allowed blocked sites.

The DOD doesn't go out trying to violate our rights, there are good reasons for what they do. People need to stop crying about not being able to access certain sites and remember the other wars where our Brothers in Arms sat in a foxhole for weeks at a time...

Brian, a reservist:

I'm in the Reserve, prior active duty, have been called up to serve in Iraq before, and have friends serving in Iraq right now.

DoD is making the right choice here and I'm surprised it wasn't done a lot sooner. I have asked my friends to send me pictures to post on picture sharing sites for friends and family (since they can't access them). Some of the pictures I get have severe operational security issues with them. Too many people just don't consider the security aspects when sending pictures and videos home to mom or spouse.

Bandwidth was a severe issue when I was in Iraq. My friends tell me it still is. So, the DoD is getting a 2 for 1 deal by doing this.

Anyone that says the govt is taking away rights from our warfighters is just plain mistaken and doesn't understand the military. We who serve voluntarily give up some "freedoms" for the greater common good. We know it. We accept it. We understand it. It's one of our many sacrifices we are proud to endure to serve our country!

Boom lays down some more covering fire:

Its all about Operational Security. I can't count how many times a mission has been compromised because some superstar has told his girlfriend what we were doing tomorrow. Personaly, it doesn't bother me and if it will help get me home alive in any way shape or form, I'm all for it.

Buffer overflow:

Around the Net

• Sunbelt: Unintended consequences
• StillSecure: Do multi-function devices confuse people?
• Steve Duplessie: 50 years of right is now very wrong
• Paul McDougall: Why Linux Will Turn Microsoft's Ballmer Into A Boy Named Sue
• Microsoft Watch: Are You Afraid?
• Matt Marshall: Only half of Bubble-era companies out of business
• Mike Masnick: CBS Learns The Lesson Quickly: Don't Build Your Own Destination; Syndicate Your Video Content
• Hans Mast: Evolutionist makes fake blog post to belittle Creationism

Around Computerworld

• Shark Bait: Laptop loaned for telecommuting
• Michael R. Farnum: Do you trust your school district for your kid's safety on the web?
• Shark Tank: He shoulda known better
• Martin MC Brown: Video on timeshift demand

Previously in IT Blogwatch

• Microsoft's forceful FOSS fight (and electric Harleys)
• VCs juice Joost (and rate my network)
• Red Hat's desktop dream (and the roadkill wears Prada)
• Sun unveils JavaFX (and ID dog go home)
• And Dell makes three (and rude error)
• Yahoo!/Microsoft! merger! talks! fail! (and game over)
• Do we need a security industry? (and eliminating uncertainty)
• Older posts

And finally... An elaborately constructed machine that works well, but has a major limitation ...

Computerworld's Senior Online Projects Editor Ian Lamont compiled IT Blogwatch today. Regular Blogwatcher Richi Jennings is scheduled to return this Thursday.