Politicians clearly don't understand the internet. 4chan would purposely make a fake online terroist plot just to make the government shut down the entire internet. It would basically be the largest DDOS attack of all-time.
U.S. Government Proposes "Internet Kill Switch"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I agree with Woodsey, the government can eat shit on this as far as I'm concerned. Those stupid dickhead Feds haven't supported any sort of internet awareness until now, the US is I think 15th in the world as far as internet speeds. If thats indicative of anything no wonder they're shitting they're pants regarding "cyber-warriors,cyber-criminals, and cyber-dildos". How many times can we use cyber in a single fucking post. GEEZ!!!
It would be brilliant if it was just a red button or toggle switch somewhere on the President's desk. The potential for accidental use would be incredible.
"I thought that was the intercom?"
"I thought that was the intercom?"
Ever head of Watergate? If a US president could do that...SirBryghtside said:
well maybe its an incase of mass troll grouping?
he did but he got caught and failed... I miss RRRRRRICHARD *giggles*Funkysandwich said:
Yeah, that seems wrong. Sacrificing the main outlet that most people express their freedom of speech (however stupid they may get with it) doesn't seem like a particularly good way of defending that freedom.
Interesting ethical quandry, but I don't agree with a government approved internet kill function. Seems a bit too Ayn Rand for my tastes.
Interesting ethical quandry, but I don't agree with a government approved internet kill function. Seems a bit too Ayn Rand for my tastes.
"OMAIGAWD!!! ALL OF OUR CYBERWEBZ IS BEING HACKEDED!!"
"ZOMFG WHICH OF THEM?!"
"ALL OF THEM!"
"LAUNCH A COUNTER-VIRUS!"
"IT'S NO USE, THEY HAVE DEFENSIVE ALGORITHMS!"
"SHUT DOWN ALL TEH INTERWEBZ AND SAVE THE WORLD!"
...yeah
Not too big a fan of that idea
"ZOMFG WHICH OF THEM?!"
"ALL OF THEM!"
"LAUNCH A COUNTER-VIRUS!"
"IT'S NO USE, THEY HAVE DEFENSIVE ALGORITHMS!"
"SHUT DOWN ALL TEH INTERWEBZ AND SAVE THE WORLD!"
...yeah
Not too big a fan of that idea
Obama is moving Gitmo prisoners to Afghanistan to continue torturing them, still denying their right to challenge their detention. Something his campaigned against to get into power.
Obama is continuing with kidnap and torture (extraordinary rendition) which he campaigned against.
Obama has put out a kill order on a US citizen suspected terrorist no matter where he is found.
Obama's administration want to now steal the mineral wealth of Afghanistan.
These are all clear contraventions of international law.
Obama has extended secret government and wants to increase the size of the state. He's alienating the left while pandering to the right who hate him for who he is.
[link]http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah[/link]
Is it really a surprise that they want control over your internet access?
Obama has turned to be as bad as I expected, at least Bush was honest about being an evil bastard.
Obama is continuing with kidnap and torture (extraordinary rendition) which he campaigned against.
Obama has put out a kill order on a US citizen suspected terrorist no matter where he is found.
Obama's administration want to now steal the mineral wealth of Afghanistan.
These are all clear contraventions of international law.
Obama has extended secret government and wants to increase the size of the state. He's alienating the left while pandering to the right who hate him for who he is.
[link]http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah[/link]
Is it really a surprise that they want control over your internet access?
Obama has turned to be as bad as I expected, at least Bush was honest about being an evil bastard.
To quote Yahtzee, "Why don't you roll over so they can stamp on the other side of your face".Sober Thal said:
The US Government has routinely shown its disregard for the rule of law, there a thousands of cases where the government have infringed on people's rights. Also, the law would not be changed if it was abused, again this has been shown throughout legal history.
There is not going to be a 'crazy attack'. The government should have sufficient safeguards in placed such as using closed systems.
Why shouldn't people be able to use the internet at any time!? That's the attitude that the founding fathers had, people should be free to pursue happiness, free from government oppression. The government don't own the internet, they didn't pay for the servers or all of the infrastructure, they don't run the ISPs. If I connect my computer to a friend's that's a basic network, what right does the government have to tell me to stop!?
As for your bizarre attitude towards 'young people', they realise that the internet is not essential for life, but neither is electricity, cars, smoking, alcohol, air conditioning and so on. However, people want to increase their standard of living and these have become the norm, just like the internet.
The dawn of a new age... where nuclear weapons are not the thing that governments want and use for political leverage but the ability to switch off a global communication's network that so intrinsically woven into our very way of life that its would cause extreme damage econimically.
Depsite the fact that doing something like this would be almost fucking impossible it does not surprise me that it was thought up. The next stage wil be that they suggest they have a button for each country/region of the world and can selectively turn them off, because why cause mass devastation when you can sell it to the public as something that won't affect you personally and then be hailed as a hero by the unwashed masses for causing said devastation.
Depsite the fact that doing something like this would be almost fucking impossible it does not surprise me that it was thought up. The next stage wil be that they suggest they have a button for each country/region of the world and can selectively turn them off, because why cause mass devastation when you can sell it to the public as something that won't affect you personally and then be hailed as a hero by the unwashed masses for causing said devastation.
My argument, whilst the technicalities have altered, still standstsb247 said:
"America does not own the internet, and has no jurisdiction there"
Also, thanks for such a reasonable reply. Most of the responses that statement has garned have been "DARPA INVENTED TEH INTERNET" despite the fact that ARPNAET was simply the first ever concept of an 'interconnected network', and is completley different from the 'internet' of today, which is the subject matter at hand
HTML has nothing to do with networking. It has to do with making text data accessible by splitting data and formatting. The Internet and HTML are entirely separate ideas. Once you can finally understand that you can start to understand the power of the Internet.cainstwin said:
The Internet is about creating a pathway for data to flow from one processing unit to another regardless of what the information is. The pathway is created from a network of networks sometimes referred to as "The Cloud", because the route is unknown at the time of transmission. Your data will find it's way by using road signs provided by routers as they proceed to their destination. The Internet is passive this way. It's just a set of routes to travel and isn't interested in what is traveling on it.
TLDR: The Internet is not HTML. HTML does not need the Internet to exist. It just so happens that HTML was one of a few platform independent standards for text formatting and became a defacto standard across a platformless Internet.
You won't get any argument from me. I can't even imagine what an, "Internet killswitch," could do to businesses (foreign and domestic) as well as the banking industry and Wall Street.GrinningManiac said:
"You were trading that stock? Sorry, you lost it because we turned off the internet."
"You were wiring money to your son on vacation in Amsterdam because he lost his traveller's checks, has no cash, and about $20 in the bank? Sorry, it never went through because we shut off the internet."
"Bill in Kentucky pays his electric bills online, but since the government shut off the internet, his payment was late, and he was hit with $40 in late fees."
There are just a few horrible situations I can think of, but I am sure there are infinitely more that could arise if such a thing were ever allowed.
