With playful speculation bubbling around Google's next moves (Goobuntu or Napster etc.) I thought I might add some ludicrous suggestions of my own.

Google is one of the most powerful supercomputing platforms in the world. Tor is a distributed network that anonymizes web browsing and any other applications that use the TCP protocol. Tor's security is improved as it grows and as more organisations volunteer the time and bandwidth to run servers. Google has alot of bandwidth and servers. (The Googlesphere, as presented in the company's public announcements, comrises more than 100,000 servers ranging from 533 MHz Intel Celeron to dual 1.4 GHz Intel Pentium III - that's 126–316 teraflops, one third the speed of the Blue Gene supercomputer, the most powerful unclassified computing machine available to humanity. There's a significant difference between Google and Bluegene - Google is interwoven with the internet. Physical infrastructure - Google's four U.S.-based datacentres - two in Silicon Valley and two in Virginia - each with an OC 48 (2488 Mbit/s) internet connection. Data - a constantly updated fascimile of the internet itself).

Suppose Google were to install Tor's Onion Routers throughout its serverfarms. Global internet users communications would bounce around anonymously in a massive distributed network of virtual tunnels. It would be unprecendented in scale, a network that would open up the internet to people in censored regimes all around the world. It would enable a generation of software developers to create new communication tools with privacy built-in. The Google platform running onion routers would provide an ecosystem for a range of applications that allow organizations and individuals to share information over public networks without compromising their identity. By donating - say, 20kb/s of bandwidth per server(!) - Google would be in a position to - inadvertently - overwhelm, the 'Great Firewall' - a striking way to differentiate itself from competitors - particularly those invited to testify in congress todayand in two weeks time: Cisco Systems, (Google), Microsoft, Yahoo.

. . . I doubt Google can even afford to have people sitting around thinking about providing a free privacy service to the planet. For a (not-so-)small - but vocal - proportion of its users? Perhaps, - or is it that Google's business model is now inextricably linked into a downward spiral of content/user aware advertising and anti-democratic emerging markets - increasingly at the expense of its more mature markets?

Reuters Canada is reporting that Nortel Networks, and its key competitor in China, Huawei are forming a joint venture research and development product house focused on what they are calling 'ultra' broadband - user-aware, content-aware broadband access platforms capable of delivering IPTV (TV over the Internet) and NGN Next Generation Netwoks) to the home. Nortel, North American largest telecom equipment supplier, will hold the majority stake in the joint venture, which will be run from Ottawa.

A joint venture with Huawei raises some serious and immediate concerns. Craig Simons, writing in Newsweek International last month asked of Huawei,

Is it a security menace bent on doing Beijing's bidding, a legitimate international telecom competitor, or a corporate house of cards, all market share and PR releases but no profits? It's hard to answer those questions. CEO Ren refuses to talk with journalists, and there are persistent rumors that the firm is actually run by the People's Liberation Army. The company denies that, and has long claimed it no longer has any ties to the government. Huawei's books are audited by a well-known accounting firm (KPMG), but few of its financial numbers are made public. Opaque bookkeeping has also frightened analysts: an August report by the Thailand-based consulting company MWL argues that Huawei may rely on "unsustainably low prices and government export assistance" to make sales.

An unclassified CSIS commentary published 2003 on global weapons proliferation and the military-industrial complex of the PRC, on Huawei

There are two distinct components to the production and sale of arms in China: military and former military enterprises such as Poly Group, and civilian defence enterprises, both state-owned and private, such as NORINCO and Huawei...Besides state-owned defence producers, China also has private companies involved in defence production, such as the telecom firm Huawei. With offices in Cuba, Iran, and Burma, Huawei has been a major supplier of dual-use telecom equipment. In 2001, its Indian subsidiary was accused of tailoring a commercial order for the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Also in 2001, Huawei supplied Iraq with fibre optics to link its radar and anti-aircraft systems, triggering U.S. and U.K. bombings. Private defence firms often also enjoy the shielding of powerful patrons. Huawei was founded by a former PLA officer, and benefitted from early sales to the PLA. But it also receives state support in the form of tax privileges and state-sponsored credit because it has been designated a “national champion” of new technology. Its supporters have included top general Yang Shangkun and head of the China International Trade and Investment Corporation, Wang Jun (also president of Poly). Unlike state-owned defence producers, private firms are more likely to be profitable. A further level of complexity in their proliferation activity is that foreign firms seeking to do business with them may try to shield them from U.S. sanctions.