31–40 of 143 posts
I read this, and become more concerned about bills to give the US President an Internet kill-switch. They say it's to protect against cyber-warfare, but something makes me think it's just as likely to be applied to civil unrest, and civil unrest doesn't usually happen unless there's something pretty wrong with the government.
I read this, and become more concerned about bills to give the US President an Internet kill-switch. They say it's to protect against cyber-warfare, but something makes me think it's just as likely to be applied to civil unrest, and civil unrest doesn't usually happen unless there's something pretty wrong with the government.
I don't support the bill anyhow, because I'm not really a "let's just give one central authority all the power because why not?" kind of guy, but honestly, there's not much point worrying about that particular kind of misuse of that particular power. Standard martial law concepts would probably be enough to take the necessary actions to shut down whatever networks you like; pointing guns at network admins can be pretty effective. You're actually not being cynical enough.
Any government currently in power will have an item in its playbook titled 'shut down public internet access', right next to a folder labeled 'island mode' and 'totally dark'. Some will be upfront about it, some will be more circumspect but media control has long been one of the central points in crowd control and just like newspapers, radio and TV stations are with some regularity taken over by the government (Italy…
Which makes me wonder, is there a way to make an ad-hoc, decentralized internet that a government could not shut down?
I read this, and become more concerned about bills to give the US President an Internet kill-switch. They say it's to protect against cyber-warfare, but something makes me think it's just as likely to be applied to civil unrest, and civil unrest doesn't usually happen unless there's something pretty wrong with the government.
Well, good news, it doesn't matter. If the situation has deteriorated to that point, the government will just do it anyhow. I don't support the bill anyhow, because I'm not really a "let's just give one central authority all the power because why not?" kind of guy, but honestly, there's not much point worrying about that particular kind of misuse of that particular power. Standard martial law concepts would probably…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because a video like that can be like pouring gasoline on a fire. The question is who gave them the right to starve the fire? The internet is merely communication. If you can't deal with your populace communicating, even in a troubled time then you're already at your death-knell. The danger here is that if the government steps in to tell me I'm not allowed to show someone a video of an abuse of power, then I'm goin…
I'd say Iran managed to show that brutal repression can be pretty damned effective at propping up a regime that couldn't survive the free flow of ideas.
One thing I fear is that eventually we'll reach a point where a dictatorship will establish itself and be so cruel and effective that it'll represent a permanent power which will dictate until it's own will to govern expires. North Korea seems like a close enough approximation but with the weapons and technology of the modern world it doesn't take that much creativity for a psychopath to imagine a world where that can occur.
Perhaps it's time I re-read Cryptonomicon.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which makes me wonder, is there a way to make an ad-hoc, decentralized internet that a government could not shut down?
It's arguable, but I'd say that the real Internet is like that, at least in well-connected places like the US. I cannot imagine the act of God necessary to stop Americans from accessing Google.
It's depressing, but I think it's important for us to be realistic about how bad the situation really is if we're ever going to do something serious about fixing it. The reason we still have most of the privileges we do isn't because we're too powerful to have them taken away from us, it's because there hasn't yet been a need to take them away, or because we haven't (yet) elected someone with that sort of style (we certainly HAVE been too close for comfort).
I mean, America is effectively bankrolling the Egyptian censorship. There clearly aren't any qualms with the tactics.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, good news, it doesn't matter. If the situation has deteriorated to that point, the government will just do it anyhow. I don't support the bill anyhow, because I'm not really a "let's just give one central authority all the power because why not?" kind of guy, but honestly, there's not much point worrying about that particular kind of misuse of that particular power. Standard martial law concepts would probably…
Passing a law like that means they'll put in the infrastructure to actually do it. If things deteriorate significantly in the US, it is likely that attempting to gain the ability to shut down the internet would directly trigger some sort of civil unrest while now it only triggers angry blog posts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, good news, it doesn't matter. If the situation has deteriorated to that point, the government will just do it anyhow. I don't support the bill anyhow, because I'm not really a "let's just give one central authority all the power because why not?" kind of guy, but honestly, there's not much point worrying about that particular kind of misuse of that particular power. Standard martial law concepts would probably…
Passing a law like that means they'll put in the infrastructure to actually do it. If things deteriorate significantly in the US, it is likely that attempting to gain the ability to shut down the internet would directly trigger some sort of civil unrest while now it only triggers angry blog posts.
My real worry, and the real reason this shouldn't be done, is that it shouldn't be made so easy that some clever hackers can do it, or gets accidentally triggered for some reason. But ye olde "shoot the place up" can take down the internet pretty effectively. "Stray backhoes" have done a decent job a couple of times within my experience as it is; the hard part is keeping the net running, not shutting it down.