51–60 of 414 posts
As a middle-aged person voluntarily NOT using email/phone, I cannot even imagine being banned from the internet . How would you function?
Would this apply to traveller phones roaming on Canadian telco networks? What forms of digital identity could be used to enforce an internet kill switch / blockade for specific humans?
The argument made here seems to be that the power to prevent unlawful access or threats is somehow required to keep us all safe. But if someone was an actual threat, do we really think they’d be using the internet with their own identity? Like if someone is willing to hack into a power station or some other critical infrastructure, they’ll be simultaneously stupid enough to use their own credit card? Illegal things a…
They really do hate anyone who points out their hypocrisy or makes fun of them. It challenges their corrupt kickbacks directly.
I think it's easy to make a prediction of actual use cases here.
Its also concerning to read the quote: “necessary to do so to secure the Canadian telecommunications system against any threat, including that of interference, manipulation, disruption or degradation.”
Where Canadian telecommunication is almost a duopoly and had major outage a few years ago without any claims of bad actors.
If you think but I don't like the COVID truckers, well that's fine for now. Wait until there is something you vehemently disagree with the government about. Freedom of speech must be protected, regardless of how much you like the content or the speaker.
ETA: What might be the justification for censorship in this bill? The telecom network is critical infrastructure. You're spreading mis/dis/mal-information, according to the government. Therefore you are harming the integrity of the telecom network.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
in America whereas in places like China, it very much exists. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_System
How's the Chinese system different from the American credit score?
Applying for jobs has almost entirely moved online these days. And this is just one of many such things. Does whoever wrote that bill understands that? Or do they just naively think that "it's just time out for people who break the rules".
> “Malicious cyber-actors are breaching our country’s IT systems, accessing sensitive information and putting lives in danger,” he said.
> Anandasangaree added that “hostile state actors are stealing information and gaining access to systems that are critical to our national security and public safety.”
... and these hostile state actors are doing this from their checks notes home in Ottawa, using a Rogers internet connection they're paying for?
C11 and this bill makes me think about what situations does the government need this sort of "weaponry"? I think the plausible answer is war.