Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 157 posts

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#101

Post by RegnisGnaw »

toast0 wrote: post #89
tetromino_ wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can mean government control over all IXPs in the country (including DPI hardware and a killswitch), and legal mandate for all ISPs in the country to use only government-controlled IXPs. So unless you have a satellite connection or a private microwave link to a friend's antenna on the other side of the border, you don't get internet.

International dial-up is an option too. Although providers are getting fewer. If you've got a landline, a modem and a technically oriented friend outside the shutdown, it doesn't take too much to setup an iffy dialup server. Can't do a lot of surfing with those speeds today though.

Its not really an option. In the countries referenced by the article, the Government is the telecom monopoly or there is a few which will listen to the government.

Its very simple to analyze calls to see if its voice or a modem. Guess what happens if its the later?

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#102

Post by nradov »

yardie wrote: post #21
generalizations wrote: post #3

Time to start building long distance (100+ mile) mesh nets. Alternately, I wonder if there's any way to lay down fiber long distance that doesn't require govt authorization...and doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

Probably better to use spread spectrum radio. Stations can be mobile and move to minimize tracking and interference. Fiber is fixed and the link can be severed with $20 bolt cutters.

Any practical grass-roots mesh wireless network would have to be built using commodity consumer WiFi hardware. People aren't going to go out and purchase spread spectrum radios, especially not in developing countries where governments are most likely to kill Internet access.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#103

Post by wil421 »

petermcneeley wrote: post #84
chiffre01 wrote: post #60

Remembering all those "The internet has no borders arguments from the 90s and early 2000s: https://futuristspeaker.com/business-trends/eight-false-prom...

"A world without rules and controls, without borders or boundaries. A world where anything is possible." - Matrix Epilogue (1999)

“Where we go from there is a choice I leave to you.” Begin Wake Up by RATM.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#104

Post by mikepurvis »

RegnisGnaw wrote: post #100
jliptzin wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would starlink help or is that too expensive? Or would governments block import of starlink terminals anyway?

Those Starlink dishes are pretty obvious. It would be very easy to photo an area using an Drone/UAV to see who has them. Those who have them will experience some fun time in the local re-education camp.

Do they need line of sight? I assume the dish would still work with some kind of blanket or plastic shroud over it, provided it was kept in the acceptable temperature range.

Or even just being painted to camouflage into the roof it was mounted to.

There'd be reasonable aesthetic reasons to do these things, from a deniability standpoint. Though I guess that doesn't help if you're under a regime where accessing an unauthorized satellite service is straight up banned.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#105

Post by ravel-bar-foo »

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #57
ryandrake wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a giant chasm between “Twitter gets to decide what it wants to host on its own web site” and “government censorship of speech”. It’s not in the same ballpark. It’s not even the same sport. Nobody has the obligation to publish, broadcast, or amplify someone else’s speech. If you don’t like one particular social media’s content policy, choose from one of the dozens of others or one of the thousands of web foru…

"You have every right to go protest in that empty square over there."

You say this as a metaphor, but it is already the physical reality. I was at a US National Park in 2010, and in the parking lot outside the visitor's center (where it would get in nobody's way) was a roped off "Free speech zone." Despicable.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#107

Post by nradov »

generalizations wrote: post #3

Time to start building long distance (100+ mile) mesh nets. Alternately, I wonder if there's any way to lay down fiber long distance that doesn't require govt authorization...and doesn't cost an arm and a leg.

Grass roots wireless mesh networks are a nice concept in theory but no one has ever made them work well at scale. It's just a very challenging technical problem with nodes moving around around, going offline, intermittent radio interference, etc. So the routing tables constantly change. And unless people are willing to buy specialized hardware such as towers and antennas, the range between nodes can't be more than about 100 m.

The One Laptop Per Child project tried to use such a network to serve remote areas but it never really worked.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#108

Post by wtmt »

> India leads total shutdowns globally. In 2021, the world’s largest democracy shut off its internet 106 times – more than the rest of the world combined. Hardest-hit was the conflict-ridden region of Jammu and Kashmir, which was subject to 85 shutdowns under the guise of containing separatist violence. The blackouts shut down Zoom classes for students, stopped doctors from communicating with their remote patients and crippled the banking system, causing mortgage holders to default on their loans. Apple crops rotted before they could be sold and businesses were paralysed.

India was a leader in Internet shutdowns in the years before 2021 too. Don't for a moment assume that the hardest hit region of Jammu and Kashmir is the only one. Internet shutdowns are routinely used in most states whenever the state executive or law enforcement thinks there could be some trouble. Sadly, the Indian judiciary is more of an ally to the executive, and doesn't consider these "sledge hammer" approaches as questionable or challenge-worthy. Strict control over the Internet and Internet based companies (which would be almost all) are of prime importance to the majority lawmakers and to the executive. That theme, which goes hand in hand with surveillance, is a major thread across the country, and a major threat to the "of the people, for the people" slogan (these are not "by the people", many of whom are taught what to think and believe by...media owned/influenced by the majority parties).

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#109

Post by mistrial9 »

bediger4000 wrote: post #44
hotpotamus wrote: post #39

I run infrastructure for a company that provides medical records services to medical organizations located exclusively in the US and have to deal with the usual scans/exploit attempts that come with running services on the public internet. Somedays I think it's just bonkers that anyone in China or Russia or wherever is allowed to contact my servers. I know that the internet is a "network of networks" to use an older…

Not just China and Russia, though. Lots of weirdness from Turkey, Viet Nam and even Netherlands.

banning and blocking is easy; building bridges is hard. It is documented in modern times that the first to leave a war zone are the teachers and the civilian medical people -- they can't function as they must in a world built with passkeys, barbed wire and bulk control rules. The PP here has a commercial medical system, so of course the first consideration is protecting --money-- privacy of --insurance records-- patients. Go ahead and block the world for the medical insurance, it is a block already by its nature.

The question now is, will any civilian communication survive the battles of nations and currencies.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#110

Post by ravel-bar-foo »

cyberlurker wrote: post #68
zmgsabst wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They had officials coordinate with social media companies to coordinate takedowns of accounts and messages which disagreed with them.

So, public health officials asked social media companies to stop accounts from spamming that vaccines cause autism? There was no law and no threat, just public and private coordination. I have no problem with that. Sorry, this is not even close to censorship.

If a member of the government asks their friend in a social media company to quietly take down a post, they are using influence and corruption (of the company) to impose government censorship. If they ask the legal representatives of the company to make a policy decision to take down a post, there is the implied threat of regulation, and it is government coersion. Both are legally violations of the first amendment.
Post reply on HN