TheRightToArmBears said:
Therumancer said:
You're pretty paranoid there I see...
cyberparanoid.
But anyway, even if the US were close to war with China, shutting off the
entire internet is still ridiculous. Pray tell me what part our dear Escapist has in China's battle plan? And this would seriously screw with other countries, something which frankly, the US has no right to do. Of course, living in the uk I know just how batshit crazy the US government is about their internet security: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_McKinnon
Shynobee said:
You missed the key word of my post: "Entire".
Basically, rather than taking out their problem on the internet the government could try upping the security.
Just because your paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you. In this case it's well documented.
I think the point being missed here is that if it was to ever come to the point where the US was using the "Internet Kill Switch", it would come down to a matter of national survival, which of course would mean I wouldn't much care about whom it might inconveinence elsewhere, if the idea wasn't inherantly ridiculous.
I say that because chances are if the US is going to war against a nation like China, the rest of the world is not going to be sitting back minding their own business. Superpowers are superpowers because of the effect we have globally and how the interests of other nations are entwined with ours. Not to mention the fact that pretty much everyone is between us.
So really, the only real question is whether it's a viable defensive strategy in that case, and it is.
The way the internet is networked it's an all or nothing equasion. The idea is to take the technology down in general to prevent any potential exploits.
Sites like "The Escapist" represent unsecured information conduits if nothing else. I could for example hop on private mail here and exchange information with a Chinese Agent unobserved. In an actual full war, you'd be surprised how much the most trivial information can matter. I for example could glean things that would be useful to an enemy nation just by being around things like "EB" (General Dynamics: Electric Boat Division), Sub Base, and Coast Guard Academy here in SE Connecticut. What boats are in for example.
The problem being that you don't have the right "wartime" mentality to see things the correct way, are anti-war, or perhaps both. The bottom line is any nation that's involved is going to have very similar concerns. Things like this are simply us being smart enough to try and plan ahead, rather than waiting until we're exchanging missles and moving fleets into position and so on to worry about our tactics. A "kill switch' is very much a tool we should have in our arsenal.
I'd also point out that this kind of thing has been tossed around before, with a simple search we have:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/04/government-to-s/
That's in referance to the determination that a group of terrorists could use a game like "World Of Warcraft" to meet, plan, and exchange information with pretty much zero chance of being caught, with or without talking in codes. There are better things covering the subject though.
Back when this was more current news, I believe it was discussed here on The Escapist and I was against taking action to monitor MMORPGs during peacetime. I don't believe in that kind of thing. However keeping things like this running during a war, opens up uncontrolled communications much like the bit above. Controlling communications and information is a BIG part of warfare, which is why things like concealed radios and the like have been a big part of spy fiction for so long.
If we're compartmentalizing information in a time of war, leaving something like World Of Warcraft, or independant message boards, running, making it very easy for enemy intelligence agents to communicate and pass information would be a massive mistake.
This is why along with the cyberwarefare threat, cutting the internet entirely would be a good idea.
But again, when it comes to peacetime I do not think the goverment should be involved in regulation at all. I see it as an all or nothing equasion. Either we have totally unfettered free speech, or full wartime controls for the duration of a conflict. It's when people start trying to get into middle grounds that allow the goverment to control speech during peacetime that I see a problem.
Basically I think the kill switch should exist, but it's something we should hope never has to be used.
By the time things get to that point, we're going to have better things to worry about than message boards, and MMORPGs anyway.
If we DID wind up in a war of survival/domination against China, I'd imagine most people that would be concerned about this would be being Drafted anyway. With a threat of that level (a real one, not hypothetical) I imagine it would be received a bit differant than 'Nam, and those who try to dodge the draft would probably find the world so divided that there really wouldn't be any neutral nations within range to make flight viable... and anyone who did would probably be too busy hiding to want to play games online or whatever.
The point being, that in a major war like that it's not going to be a situation where people are going to be just kicking back at home while it it's off happening somewhere else. The idea as I see it is that if that kill switch was hit, it means we're mobilizing as a nation/entering a wartime footing/declaring martial law.
