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

121–130 of 157 posts

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#121

Post by bediger4000 »

mistrial9 wrote: post #109
bediger4000 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-- pati…

So you're saying that the USA's adversarial legal system makes bans and blocks the easiest/most probable way of dealing, but the consequences of that are far reaching, and yet to be noticed.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#122

Post by throw10920 »

mminer237 wrote: post #18
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.

I doubt it. You have to get the consent of every owner of property for a connecting 100+ miles. You pretty much have to either have an uninhabited wasteland or eminent domain to do that. Plus, you have to hire people to do hard manual labor for 100+ miles. You can try to just lay it on preexisting poles without permission some places, but who knows how long that will stay up. And ultimately, fiber is something anyone…

You wouldn't be able to get a high-speed mesh network, sure, but LoRa[1] (or something LoRa-like - it's proprietary) provides in the range of kilobits per second across tens of miles. RONJA[1] trades throughput for range, with 10 megabit throughput over 0.8 miles).

Sure, you won't be able to even really download images through LoRa, but it'll do for textual communications in case of an emergency e.g. natural disaster.

A smart meshnet that has billing/transactions built in would allow nodes to charge based on bandwidth and data used (so a LoRa node could charge you more than a node that uses fiber, you can use the fiber node while things are normal, and then when things go sideways you can pay more to get an emergency message to your relatives through LoRa).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LoRa

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RONJA

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#123

Post by throwaway0a5e »

Schroedingersat wrote: post #88
throwaway0a5e wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In full? 1776 In practice what happens is that some boondoggle results in a catastrophic too big to brush aside and the part of the executive branch in question decides that just not doing that thing going forward is better than the scrutiny from the legislative branch and change their policy. Nobody is ever meaningfully held accountable. Sometimes there's a token scapegoat. The above pattern holds both at the federa…

> In full? 1776 That wasn't the people. That was the oligarchs disagreeing as to who got to own the slaves and reap the spoils of genocide.

>That wasn't the people. That was the oligarchs disagreeing as to who got to own the slaves and reap the spoils of genocide.

Oh come on, quit with the BS talking points. War on your territory is NEVER good for business and overall wealth and they knew that back in the 18th century too. They would have been far, far, far, richer throwing their lot in with the status quo. Many of the prominent individuals who played key roles the revolution lost their wealth and in many cases their lives.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Founding_Fathers_of_the_United...

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#124

Post by kaiusbrantlee »

packetlost wrote: post #87
ftth_finland wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. That’s a hard no. Just the materials for a 100+ mile fiber network is hundreds of thousands. Then there is the matter of right of way across all those miles. It would be nigh impossible to find a route that does not cross a road or land parcel that isn’t government ow…

Can confirm. Worked for an ISP. Do any of you even know how much it costs to rent a trencher for a couple of weeks? There's a reason the government has to subsidize internet infrastructure build-out (ie. via CAF, ACAM, etc.) is it's so prohibitively expensive that it wouldn't happen otherwise. As it stands, a new suburban neighborhood that's relatively dense won't see a ROI for at least 10 years (on avg).

You bring up a good point.

Additionally, just doesn't make sense to install a network that has long fragile potential points of failure (aka attack surface) like fiber cables to replace the network that is or may be shut down by bad actors.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#125

Post by Schroedingersat »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #123
Schroedingersat wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In full? 1776 That wasn't the people. That was the oligarchs disagreeing as to who got to own the slaves and reap the spoils of genocide.

>That wasn't the people. That was the oligarchs disagreeing as to who got to own the slaves and reap the spoils of genocide. Oh come on, quit with the BS talking points. War on your territory is NEVER good for business and overall wealth and they knew that back in the 18th century too. They would have been far, far, far, richer throwing their lot in with the status quo. Many of the prominent individuals who played ke…

> War on your territory is NEVER good for business and overall wealth and they knew that back in the 18th century too. They would have been far, far, far, richer throwing their lot in with the status quo. Many of the prominent individuals who played key roles the revolution lost their wealth and in many cases their lives.

So they fought and expended resources because they disagreed on which land stealing genocidal slavers got to be on top of the pile...

If it was for the good of the people, 'the people' would have included people and not just the elite men.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#126

Post by pessimizer »

ravel-bar-foo wrote: post #105
d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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.

"Free Speech Zones" date from the WTO protests in the 90s, and were generally upheld by the courts. More a direct nullification of the first amendment than the beginning of a slippery slope. Maybe not coincidentally, I remember the major usage of free speech zones being to defend Democratic Party Conventions.

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#127

Post by Melatonic »

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.

Or just Starlink or something else similar

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#128

Post by webmobdev »

wtmt wrote: post #108

> 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 an…

As an indian, I don't see anything wrong with my country having a kill switch for the internet because (1) India is a democracy (2) It is a foreign platform and (3) A kill switch for communication platforms is necessary to prevent rumour mongering or disrupt coordination during tense political situations like rioting (which is common in India). Note that this is not a new thing - every government also has a kill switch for various other communication platforms; for e.g. governments often do cut-off cell phone communications in a particular region during tense moments.

J&K though is a special case in India where indian government has indeed often curtailed democratic rights for many decades (often overreaching itself while fighting terrorism there), and has been guilty of over abusing their powers there, sadly without much repercussion. That's because J&K is a disputed area between India, Pakistan and China - India has fought 3 wars with Pakistan over it, China occupies some area of it, and had recently invaded India and even annexed some more area (China taking "incremental and tactical actions" to press territorial claims with India: Pentagon - https://www.nationalheraldindia.com/international/china-taki... ). The indian judiciary thus does grant the government more leeway for non-violent tactics like cutting of communication or holding an important political person under house arrest. But for violent abuses of power, the Indian judiciary has not hesitated to stand up for the rights of the citizens and has even ordered arrest and prosecution of Army and police officials when necessary. Unfortunately, Narendra Modi, the current indian Prime Minister is inexperienced in statecraft, has also made more of a mess by unnecessarily changing the status quo of J&K, thus creating more unrest in the state thus necessitating the current situation there (India’s Supreme Court Orders a Review of Internet Shutdown in Kashmir. But For Now, It Continues - https://time.com/5762751/internet-kashmir-supreme-court/ ).

That said, I do believe more restrictions and judicial oversight is necessary before the government is allowed to use such powers to kill communication platforms. Especially since the current right-wing religious fundamentalist Modi / BJP government has indeed abused this power undemocratically many times to use it even against legitimate opposition and blunt their protest movement and criticism against it:

- India farmers’ protests: internet shutdown highlights Modi’s record of stifling digital dissent: https://theconversation.com/india-farmers-protests-internet-...

- India muzzles citizenship law protests, detaining thousands and shutting down Internet in several cities: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/india-muzz...

- Govt suspends Internet in eastern state over military recruitment protests: https://www.businesstoday.in/latest/trends/story/govt-suspen...

- Modi govt’s response to farmer protests stirs fears of a pattern: NYT: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/foreign-media/modi...

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#129

Post by Melatonic »

mikepurvis wrote: post #104
RegnisGnaw wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 unau…

Yea I imagine there is a fairly easy solution to this problem. And if there is not - I guarantee you creative people in India are going to figure it out!

Re: Flicking the kill switch: governments embrace internet shutdowns

#130

Post by pessimizer »

ryandrake wrote: post #43
OrangeMonkey wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I call out particular comments and users, I think I would come close to violating HN rules. I think I can talk about a few comments, not linked, without causing dang issues. I hope. - Second highest root comment talking about how people being removed from twitter isn't a big deal, its not 'my freedoms' and the real threat is the government putting people in prison and this other stuff just doesn't matter. - ctrl-f…

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…

> 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”.

How wide is the chasm between "The administration and congresspeople directly contact twitter and ask them to remove particular ideas and people from their website" and "government censorship of speech"? If you can do the first, why even push for the second? Chinese-style censorship involves approval boards, paperwork, and permanent records. What we have now involves government officials making deniable phone calls and veiled threats.

Post reply on HN